6 ms·

I'm concerned about the DNA opensourcing (searching by the preamble, others have published their DNA, too) - it's not computer code, more eyeballs on it won't m

I'm concerned about the DNA opensourcing (searching by the preamble, others have published their DNA, too) - it's not computer code, more eyeballs on it won't make it better. Now cloning from raw DNA data is probably far enough off for now but couldn't the DNA be used to find vulnerabilities, for example, allergies or diseases with a genetic component? What about an insurance company looking at the DNA and denying insurance because of preexisting conditions?

Karunamon 14y ago
>What about an insurance company looking at the DNA and denying insurance because of preexisting conditions? Assuming the recent law changes survive coming challenges, such shenanigans will be illegal, at least in the USA.
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  I don't follow politics, what are the arguments against allowing insurance companies to make such decisions?
  - adrusi 14y ago
    If people are denied health insurance then they are treated as second class in hospitals that know they wont be able to pay for their care and people die. No matter who you are your right to free business practice is second to people's rights to live.
  - anonymoushn 14y ago
    In the United States, the medical industry is allowed to vary prices significantly based on the method of payment, and the cost of buying care without insurance is much higher than the cost of buying care with insurance. This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. So the argument goes that, given that the taxpayer is already responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone, it would be reasonable to compel everyone to buy prepaid health plans. In order to compel people to buy these, they must be available to everyone, so the government must also prevent insurance companies from refusing to sell prepaid health plans to people who are certain to use them. I use the phrase "prepaid health plan" rather than "insurance," because insurance is purchased to protect against future risk, but a prepaid health plan will cover things that occurred in the past and things that are not risks but certainties. It's a pretty sound argument as long as you don't ask "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?"
    - npsimons 14y ago
      "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?" The answer to that is another question: do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death?
      - derleth 14y ago
        > do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death? You know, for some people, the answer to that is "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem."
        npsimons 14y ago
        "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem." "Oh, you got old and need medical assistance? Sorry, not my problem." "You've been shot? Maybe you shouldn't have looked so suspicious to that cop. Not my problem." "You have cancer from all the pollutants in the air and water that my company produces, but you can't afford health care because we laid you off? Not my problem."
        jentulman 14y ago
        Then those people wont mind if they're denied treatment after irresponsibly allowing themselves to be hit by a drunk driver.
        Ygg2 14y ago
        > Actions have consequences. So, assuming I'm born with genetic defect that escalates into brain tumors, I shouldn't have been conceived since the my genes gave me 15% higher chance of developing spontaneous brain tumors. That sounds like a wonderful society. As correct as it sounds (to quantum theorists at least), some consequences, don't have actions, other than "being born" or "happening".
- B-Con 14y ago
  It's difficult to prove why a decision was made, though, because there are generally lots of excuses. Similarly, hiring employers can't discriminate based on a lot of things, but it's still best to avoid mentioning them because you can't prove why they didn't hire you.
- snowwrestler 14y ago
  It is already illegal for insurance companies to base coverage decisions on genomic information under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which became law in 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimination_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimi...
Heliosmaster 14y ago
Did you ever see Gattaca? That great movie, all about eugenetics!
zacharyvoase 14y ago
You don't need to clone a whole human being to do serious damage. You could synthesize the necessary chunks of someone's genome and use it to fake a bioassay. Imagine a disgruntled former lover using your genome to fake a paternity test—this kind of thing isn't very far away, and there are already services which let you upload a sequence and have DNA mailed to you.
- elektronaut 14y ago
  Then wouldn't having a paper trail of your genome published on the internet provide reasonable doubt? Plus, I can't imagine it would be too hard for a disgruntled former lover to get a DNA sequence done with an old toothbrush or comb. Not to mention you have the right to an independent paternity test.
  - biscarch 14y ago
    This would be interesting, considering that there is often a window before disgruntled lovers/partners are actually out of the target's life. How long does DNA "last" on something like a toothbrush?
- thronemonkey 14y ago
  The degree to which this is possible has been hugely exaggerated. Yes, you can have DNA mailed to you, but not DNA as its packaged in the human genome. When you order from NEB or Sigma-Aldritch, what you get is a short DNA sequence (usually on the order of hundreds to thousands of basepairs) in a buffer solution. When forensic scientists do DNA preps of cellular samples from a crime scene or for a paternity test, they purify genomic DNA. This is millions of basepairs coiled around storage proteins to form a densely packed material called chromatin. The procedures used to purify chromosomal DNA would wash away any of the much smaller, synthesized fragments of the sort that you can order from a company, meaning that faking a paternity test in this manner is impossible. Biotechnology is exciting, but not so exciting as University press offices might have us believe :( Putting your genome online in this manner is more of a concern for insurance than anything else, I think— although as others have pointed out, discriminatory insurance practices based on preexisting conditions will soon be illegal in the U.S. . . . still, better not to take any chances.
baggers 14y ago
I'm looking at open-sourcing my DNA at some point. Partially for my own curiosity but also because we are in a time where companies are patenting genes and I'd like to see the open-source community put down a body of prior art.

Karunamon 14y ago

>What about an insurance company looking at the DNA and denying insurance because of preexisting conditions? Assuming the recent law changes survive coming challenges, such shenanigans will be illegal, at least in the USA.

MatthewPhillips 14y ago
I don't follow politics, what are the arguments against allowing insurance companies to make such decisions?
- adrusi 14y ago
  If people are denied health insurance then they are treated as second class in hospitals that know they wont be able to pay for their care and people die. No matter who you are your right to free business practice is second to people's rights to live.
- anonymoushn 14y ago
  In the United States, the medical industry is allowed to vary prices significantly based on the method of payment, and the cost of buying care without insurance is much higher than the cost of buying care with insurance. This is true unless you can't pay, in which case you will still be treated and the taxpayer will foot the bill under EMTALA. So the argument goes that, given that the taxpayer is already responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone, it would be reasonable to compel everyone to buy prepaid health plans. In order to compel people to buy these, they must be available to everyone, so the government must also prevent insurance companies from refusing to sell prepaid health plans to people who are certain to use them. I use the phrase "prepaid health plan" rather than "insurance," because insurance is purchased to protect against future risk, but a prepaid health plan will cover things that occurred in the past and things that are not risks but certainties. It's a pretty sound argument as long as you don't ask "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?"
  - npsimons 14y ago
    "Why is the taxpayer responsible for unbounded medical expenses for everyone?" The answer to that is another question: do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death?
    - derleth 14y ago
      > do you want first responders checking to see if you can pay your bills before treating you, when literally moments can make the difference between life and death? You know, for some people, the answer to that is "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem."
      - npsimons 14y ago
        "Actions have consequences. If you were more responsible, you wouldn't be in that mess in the first place. Not my problem." "Oh, you got old and need medical assistance? Sorry, not my problem." "You've been shot? Maybe you shouldn't have looked so suspicious to that cop. Not my problem." "You have cancer from all the pollutants in the air and water that my company produces, but you can't afford health care because we laid you off? Not my problem."
      - jentulman 14y ago
        Then those people wont mind if they're denied treatment after irresponsibly allowing themselves to be hit by a drunk driver.
      - Ygg2 14y ago
        > Actions have consequences. So, assuming I'm born with genetic defect that escalates into brain tumors, I shouldn't have been conceived since the my genes gave me 15% higher chance of developing spontaneous brain tumors. That sounds like a wonderful society. As correct as it sounds (to quantum theorists at least), some consequences, don't have actions, other than "being born" or "happening".
B-Con 14y ago
It's difficult to prove why a decision was made, though, because there are generally lots of excuses. Similarly, hiring employers can't discriminate based on a lot of things, but it's still best to avoid mentioning them because you can't prove why they didn't hire you.
snowwrestler 14y ago
It is already illegal for insurance companies to base coverage decisions on genomic information under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which became law in 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimination_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimi...

Heliosmaster 14y ago

Did you ever see Gattaca? That great movie, all about eugenetics!

zacharyvoase 14y ago

You don't need to clone a whole human being to do serious damage. You could synthesize the necessary chunks of someone's genome and use it to fake a bioassay. Imagine a disgruntled former lover using your genome to fake a paternity test—this kind of thing isn't very far away, and there are already services which let you upload a sequence and have DNA mailed to you.

elektronaut 14y ago
Then wouldn't having a paper trail of your genome published on the internet provide reasonable doubt? Plus, I can't imagine it would be too hard for a disgruntled former lover to get a DNA sequence done with an old toothbrush or comb. Not to mention you have the right to an independent paternity test.
- biscarch 14y ago
  This would be interesting, considering that there is often a window before disgruntled lovers/partners are actually out of the target's life. How long does DNA "last" on something like a toothbrush?
thronemonkey 14y ago
The degree to which this is possible has been hugely exaggerated. Yes, you can have DNA mailed to you, but not DNA as its packaged in the human genome. When you order from NEB or Sigma-Aldritch, what you get is a short DNA sequence (usually on the order of hundreds to thousands of basepairs) in a buffer solution. When forensic scientists do DNA preps of cellular samples from a crime scene or for a paternity test, they purify genomic DNA. This is millions of basepairs coiled around storage proteins to form a densely packed material called chromatin. The procedures used to purify chromosomal DNA would wash away any of the much smaller, synthesized fragments of the sort that you can order from a company, meaning that faking a paternity test in this manner is impossible. Biotechnology is exciting, but not so exciting as University press offices might have us believe :( Putting your genome online in this manner is more of a concern for insurance than anything else, I think— although as others have pointed out, discriminatory insurance practices based on preexisting conditions will soon be illegal in the U.S. . . . still, better not to take any chances.

baggers 14y ago

I'm looking at open-sourcing my DNA at some point. Partially for my own curiosity but also because we are in a time where companies are patenting genes and I'd like to see the open-source community put down a body of prior art.