[Debate] In favor for a Civil DNA Database in your country?

[Noctosphere]

This thread debate is to see if peoples would be in favor of a civil DNA database.
A civil DNA database is pretty much the same as the criminal DNA database all police forces possess. In the case of a civil one, it would mean that ALL citizens (under some conditions, such as at their 18th anniversary) must provide a blood sample to their police forces.
Their dna datas wont be put in the same database as the criminals. However, whenever there is a crime scene and a polices find dna sample, they'll scan both dna databases, both civil and criminal.
If your dna matches and is in the civil database, you'll be considered as "potential witness" and not as "suspect".
If your dna was on a crime scene before it becomes an actual crime scene, all you'd have to tell is when was the last time you were there.

Of course, depending on what kind of dna sample is found on the crime scene, police forces may or may not focus their investigation on you. For example, they find the remains of a ciggarettes behind a bar, they probably won't focus on you if you just say that you go to this bar every week. However, if they find your blood on a shattered beer bottle and they also find the fingerprint of the victim of said bottle, then they'll probably focus their investigation on you.

In case a civil dna database were to be created, you'd have nothing to worry about if you don't do anything criminal right? At worst, you'd get interrogated and you'll maybe lead police to new details about a crime which could actually lead to the real criminal arrestation.

What are your though about that?

 

[TraderPatTX]

It baffles me that so many people are so comfortable giving government unlimited power over their fellow citizens. When in history has that ever worked out?

 

[Hanafuda]

In a perfect world where perfect people go about their perfect lives in their perfect community ... but then you wouldn't need such a "database" in the first place.

This world isn't perfect though, and never will be. It is full of corruption, perversion, extortion, malfeasance ... you get the idea. All such fine socialist ideals for the greater good of which young idealists conceive, if implemented, become corrupted and bent to serve the needs of the elite, or the State, or both. After this process is repeated so many times, when new plans are proposed to cure the world, one has to wonder if the corrupt ulterior intent is already built in by those at the top who stand to gain, and the gullible youths and idiot idealists are simply sold the lie to push it through. Eventually, you become convinced of this.

This is why after John Lennon wrote "Imagine," Steely Dan replied with, "Only A Fool Would Say That."

 

[AlexMCS]

Never.
Privacy is already too rare.

 

[FAST6191]

Nice database so I can weed out the genetic inferiors (whatever they may be for me and whatever politicos come after me) or compel them (actually that might be harsh, let's go with heavily incentivise) to get some nice crispr modifications as and when that becomes viable.
Sign me up.

That said it will probably exist by default before too long as people give their real name to those find my ancestors sites and you are a minor refactoring to your cousins or whatever.

Would be nice to ensure paternity though.

 

[Minox]

Not in favour. Privacy is important and that includes your DNA as well. A country's government has no need to know such things to govern.

 

[Xzi]

As corrupt and incompetent as our police force in the US is? Hell no. They'd just use it to target peaceful protestors and anybody unwilling to lick their boots.

 

[dragonmaster]

Never
we live in an age where freedom tends to be just a word , with petty excuses they are trying to control us, Ι don't wish to offer pretty more than asked . "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety

 

[JaapDaniels]

One centrall point of all people in a country can only be abused.
Abuse by criminals to fiend your relatives so they can harm those to get you to do thier bidding for example.
Never should you only look for the benefits.
Sure i would like my hospital and doctors to know me as perfect as can be without too much hassle...
The risk of abusive use is far too high.

 

[RAHelllord]

Smaller DNA databases are already being abused regularly by corrupt individuals, having all of that information in one place would just make it even easier to abuse for more people.

I'm all for government subsidized DNA imaging for healthcare purposes, but that would require the actual scan to be irretrievably discarded and only healthcare related findings to be given to the patient in question, and they can forward that to their doc to advice on future cancer screenings or similar. But even that is too optimistic and you can basically guarantee they'd use it for some sort of bullshit as well.

 

[FAST6191]

I'm all for government subsidized DNA imaging for healthcare purposes, but that would require the actual scan to be irretrievably discarded and only healthcare related findings to be given to the patient in question, and they can forward that to their doc to advice on future cancer screenings or similar. But even that is too optimistic and you can basically guarantee they'd use it for some sort of bullshit as well.

That gets a bit more tricky.

The human genome (or at least one dude's) might be available for download now but it is an ever evolving (literally actually but I will ignore that for this) work wherein new connections are made all the time for even single expression illnesses, never mind combinatorial (some things only appear if this and this and this... are all, any one not there and nothing happens, and at that point you are in big boy statistics world*) and recessive/dominant things if you are screening a partner to have kids with (or go full gattaca and select only the healthiest embryos to go onto the CRISPR phase so as to make it better still).

*and to add to that a lot of it is statistical probability -- if basic drugs get recalled all the time as being pointless/worse than placebo then... yeah.

To that end you either go back every year for an update, some kind of crazy anonymised system (hard to do on multiple counts, not least of all because the one way hash of your DNA result is still a theoretically unique input) or some kind of middle ground effort.

https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/amazing-dna/ is a choice link at times like this.

 

[RAHelllord]

That gets a bit more tricky.

The human genome (or at least one dude's) might be available for download now but it is an ever evolving (literally actually but I will ignore that for this) work wherein new connections are made all the time for even single expression illnesses, never mind combinatorial (some things only appear if this and this and this... are all, any one not there and nothing happens, and at that point you are in big boy statistics world*) and recessive/dominant things if you are screening a partner to have kids with (or go full gattaca and select only the healthiest embryos to go onto the CRISPR phase so as to make it better still).

*and to add to that a lot of it is statistical probability -- if basic drugs get recalled all the time as being pointless/worse than placebo then... yeah.

To that end you either go back every year for an update, some kind of crazy anonymised system (hard to do on multiple counts, not least of all because the one way hash of your DNA result is still a theoretically unique input) or some kind of middle ground effort.

https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/amazing-dna/ is a choice link at times like this.

You're caring too much about small details while missing the bigger picture. The idea would be best used by making a general overview of things that are more likely to happen down the road than for the average John Doe and make a note about those things in the patient's history so that the recommendations for screenings can be adjusted accordingly. You don't need to redo the scan every year when the medical team can just keep in mind what symptoms to proactively look for during screenings, and potential add a few other, cheaper tests along the years based on might be relevant.

You can't start treatment of something before the disease actually started, but you can start looking more carefully for the symptoms when you know they might be more likely to happen than for other people in that age range.

 

[FAST6191]

You're caring too much about small details while missing the bigger picture. The idea would be best used by making a general overview of things that are more likely to happen down the road than for the average John Doe and make a note about those things in the patient's history so that the recommendations for screenings can be adjusted accordingly. You don't need to redo the scan every year when the medical team can just keep in mind what symptoms to proactively look for during screenings, and potential add a few other, cheaper tests along the years based on might be relevant.

You can't start treatment of something before the disease actually started, but you can start looking more carefully for the symptoms when you know they might be more likely to happen than for other people in that age range.

Combined with a patient family history (I am sure some would love those find unknown cousins from grandad sporting multiple families or grandma getting plowed by the neighbourhood milkman while rich but stupid husband was at work to further refine things) there could be some serious fun, however at this point family history is probably still more valuable as the gaps are that huge and new things are found every day it seems.

Likewise DNA sequencing is probably cheaper than the battery of basic bloodwork, even in countries without insane pricing like the US, and less invasive.

 

[Marc_LFD]

No. This is insane.