Friday, February 12, 2010

Things you don't wanna think about.....

Here we go again, down highway 101, State of Mind, to the tiny burg of Why, the place with so many questions and very few, if any, answers.

I read an article a few days ago that sent my head whirling. This is a practice that has been done for the past fifty years and the government is just now letting us know about it. And yes....it affects all of us. In the United States, at the time of birth, every newborn's DNA is taken, without permission of the parents, and kept in a lab somewhere for various amounts of time. Your child's complete genetic makeup....the blueprint of their being. The time retained differs from state to state.....my state is one of those who keep it indefinitely. Yes, you read right. Indefinitely.

Holy Clone Recipes, Batman! What's the meaning of this? I know my brain is working on overload and there isn't anything holy about what I'm fearing. Well, they say that they take it for research and that it has saved lives. I guess that's a pretty good reason....by why keep it indefinitely....why keep it at all? With all the specimens being added each day, the cache has got to be in the millions. How can they be assured that security is adequate and furthermore......why should the extra expense of security and headaches over whether some could be missing even be in place unless there IS a reason. If you're supposedly finished with something.....why keep it? With millions of specimens, would they even know if any were missing?

Without rambling on about my worse fears and sounding like a complete raving lunatic, I'll give you the link to read the article yourself. Go here. I don't approve of it mainly because it was kept secret for so long; if it was purely innocent then everyone should have been made aware. To find out the length of time your state keeps the DNA, go here, choose the year you want to see from the drop down menu in the box in upper left corner of your screen.

This is setting the stage for the possibility of some sinister acts to take place. If you're under 50, there's a good chance a clone could be made of you. And since the specimens have names attached, how long before someone tries to buy their DNA.....or maybe someone else's DNA. And why are the names attached if its only being used for research to help save lives? The insurance companies are privy to this information according to the video that accompanies the article I've linked for you. And I know I'm not the only one thinking along these lines. I just can't bring myself to write down all the awful possibilities of what could happen, fueled by greed and/or power. Plots of horror/science fiction movies come true.

How do you feel about this? Why do you think these specimens are being kept and is this another example of invasion of our privacy? If you had been asked, would you have given permission for them to take your child's DNA? Myself, I think I would have given permission to let them use it for research if it helps saves lives, but I would not have signed for them to keep it.....I would have wanted it destroyed after they were finished with it so it could never get into the wrong hands and/or used for other purposes.

Leaving the town of Why now.....and as usual, I haven't as yet found answers. But I know I'll be back again soon....I'm always wondering about something........ and usually the optimist, I'm hoping I'll find those answers one of these days.

16 comments:

Jamie said...

I don't have time to read the article now, but what you write is very disturbing. If for no other reason than the budget issues, and the money that has to be spent to catalogue and store this useless (hopefully) material...

So many things make no sense. This is why I need to rule the world..teeheehee...

Happy FINALLY Friday!

Hugs.

BREZZ said...

this is some creepy stuff.

my kid was tellin me just the other day that folks were saving their babies (newborns) DNA. then if the baby were to die-- they could (bring it back)- UGH it was so pet cemetery-ish to me.
i could understand the first few days after the loss of a child-- someone actually having the desire to do that. then later -- knowing how wrong it was-- but by then, what sort of awful thing might happen. i hate to think about it.
even a spouse. grief is cruel- and folks do not think rationally. so whatever 'they ' do this for-- or why-- those were y first thoughts-- was to have the bereaved "bring them back, thinking it would be the same-- but i really don't thik that is possible.
this is just freaky. and wrong.

and like jamie-- i'll have to come back to grab the article later.

hope you have a safe warm day
hugs C

Happyone :-) said...

You know, it really just doesn't bother me.

SupahMommy said...

WHAT KIND OF DOG IS THAT??? I have a rat terrier that looks similar !!

xoxo
supah

My Aimless Infatuation said...

I agree with you,this scares the crap out of me.

Rae said...

Well I am over that 50 year mark so none of mine was saved. I can't imagine anybody wanting a clone of me anyway. I have never heard of this. It seems odd. I don't ever recall samples like that being taken when I worked in the obstetrics department of the hospital. They must have logged it under something else. Of course any time we have blood samples drawn we have donated our DNA. If the insurance companies want info they will find a way to get it.

glnroz said...

I did not know this. I am PO'd about this. I am going to reference this is my "Without Truth.." blog...

fiwa said...

That is really weird. I read something the other day about a black lady who was a sharecropper who had died in the 1930's and they've kept some of her cells alive that whole time. They don't know why they didn't die - so they've kept them alive and done research on them and used them for other things. Somehow a journalist found out and then told her family. Wouldn't that be weird to know? The things the government does these days in the name of "what's best for you" are so scary.

Mikey said...

I just read the article and I think that's very disturbing. Very 1984, pet cemetary-ish. I think it's safe to assume that a lot of things that the book 1984 talked about are alive and happening today. Very scary. There's no hiding.

Golden To Silver Val said...

Supah Mommy: Yep, she's a rat terrier. Aren't they fun? If I only had an eighth of her energy I'd never have to diet again!

Linda Medrano said...

I think this is being used for positive reasons, but in any brave new world, new risks are out there. I'm sure I never heard of dna 50 years ago, but it seems to hold a lot of answers for tomorrow and the future of humankind. I don't disagree that it's scary, but honestly, I'm too stupid to understand most of it anyway!

ain't for city gals said...

I agree with the title...I don't want to think about it...ignorance is truly sometimes bliss...With DNA, surveillance cameras and the internet we have only the illusion of privacy left..to me what is scary is that the younger generation is growing up with this and thinks nothing of it...I guess things change...I'm sure they were saying the same thing 20 years ago about stuff that is happening now...

Anonymous said...

this is scary to even think about. i will go back sometime and read the article. i got your blog address from a blogger who blogs on andrew's blog. i hope that you have a good day, liz

dana said...

Maybe we all SHOULD to see the new movie SURROGATES. I thought it sounded too silly in the previews, but WHO can say what the government might do from one day to the next.

Gypsy said...

Well I'm wondering if this happens in Australia too. Surely they should need permission from the parents to take DNA from a newborn. You need permission to take organs when someone dies, DNA is also a part of our bodies and I would have thought the same rule applies. Evidentally that isn't the case.

Too scary for words and open to all kinds of abuse and misappropriation.

ordinaryjanet said...

I heard about that, and it didn't surprise me. I saw an episode of the X-Files where Mulder found a vast cache of samples taken from everyone born in the US, and that didn't surprise me either.

People don't really think that when a newborn's blood, etc. is taken, that they discard it when they're done testing, or that the records are eyes-only for the doctor and/or hospital. It's something we never really thought about, and when it's put in front of us, we're shocked-we shouldn't be. What's surprising is that these records aren't more widely used-for instance, by people searching for organ donor matches. I'm assuming that the specimens aren't all on a national database yet, otherwise some of us might be getting letters or phone calls asking if we'd care to donate a kidney since we're matches for someone.

I think anytime your blood or DNA leaves your body and into the hands of someone else, it-or the information-is bound to be kept somewhere. It's just a matter of time before we find out what it's used for.