Skip to main content

Too much information

Which country has the largest records of genetic information ?

You might have thought China, or India since they have the largest populations.

In fact, the United Kingdom keeps more genetic information about its citizens than any other state on the Planet. There is more DNA from British citizens in laboratories than in any other country on Earth.

The sources for this material is not just the criminal justice system, where DNA from people that is taken to eliminate them from police inquiries is not routinely destroyed. It is also the health care system, and insurance. It is even collected from school children!

A large amount of genetic information is now under institutional control. There are no clear guidelines under legislation as to who may have access to this information. The statutory body that was set up to supervise this has now been split, after too many members objected to the routine dissemination of DNA information.

Let us just recall that this is material that we see more scientific use for every day- material which could become the basis for indelible identification, yet which is now available to third parties. No other country keeps such information as a matter of routine.

No free and democratic state should seek to spy on its citizens- yet with CCTV- where the UK now also has the largest number of spy cameras per capita in the world- and DNA, the state may now reduce privacy to a dramatic degree.

We can not accept this astonishing erosion of liberty without some severe costs- and I do not accept the idea that "those with nothing to hide, have nothing to fear". The state is the servant of the citizen and not the master. I resent this gross intrusion into my life, as other countries prove, it is not necessary.

A free country does not need to snoop, and should not have a national DNA pool.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Uh, Cicero, you missed that wonderful beeb story about how female Indian civil servants had to inform the state of their menstrual cycles...now that is definitely too much information!
Anonymous said…
Many health projects want to collect DNA samples so that they will be able to identify the genetic determinants that influence progression to disease - something that can warn someone to have regular check-ups and allow them to get early treatment for disease.

I personally feel that such projects are perfectly acceptable and worthwhile, although I would require additional caveats (e.g. restrict access to the database, anonymise date where possible, insurance companies are not allowed to use genetic make-up as a factor in setting insurance costs either directly or indirectly)

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...