I want you to tell me what that “something” you fear is.
And I am a biologist, in my imagination we may soon be able to cheaply and efficiently figure out the genotype of any given DNA sample (i.e. this is a half Puerto Rican half Norwegian guy with blue eyes and brown hair, about six feet tall, likely average IQ, a risk taker, prone to being overweight, likely to die of heart disease, etc).
Currently all a DNA sample tells “the man” is “I do not match anybody in the database” or “I do match someone in the database”, or the interesting case your raised “I am most likely a very close relation to someone in the database”.
Are you currently against the collection of DNA markers from convicted felons?
I have already given you a very important example, genetic profiling for the denial or acceptance of medically necessary health care. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.... the first of those being life. You seem to scoff at the idea that our loving bureaucrats won't someday mandate the denial of service to cut costs based upon genetic profiles. Those in the UK are now currently being euthanized:
A British "end of life" care protocol approved for use by the National Health Service (NHS), has created a systematic, and legal, method of euthanising elderly and disabled patients, even while "mercy killing" remains officially illegal, says a prominent expert in elder care. The "Liverpool Care Pathway" will be used to eliminate patients deemed to be "blocking beds" in the increasingly financially strapped public health system.
If the thought of some Tom Daschle somewhere deciding whether you live or die is not something to "fear", then I don't need to waste anymore time on you.
And it is my understanding that the "samples" from which you make your digital CODIS profile, may not be destroyed, but kept in storage.
"Police were asked to supply the policies their evidence-room technicians keep at their desks that describe how long DNA samples are maintained for the crimes of murder, rape and kidnapping and for missing-persons cases.
Of the Colorado policies, only Denver's specifically addresses DNA storage, saying that DNA samples are to be placed in "long-term" storage. But even Denver's policy doesn't define what it means by "long-term." The department says it means "indefinitely."
So I assume that there are lots of long term storage areas around that haven't bothered to destroy the physical sample yet, if ever. There goes your theory that the only thing that exists is "the number of repeats I have for 13 different short terminal repeat sequences (diploid). So all they have are 26 numbers that form a unique designator that identifies me"
They most likely still retain the physical sample somewhere. That can be subjected to future tests that haven't been invented yet, looking for things that you don't have the imagination to dream up. Welcome to Gattaca.
No thank you.
Good grief. We’re already seeing what’s going on in the way of eugenics with DNA. Babies are being selectively aborted now by the choice of the parents.
You don’t foresee that once the government establishes socialized medicine, that genetic testing is going to be mandatory and that babies are going to be selectively aborted by the dictum of the government?
You don’t see that the government would not even decide who ought to be allowed to reproduce based on genetic testing?
Forced sterilizations for those whose genetic material is too risky?
There are none so blind as those who will not see.