Group items tagged

U.S. law enforcement officials have expanded their DNA databases to include not only those convicted, but also those arrested but not yet tried. The New York Times reported Saturday the practice has drawn criticism from people who say offenders are presumed innocent. The newspaper said starting this month, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will join 15 states that collect DNA samples from those awaiting trial and will also collect DNA from detained immigrants. The FBI, which already has a DNA database of 6.7 million profiles, expects to add 1.2 million new entries by 2012. "DNA databases were built initially to deal with violent sexual crimes and homicides -- a very limited number of crimes," said Harry Levine, a professor of sociology at City University of New York. "Over time more and more crimes of decreasing severity have been added to the database. Cops and prosecutors like it because it gives everybody more information and creates a new suspect pool." Courts have generally upheld laws authorizing DNA collection from convicts and ex-convicts under supervised release, finding that criminal acts diminish privacy rights.

Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com like this http://killdo.de.gg travel,hotel,fun,hotel new,new offer,hotel best,best hotel,hotel travel,seo,backlinks,edu,gov,ads,indexing,bookmark,killgoggle,gogglesuck,goggle bookmark,kill goggle,yahoo,bing,indexing,quality links,linkwell,traffic boster,index best

In April 2008, the blogosphere was abuzz with news that someone was auctioning then-candidate Barack Obama's half-eaten breakfast on eBay, along with silverware purported to contain his DNA. This episode led some to speculate that the DNA of one or both of the presidential candidates would be surreptitiously analysed and their genetic information broadcast before the election for all to examine. Although this scenario did not take place during this election cycle, it is well within the realm of technological possibility. Every day, we shed millions of cells during ordinary activities - licking envelopes, blowing our nose, combing hair. These cells may seem to be mere human detritus, but our biological trash could be a gold mine for information prospectors looking for clues to our health or ancestry. And as an investigation in the latest issue of New Scientist magazine found, there already is a vibrant industry offering covert DNA tests to confirm infidelity and parentage. We have reached this point through technological advances in laboratory genetic analysis, dramatically reduced costs for the analysis and an almost complete absence of rules governing the legal status of "abandoned DNA."

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is expanding beyond its traditional fingerprint-focused collection practices to develop a new biometrics system that will include DNA records, 3-D facial imaging, palm prints and voice scans, blended to create what's known as "multi-modal biometrics." Slideshow: The changing face of biometrics How the Defense Department might institutionalize war-time biometrics "The FBI today is announcing a rapid DNA initiative," said Louis Grever, executive assistant director of the FBI's science and technology branch, during his keynote presentation at the Biometric Consortium Conference in Tampa. The FBI plans to begin migrating from its IAFIS database, established in the mid-1990s to hold its vast fingerprint data, to a next-generation system that's expected to be in prototype early next year. This multi-modal NGI biometrics database system will hold DNA records and more.

Taking genetic tests to assess potential health risks could mean cheaper medical insurance even if the results are not disclosed, a senior industry executive has told The Times. Customers who take personal DNA scans will pay lower premiums because insurers believe that they encourage a healthier lifestyle, according to Gil Baldwin, the managing director of Norwich Union Healthcare. The advent of tests for DNA variants that affect common disorders such as diabetes and heart disease has prompted fears of discrimination and the creation of a "genetic underclass" who cannot buy cover. Mr Baldwin insisted that his company did not see genetics as a tool for cherry picking low-risk customers but as a way of helping them to manage and reduce their risk of disease with the aim of lowering costs for both parties. In an interview with The Times, he said that people who take genetic screening are likely to act on the results and therefore present a much better risk profile. Insurers will reflect this in premiums, regardless of whether results are disclosed.

Further proof that LA has it head in the clouds - A plan to overhaul the city of Los Angeles' computer system is raising concerns about the security of confidential information. The nation's second-largest city is considering dumping its in-house computer network for Google Inc. e-mail and office programs that are accessed over the Internet. But the city police union says it doesn't have enough information to determine if sensitive witness and investigation files will be secure from hackers. Google spokeswoman Aviva Gilbert says security "is built into the DNA of our products."

A plan to overhaul the city of Los Angeles' computer system is raising concerns about the security of confidential information. The nation's second-largest city is considering dumping its in-house computer network for Google Inc. e-mail and office programs that are accessed over the Internet. But the city police union says it doesn't have enough information to determine if sensitive witness and investigation files will be secure from hackers. Google spokeswoman Aviva Gilbert says security "is built into the DNA of our products."

Laws in Canada and other countries are increasingly helping technology force people to identify themselves where they never had to before, threatening privacy that allows people to function effectively in society, a new study has found. "What we're starting to see is a move toward making people more and more identifiable," University of Ottawa law professor Ian Kerr said Wednesday. His comments followed the launch of Lessons from the Identity Trail: Anonymity, Privacy and Identity in a Networked Society, a book summing up the study's findings, at a public reading in downtown Ottawa hosted jointly with the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Kerr led the study with University of Ottawa criminology professor Valerie Steeves. They collaborated with 35 other researchers in Canada, the U.S., the U.K., the Netherlands and Italy. The researchers reported that governments are choosing laws that require people to identify themselves and are lowering judicial thresholds defining when identity information must be disclosed to law enforcement officials. That is allowing the wider use of new technologies capable of making people identifiable, including smartcards, security cameras, GPS, tracking cookies and DNA sequencing. Consequently, governments and corporations are able to do things like: * Embrace technologies such as radio frequency identification tags that can be used to track people and merchandise to analyze behaviour. * Boost video surveillance in public places. * Pressure companies such as internet service providers to collect and maintain records of identification information about their customers. While Canada, the U.K., the Netherlands and Italy all have national laws protecting privacy - that is, laws that allow citizens to control access to their personal data - such legal protection does not exist for anonymity, Kerr said. "Canada is quite similar [to other countries] with respect to anonymity. Namely, it's shrinking here just as it is there.

Traditionally, we trust doctors with confidential information about our health in the knowledge that it�s in our own interests. Similarly, few patients object to the idea that such information may be used in some form for medical research. But what happens when this process is subject to scrutiny?How explicit does our consent have to be? Since the introduction of the Data Protection Act 1998 medical researchers have raised concerns over the increasing barriers they face to accessing patient data.These concerns have heightened amongst some researchers since the passing of the Human Tissue Act 2004 introduced in the wake of the Alder Hey and Bristol Royal Infirmary scandals. When scientific advances are unraveling the secrets of DNA and the decoding of the human genome has opened up substantial new research opportunities.Clinical scientists and epidemiologists argue that the requirements being placed upon them are disproportionate to the use they are making of either datasets or tissues samples and, besides, their work is in the public interest.At the heart of the debate lie key questions over trust and consent and how these can best be resolved.To complicate things, it is no longer just medical researchers, but also public health bureaucrats who are keen to have access to our data.Quasi-official bodies have been charged with persuading individuals to change their behaviour and lifestyles in connection with all manner of issues such as diet, exercise, smoking and alcohol consumption.Social Marketing � the borrowing of commercial marketing techniques in the pursuit of 'public goods' � is in vogue amongst public health officials. Empowered by advanced data collection and computing techniques, armed with the latest epidemiological research, and emboldened by a mission to change unhealthy behaviour, public health officials are keen to target their messages to specific 'market segments' in most need of advice.Are government researchers abusing patients' trust? Can an

"The school's policy seems to violate the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), says Susannah Baruch of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University. "Most generally," she says, "GINA prohibits health insurers and employers from using your genetic information against you." The law went fully into effect Nov. 21, and it prevents health insurers from collecting genetic information to make decisions about the insurance people get or how much it costs. The law also says an employer can't use it to make decisions about hiring, firing or job promotions. There are a few exceptions. The law doesn't apply to employers with fewer than 15 workers. And while it covers health insurance, it doesn't apply to life or long-term care insurance."