It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Republicans would let employers demand workers’ genetic test results

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I hear you.

Authoritarianism is quietly oiling its way into our lives, hidden in bits and pieces of bills we may not even know about.

This one is scary.

I think it could easily violate HIPPA laws already on the books. Let's hope the SCOTUS would reject it as unconstitutional.





posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: Kandinsky

I hear you.

Authoritarianism is quietly oiling its way into our lives, hidden in bits and pieces of bills we may not even know about.

This one is scary.

I think it could easily violate HIPPA laws already on the books. Let's hope the SCOTUS would reject it as unconstitutional.



It should be rejected as unconstitutional. In fact, this should be rejected based on the 5th Amendment immediately and outright.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
Dear Conservatives and Trump Voters.

Call your Representatives. Tell them you voted for them, but if they go through with this, they will not get your vote again, nor will you support any candidate that has supported this terrible and invasive legislation.

Tell them you will be asking others in your conservative circles to join you.

Let them know there will be consequences to their personal career, and thus to their party and power.

YOU have more say in this than we liberal folk because your votes matter more.

Please.


None of "my" representatives are actually for this, neither are they conservative. If they were, they'd be reading a nice story of what someday would happen to their less intelligent children when they seek employment.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Squirlli
OOOOOoooo I wonder if I'll get to pick my own barcode!?



We will get to pick our own smart Tattoo! On the head or hand
(Don't do it though)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Squirlli
OOOOOoooo I wonder if I'll get to pick my own barcode!?



We will get to pick our own smart Tattoo! On the head or hand
(Don't do it though)


I'll go for the QR Code tramp stamp myself.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:02 AM
link   


Fortune 500 companies want to shift more healthcare cost to the workers


Just like Republicans want to shift taxes from the wealthy to the poor, but when you mention it they attack you with cries of "Class Warfare!"

I have been saying forever that the wealthy (and corporations) are the greatest danger to us all- not taxes, liberals, socialism, science and everything else they convince their followers are so dangerous.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Just another GOP purging law.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
It's just part of their plan to filter-out undesirables as they build their Master Race.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Well, I have been studying epigenetics for quite a while now and most of the stuff is not well understood yet, it is strongly influenced by diet and other environmental concerns. Just because you have the genes for breast cancer does not mean you will ever get it, in fact the vast majority of these disease genes do not lead to sickness. Even the genes for skitzo does not mean that a person will ever get skitzo, it does run in families sometimes, but remember, dietary preferences also run in families. Just altering the diet a bit can make it not a problem in most cases.

Any employer who uses genetics to try to define a person's future health is believing in science too much. I study this and do personal testing, food choices are very important. Some People with certain gene variances can't eat much of certain raw veggies or their risk of mental disease increases. Another person needs to eat leafy greens or they will have problems. Some people cannot drink milk without getting health problems but are fine if they don't drink milk. Some people cannot eat a lot of protein or they get gout. This is also genetic susceptibility. We all have different epigenetic variances and many times we have gene corrections elsewhere that make these problematic genes not a problem.

I think that until they figure out how this stuff works better, the government should keep their nose out of it. An employer can require his employee to have their DNA on file if they want, some high paying jobs and top government jobs might require this for various reasons. Science does not have all of the corrective genes figured out yet, genes that will counteract things. They cannot effectively use genetics even to treat people yet until they figure out more. In some people the treatment work great, in others it leads to side effects that could be more dangerous than the original problem.

Ten years from now this may be feasible, not yet though. Look at the personality of the person before concluding things from genetics.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Another conservative that gets it!

See, liberals? We can find something to agree on.

More things than you know.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TarzanBeta

Really? From article:

"The bill was approved by a House committee on Wednesday, with all 22 Republicans supporting it and all 17 Democrats opposed. "



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: TarzanBeta

Really? From article:

"The bill was approved by a House committee on Wednesday, with all 22 Republicans supporting it and all 17 Democrats opposed. "



Yeah. I read it. Are you totally missing everything I've said...?



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: TarzanBeta

You and I can agree all day this law is wrong. But come election day all that goes out the door. Let's come together now means , submit.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: TarzanBeta
a reply to: rickymouse

Another conservative that gets it!

See, liberals? We can find something to agree on.

More things than you know.


It doesn't matter what the average American Dem or Repub thinks
What matters is in DC and the lobbyists pushing for this



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:37 PM
link   
I find it hard to believe this isn't on the front page plastered with hundreds of flags and long threads naming names of who voted and how to contact them



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX
I find it hard to believe this isn't on the front page plastered with hundreds of flags and long threads naming names of who voted and how to contact them


There is already a post with that information.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: TarzanBeta
a reply to: rickymouse

Another conservative that gets it!

See, liberals? We can find something to agree on.

More things than you know.


It doesn't matter what the average American Dem or Repub thinks
What matters is in DC and the lobbyists pushing for this


Fair enough. I was trying to find the light in the darkness of the divide of discontent between the two ideals on ATS in particular. My mistake.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: TarzanBeta

You and I can agree all day this law is wrong. But come election day all that goes out the door. Let's come together now means , submit.


No. It doesn't mean submit.

Sorry you feel that way.

My mistake again.

ETA come election day, I vote my conscience... I don't participate in popularity contests.
edit on 3/11/2017 by TarzanBeta because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Mixed feelings about this...reading the article it would appear that the process would be voluntary and may mean cheaper insurance costs. To that extent it's not much further than being charged less if you don't smoke, or conversely being charged more if you do. Insurance is all about risk, or it is unsustainable.

On the other hand, this is open to serious abuse, where employers could actually make decisions on who to employ based on the data...not acceptable.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
so, let's see, new healthcare bill is projected to cause over a million people to lose their health insurance while
encouraging people to stay insured by tacking on an added fee if the person remains insured for a period of time.
there is no way that these employers are gonna be paying for the dna tests when they cost anywhere from $300 to over a thousand dollars, depending on what they are screening for. and, maybe I am wrong but it sounds like the laws doesn't say that they should be, it just says that the employer can demand that the employee provide him with the results of such tests...
are they planning on making these test covered as preventive medicine, or did obamacare cover it?? will these million plus people who find themselves losing their insurance also find themselves handicapped in the job market because they can't come up with that kind of money for a dna test? it this the goal of this stupid law, or is it something else?
could they be looking for a way to monitor the effects of the higher radiation levels that are being caused by incidences such a fukishima, looking for dna mutations or something? and who has a buddy in the emerging dna testing market setting them up for a nice windfall?

hopefully these are just a few crazy people in high office that don't have the clout to carry such a law to reality.
edit on 11-3-2017 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join