It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Bush Signs Bill To Take All Newborns’ DNA

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:29 AM

One health care expert and prominent critic of DNA screening is Twila Brase, president of the Citizens’ Council on Health Care who has written a detailed analysis (PDF) of the new law in which she warns that it represents the first program of populationwide genetic testing. Brase states that S.1858 and H.R. 3825, the House version of the bill, will:

• Establish a national list of genetic conditions for which newborns and children are to be tested.

• Establish protocols for the linking and sharing of genetic test results nationwide.

• Build surveillance systems for tracking the health status and health outcomes of individuals diagnosed at birth with a genetic defect or trait.

• Use the newborn screening program as an opportunity for government agencies to identify, list, and study "secondary conditions" of individuals and their families.

• Subject citizens to genetic research without their knowledge or consent.

"Soon, under this bill, the DNA of all citizens will be housed in government genomic biobanks and considered governmental property for government research," Brase writes. "The DNA taken at birth from every citizen is essentially owned by the government, and every citizen becomes a potential subject of government-sponsored genetic research." "The public is clueless. S. 1858 imposes a federal agenda of DNA databanking and population-wide genetic research. It does not require consent and there are no requirements to fully inform parents about the warehousing of their child’s DNA for the purpose of genetic research."

More at link

Isn't this like the stuff Hitler did? Genetic research?

People in the future having babies will have all their genetic make-up stored in a computer database somewhere.

[edit on 5/8/2008 by Jessicamsa]

[edit on 5/8/2008 by Jessicamsa]

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 12:57 AM
I think that has already happened.

In Australia there is a test done on all newborns - Gruthries Test. It is a test to detect phenylketoneuria and it is done by pricking the baby's heel and swiping the blood on a card. Voila!! DNA.

My eldest is almost 27 and they have been doing this for a long long time here. Good guess that it is done in the US too.

I personally think that governments world wide already have our DNA. It is sio easy to get when you think about it. So they have Guthries that gets all the newborns, then whenever anyone has to have samples of blood or other body matter taken at a hospital, clinic or surgery, some is sent to a central DNA collection bank just in case it is not on record. That way they constantly collect the entire populations DNA.

As far as asking your permission, well they have to look like they are protecting your rights don't they? You are giving permission for something they already stole from you. Yes STOLE

just my thoughts on this...I thought about this years ago.

take care

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:06 AM
This is a redundant bill. Most of the states already have been doing this and keep this information on record. I'm not incredibly fond of it, but as technology expands, we're undoubtedly going to see some issues arise, like this, in which something never before collected or quantified for AMerican citizens is suddenly thrust into the normative procedures of the CDC, HHS, or any of a variety of other federal departments. Something I haven't ever seen reported on, but has been very interesting to me lately is how the residents of this country reacted when fingerprinting and footprinting became common. I know on my birth certificate from 1976 my footprints are on it and it cites that they are also on record with the Wisconsin state government. When I got my concealed carry permit the state of Washington fingerprinted me. I wonder if someday down the road DNA "fingerprinting" will be viewed as such a commonplace ho-hum thing that only those on the fringe really complain about it? (For the record, I was NOT pleased to have my prints taken and I really vascillated over the decision. I had managed to go 30 years without my fingerprints ever being carded and it wasn't easy to surrender that streak.)

new topics

log in