The dark side of DNA: Via The Globe and Mail.

The only real evidence in a first-degree murder charge against Mr. Turner, the golden sheen of DNA appeared certain to become a silver bullet in the hands of the Crown.

"I told my lawyer, Jerome Kennedy, that there was no way in the world it was true," Mr. Turner recalled in an interview. "He believed me. He said that I was too stupid to commit that crime and leave no evidence."

A lucky hunch by Mr. Kennedy - now Newfoundland's Minister of Health - saved Mr. Turner from a life behind bars. He sought the name and DNA profile of every technician who had worked at the RCMP lab. It turned out that the technician who had tested the ring had also been working on the victim's fingernails a few inches away, creating a strong possibility of contamination.

The technician conceded at Mr. Turner's 2001 trial that she had also contaminated evidence in two previous cases. [ Read more ... ]

To Stop Crime, Share Your Genes: Via NYTimes.com ( Op-Ed Contributor ).

PERHAPS the only thing more surprising than President Obama’s decision to give an interview for “America’s Most Wanted” last weekend was his apparent agreement with the program’s host, John Walsh, that there should be a national DNA database with profiles of every person arrested, whether convicted or not.Emphasis added: Many Americans feel that this proposal flies in the face of our “innocent until proven guilty” ethos, and given that African-Americans are far more likely to be arrested than whites, critics refer to such genetic collection as creating “Jim Crow’s database.”

In truth, however, this is an issue where both sides are partly right. The president was correct in saying that we need a more robust DNA database, available to law enforcement in every state, to “continue to tighten the grip around folks who have perpetrated these crimes.” But critics have a point that genetic police work, like the sampling of arrestees, is fraught with bias. A better solution: to keep every American’s DNA profile on file. [ Read more ... ]

Technology Review: Massive Gene Database Planned in California: Via Technology Review(MIT) .

Plans for genetic analyses of 100,000 older Californians--the first time genetic data will be generated for such a large and diverse group--will accelerate research into environmental and genetic causes of disease, researchers say.

"This is a force multiplier with respect to genome-wide association studies," says Cathy Schaefer, a research scientist at Kaiser Permanente, a health-care provider based in Oakland, CA, whose patients will be involved. Researchers will be able to study the data and seek insights into the interplay between genes, the environment, and disease, thanks to access to detailed electronic health records, patient surveys, and even records of environmental conditions where the patients live and work. [ Read more ... ]

Redefining privacy in the era of personal genomics: Via Ars Technica.

DNA, the storage bank of genetic information for all living organisms, is challenging scientists and policy makers to reconsider the issue of privacy. With the completion of the human genome and advancements in DNA sequencing technologies, a person’s DNA can potentially be tested for risks related to a number of genetic diseases. This progress is promising for personalized medicine, but ethical and policy issues are coming to the forefront as well. After all, can DNA data ever be truly private and anonymous when DNA itself can also act as a unique identifier? [ Read more ... ]

Katie’s Law May Change New York’s Approach to DNA Sample Collection: Via PogoWasRight.org » Legislation.

If you are convicted of a violent crime in the state of New York, you are required to provide a DNA sample to authorities. This is kept on file and used by law enforcement to help identify the perpetrators of future crimes. Key to this practice is the idea that a DNA sample is taken after an individual has been found guilty.

This could soon change, however, if New York lawmakers pass Katie’s Law. The law would give law enforcement the right to take DNA samples from anyone arrested for a violent crime.

Arrest vs. Conviction

It is important to note the difference: DNA samples would be taken from suspects following arrest, rather than conviction. This means that someone who is wrongly accused and arrested would be required to submit a DNA sample and, even if acquitted, would have his or her most personal information listed next to convicted criminals’ information. [ Read more ... ]

Pentagon Searches for ‘Digital DNA’ to Identify Hackers: Via Danger Room.

One of the trickiest problems in cyber security is trying to figure who’s really behind an attack. Darpa, the Pentagon agency that created the Internet, is trying to fix that, with a new effort to develop the “cyber equivalent of fingerprints or DNA” that can identify even the best-cloaked hackers.

The recent malware hit on Google and other U.S. tech firms showed once again just how hard it is to pin a network strike on a particular person or group. Engineers are pretty sure the attack came from China, and it sure was sophisticated enough to come from a state military like China’s. But it’s hard to say conclusively that the People’s Liberation Army launched the strike.

It’s the kind of problem Darpa will try to solve with its “Cyber Genome” project. [ Read more ... ]

Texas to Destroy Baby Blood Taken without Consent: Via CNSNews.com .

Austin, Texas (AP) - Texas health authorities will destroy more than five million blood samples taken from babies without parental consent and stored indefinitely for scientific research.
 
The Texas Department of State Health Services announced Tuesday it would destroy the samples after settling a federal lawsuit filed by the Texas Civil Rights Project. The project, acting on behalf of five plaintiffs, had sued the Texas Department of State Health Services and the Texas A&M University System.
 
The lawsuit alleged that the state's failure to ask parents for permission to store and possibly use the blood - originally collected to screen for birth defects - violated constitutional protections against unlawful search and seizure. The plaintiffs cited fears their children's private health data could be misused. [ Read more ... ]

Hospital keeps secret DNA file: Via Times Online (UK).

Children’s University hospital in Temple Street is under investigation by the Data Protection Commissioner

A DUBLIN hospital has built a database containing the DNA of almost every person born in the country since 1984 without their knowledge in an apparent breach of data protection laws.

The Children’s University hospital in Temple Street is under investigation by the Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) since The Sunday Times discovered it has a policy of indefinitely keeping blood samples taken to screen newborn babies for diseases.

Unknown to the DPC, the hospital has amassed 1,548,300 blood samples from “heel prick tests” on newborns which are sent to it for screening, creating, in effect, a secret national DNA database. The majority of hospitals act on implied or verbal consent and do not inform parents what happens to their child’s sample.

The blood samples are stored at room temperature on cards with information including the baby’s name, address, date of birth, hospital of birth and test result. The DPC said it was shocked at the discovery. [ Read more ... ]

DNA Testing Firm Goes Bankrupt; Who Gets the Data?: Via Threat Level.

An Icelandic firm that offers private DNA testing to customers has filed for bankruptcy in the U.S., raising privacy concerns about the fate of customer DNA samples and records, according to the Times of London.

DeCODE Genetics, a genetics research firm, began offering personalized DNA testing through its deCODEme website two years ago. A customer mails in a sample taken from the inside of his cheek, and the service calculates the subject’s genetic risk for disease — cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, heart disease.

The company hasn’t disclosed how many clients signed up for its service, but provides a number of customer testimonials on its site, including Dorrit Mousaieff, Iceland’s first lady. The staff of the Martha Stewart show also got their DNA tested earlier this year by deCODE when the company’s founder, Dr. Kari Stefansson, was featured on the show.

DeCODE warned investors earlier this year that it was running out of money, and filed for bankruptcy in Delaware this week. Saga Investments, a U.S. venture capital firm, has already put in a bid to buy deCODE’s operations, including the deCODEme business, though the sale of the operations must still undergo a public auction.

The company told the Times that Saga would be bound by deCODE’s privacy agreements with customers, which prohibits the disclosure of customer data to third parties such as insurers, employers or doctors. [ Read more ... ]

Uses of Medical Histories Are Curtailed Under a New Law: Via NYTimes.com .

The most important new antidiscrimination law in two decades — the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act — will take effect in the nation’s workplaces next weekend, prohibiting employers from requesting genetic testing or considering someone’s genetic background in hiring, firing or promotions.

The act also prohibits health insurers and group plans from requiring such testing or using genetic information — like a family history of heart disease — to deny coverage or set premiums or deductibles.

“It doesn’t matter who’s asking for genetic information, if it’s the employer or the insurer, the point is you can’t ask for it,” said John C. Stivarius Jr., a trial lawyer based in Atlanta who advises businesses about the new law. [ Read more ... ]

Police to continue to hold DNA of innocent people: Via Politics | The Guardian .

Profiles to be kept for six years under revised bill

Terror suspects' details could be held indefinitely

Chief constables are to carry on refusing requests to delete the DNA profiles of arrested people released without charge, while a fresh political battle is waged over how long the details should remain on the database.

Home Office ministers confirmed they want to see the DNA profiles of innocent people kept on the national database for six years, after failing to persuade parliament to back a longer period of up to 12 years for the most serious offences.

But senior Labour backbenchers, alongside Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, made clear tonight that they did not believe the government climbdown on DNA went far enough. [ Read more ... ]

Guardian (UK): Police to continue to hold DNA of innocent people: Via Privacy Lives.

The Guardian reports that the UK Home Office “ministers confirmed they want to see the DNA profiles of innocent people kept on the national database for six years, after failing to persuade parliament to back a longer period of up to 12 years for the most serious offences.” Also, the ministers said “in the case of those arrested under terrorism legislation or national security provisions,” those individuals’ “DNA profiles will in future be kept indefinitely.” [ Read more ... ]

Massive Gene Database Planned in California: Via MIT's Technology Review.

The data will be compared against electronic health records and patients' personal information.

Plans for genetic analyses of 100,000 older Californians--the first time genetic data will be generated for such a large and diverse group--will accelerate research into environmental and genetic causes of disease, researchers say.

"This is a force multiplier with respect to genome-wide association studies," says Cathy Schaefer, a research scientist at Kaiser Permanente, a health-care provider based in Oakland, CA, whose patients will be involved. Researchers will be able to study the data and seek insights into the interplay between genes, the environment, and disease, thanks to access to detailed electronic health records, patient surveys, and even records of environmental conditions where the patients live and work.

"The importance of this project is that it will, almost overnight--well, in two years--produce a very large amount of genetic and phenotypic data that a large number of investigators and scientists can begin asking questions of, rather than having to gather data first," Schaefer says. [ Read more ... ]

ACLU Says Extracting DNA From Suspects Unconstitutional: Via Threat Level.

California’s law requiring the authorities to take a DNA sample from every person arrested on felony accusations was challenged in federal court Wednesday as an unconstitutional privacy breach.

A lawsuit (.pdf), filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of two Californians who were arrested and released, seeks to overturn a voter-approved law that became effective this year. Proposition 69 requires detainees to provide a saliva or sometimes a blood sample upon felony arrest. The sample is stored in state and FBI databases, even if the arrested person is never charged or convicted of a crime.

The challenge, if successful, threatens to derail similar laws in other states. According to DNAResource.com, 10 other states have such statutes. They are Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota and Vermont. [ Read more ... ]

Proposed Rule Implements the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act: Via CDT - PolicyBeta.

On October 1st, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a Proposed Rule with respect to the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), a federal law passed in May 2008 that protects individuals against discrimination in health care coverage and employment based on genetic information. Many states already have similar laws in place, but GINA provides a new federal baseline level of protection against genetic discrimination in health care coverage and employment.

The proposed rule attempts to implement new privacy and confidentiality protections in Title I of GINA, which deals with nondiscrimination in health care coverage, and makes changes to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule. [ Read more ... ]

Anonymized genetic research data still carries privacy risks: Via Law & Disorder Section - Ars Technica.

Up until recently, looking for the changes in DNA that contribute to human genetic diseases was a laborious process that involved tracking the changes through the generations of individual families. The completion of the human genome has changed all of that, allowing researchers to check for hundreds of thousands of individual DNA changes in large populations, and to identify those changes that are associated with specific genetic diseases—as the number of people genotyped grows, data sharing might be able to increase the statistical power of these experiments. But researchers are now cautioning that sharing the data might allow someone to learn about the people who contribute DNA samples to these studies. [ Read more ... ]

Officers’ New Tool Against D.W.I. - Syringe: Via NYTimes.com .

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — When Officer Darryll Dowell of the Nampa Police Department is on patrol, he will pull up at a stoplight and start casing the vehicle next to him. Nowadays, his eyes will also focus on the driver’s arms, searching for a plump, bouncy vein.

“I was looking at people’s arms and hands, thinking, ‘I could draw from that,’ ” Officer Dowell said.

The thought stems from training he and a select cadre of officers in Idaho and Texas have received in recent months in drawing blood from people suspected of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The aim of the federal program is to determine if drawing blood by law-enforcement officers can be an effective tool against drunken drivers and aid in their prosecution. [ Read more ... ]

Does DNA database unfairly brand the innocent?: Via Associated Press at San Francisco Chronicle.

Like so many great discoveries, it was an accident.

British scientist Alec Jeffreys realized 25 years ago Thursday that individuals have "DNA fingerprints," unique patterns of genetic material that can be used to identify them. The discovery has solved thousands of crimes, put murderers behind bars, split and reunited families - and launched a fierce debate about privacy and human rights.

On the anniversary of his discovery, Jeffreys worried that police are using a database of DNA samples taken from suspects to brand innocent people "future criminals." [ Read more ... ]

DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show: Via NYTimes.com .

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.” [ Read more ... ]

DNA in the U.K.: Via Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union.

When you spend as much time monitoring the threats to privacy in the United States as the the ACLU does, it can be easy to lose sight of the fact that the emerging surveillance society is not just an American phenomenon. The political, social, and technological forces that are driving the magnification of surveillance here in the United States are happening all over the world. In fact, as data sharing among foreign governments and multinational corporations accelerates, developments in other countries will certainly affect our right to privacy here in the United States. Thus, it is essential to use a wide-angle when assessing the status of privacy here and abroad.

In the U.S., we’re used to having the world’s biggest of everything. But when it comes to DNA databases, it seems that the Brits are at least as ambitious. [ Read more ... ]

High Court: Convicts have no right to DNA tests : Via USATODAY.com .

WASHINGTON — Convicted prisoners have no constitutional right to biological evidence from their cases for DNA testing, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday by a 5-4 vote.
The high-profile dispute from Alaska, one of several closely awaited cases of the 2008-09 term that will end later this month, involved the modern testing technology that has led to the exoneration of more than 200 individuals.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, acknowledged that DNA testing "has an unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty." But he said prisoners simply have no constitutional right to a state's biological evidence after conviction. [ Read more ... ]

Off-the-Shelf Genetic Testing On Display: Via Technology Review.

Want to share your genome online with friends and family? Find out how well you metabolize B vitamins? Determine if you're genetically susceptible to forming blood clots on long flights? All of this is possible with a credit card and an Internet connection, thanks to the growing field of direct-to-consumer genetic testing, which aims to move genetic tests out of the doctor's office and into the hands of individuals.

The first annual Consumer Genetics Show, which started today in Boston, highlights some of what's available to today's consumer. A number of genomics startups have booths lined up along the conference hall, offering everything from genetic tests that give individuals insight into their heart health, nutritional requirements, and optimal weight-loss strategies to full genome sequences. [ Read more ... ]

13,000 offer up DNA to put their genomes online: Via Computerworld.

Study among first to offer data to computer scientists

Since opening to the public late last month, The Personal Genome Project has signed up 13,000 volunteers who will donate genetic material for the benefit of gene research worldwide. Information about the genetic material will also be posted online.

The project was launched last year with the goal of creating the world's first publicly accessible database of human genomic and trait data from 100,000 people. Initially, it started as a closed test study with 10 volunteers so that those who later sign up for the project "will know what they're getting into," said George Church, the Harvard Medical School professor leading the initiative.

Those first 10 volunteers had their genomes, along with photos and personal and family history, placed online as a pilot for the experiment, which one day could include millions of unique genomes.

Church said study participants have not been promised any anonymity -- just the opposite. [ Read more ... ]

ACLU: Human Gene Patents Infringe Speech: Via Threat Level.

The American Civil Liberties Union is suing the Patent and Trademark Office and a research company awarded exclusive rights to human genes known to detect early signs of breast or ovarian cancer. The group claims the patents violate speech by restricting research.

The novel case, if successful, opens the door to challenges of a host of other patented genes: about one-fifth of the human genome is covered under patent applications and claims. The ACLU’s case is believed to be the first to challenge a patented gene under a civil rights allegation. [ Read more ... ]

ACLU: Human Gene Patents Infringe Speech: Via Threat Level.

The American Civil Liberties Union is suing the Patent and Trademark Office and a research company awarded exclusive rights to human genes known to detect early signs of breast or ovarian cancer. The group claims the patents violate speech by restricting research.

The novel case, if successful, opens the door to challenges of a host of other patented genes: about one-fifth of the human genome is covered under patent applications and claims. The ACLU’s case is believed to be the first to challenge a patented gene under a civil rights allegation.

According to the federal lawsuit, (.pdf) filed in the Southern District of New York, the First Amendment is at stake because the patents are so broad they bar scientists from examining and comparing the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes at the center of the dispute. In short, the patents issued more than a decade ago cover any new scientific methods of looking at these human genes that might be developed by others. [ Read more ... ]