The General Public:... Lobotomized Sheep wrote:
> Bush Signs Bill To Take All Newborns' DNA
>
> President Bush last week signed into law a bill which will see the
> federal government begin to screen the DNA of all newborn babies in
> the U.S. within six months, a move critics have described as the
> first step towards the establishment of a national DNA database.
>
> ............................
>
> Terrorist Bush Signs Bill To Take All Newborns' DNA
> Health Council, Congressman Ron Paul warn new law could pave the way
> for a national DNA database
>
> President Bush an Al-Qaeda kook last week signed into law a bill
> which will see the federal government begin to screen the DNA of all
> newborn babies in the U.S. within six months, a move critics have
> described as the first step towards the establishment of a national
> DNA database.
> Described as a "national contingency plan" the justification for the
> new law S. 1858, known as The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of
> 2007, is that it represents preparation for any sort of "public
> health emergency."
>
> The bill states that the federal government should "continue to carry
> out, coordinate, and expand research in newborn screening" and
> "maintain a central clearinghouse of current information on newborn
> screening... ensuring that the clearinghouse is available on the
> Internet and is updated at least quarterly".
>
> Sections of the bill also make it clear that DNA may be used in
> genetic experiments and tests.
>
> Read the full bill here.
>
> 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:
>
> a.. Establish a national list of genetic conditions for which
> newborns and children are to be tested.
> b.. Establish protocols for the linking and sharing of genetic test
> results nationwide.
> c.. Build surveillance systems for tracking the health status and
> health outcomes of individuals diagnosed at birth with a genetic
> defect or trait. d.. Use the newborn screening program as an
> op****tunity for government agencies to identify, list, and study
> "secondary conditions" of individuals and their families.
> e.. 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."
>
> In a previous re****t we outlined the consequences of the already
> existing DNA warehousing operation in Minnesota, a program that the
> Citizens' Council on Health Care has been following closely for a
> number of years.
>
> Ms. Brase explained in a statement last month that state Health
> Department officials are now seeking exemption for the so called "DNA
> Warehouse" from Minnesota privacy law. This would enable state
> officials to continue to take the DNA of newborn infants without
> consent, which would also set the precedent for nationwide policy on
> DNA screening.
>
> DNA of newborns has already been harvested, tested, stored and
> experimented with nationwide.
>
> The National Conference of State Legislatures lists for all 50
> states, as well as the District of Columbia, the various statutes or
> regulatory provisions under which newborns' DNA is already being
> collected.
>
> In addition, all 50 states are now routinely providing these results
> to the Department of Homeland Security.
>
> The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007 merely establishes this
> practice within the law.
>
> Another vocal critic of bill S. 1858 is Texas Congressman Ron Paul
> who made the following comments before the U.S. House of
> Representatives:
>
> "I cannot sup****t legislation, no matter how much I sympathize with
> the legislation's stated goals, that exceed the Constitutional
> limitations on federal power or in any way threatens the liberty of
> the American people. Since S. 1858 violates the Constitution, and may
> have untended consequences that will weaken the American health care
> system and further erode medical privacy, I must oppose it."
>
> Paul, a medical doctor himself continued, "S. 1858 gives the federal
> bureaucracy the authority to develop a model newborn screening
> program. Madame Speaker the federal government lacks both the
> constitutional authority and the competence to develop a newborn
> screening program adequate for a nation as large and diverse as the
> United States. ."
>
> "Those of us in the medical profession should be particularly
> concerned about policies allowing government officials and
> state-favored interests to access our medical records without our
> consent . My review of S. 1858 indicates the drafters of the
> legislation made no effort to ensure these newborn screening programs
> do not violate the privacy rights of parents and children," Paul
> continued.
>
> "In fact, by directing federal bureaucrats to create a contingency
> plan for newborn screening in the event of a 'public health'
> disaster, this bill may lead to further erosions of medical privacy.
> As recent history so eloquently illustrates, politicians are more
> than willing to take, and people are more than willing to cede,
> liberty during times of 'emergency," he concluded.
|
