🚀 go-pugleaf

I only stated what you stated out of context.  A database of non identifiable
DNA is useful for research, but because you or I or anyone cannot predict the
future and sum total of information from DNA is not yet known, we cannot
allow identifiable DNA be available to the gvt at this time.  You apparently
only read part of the post or you see two clear examples where information /
research was clearly misused, given that I would say there is a strong case
to say don't give away information without know how it will be used and the
person whose DNA it is having the right to withdraw.  You say the accusations
against the gvt are weak but provide no argument. In both of the examples I
gave you the gvts were either complicit or directly involved.  That is a
direct example of the rationale for not allowing the gvt to have more
information than it currently has.  If you are saying the database is in and
of itself not bad, fine, but clearly there are great risks associated with
who has access.  When you say you see nothing to say they are bad, I would
suggest a new set of eyewear.  I gave you just two simple and small
examples.  I also pointed out that the gvt has in the past sold such
information as it had and yes this has resulted in things unwanted for the
individuals whose information is sold.  The only accusation I made against
you is that you said arguments were weak, but had no standard to judge that
by.  I provide examples of why I believe the database (identifiable database)
to be problematic.  You reply that's weak, how so?

Sensei Brent

Calgary Rob wrote:

> "Sensei Brent" <senseibrentxxx@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:3E1DD5B6.68285F00@shaw.ca...
> > DNA information is potentially far too dangerous to just let out of the
> bag at
> > this time.  People will absolutely misuse the information whether for
> > nefarious purposes, commercial purposes or because they believe they are
> doing
> > good (but are wrong).
>
> Now you start this thread claiming my argument is weak, yet you end it
> stating exactly what I was stating.  I am not afraid of DNA databases, and
> would like to see research done on the subject.  As it stands, I have seen
> nothing to say they are bad, except for some week accusations against the
> government, and myself.
>
> --
>
> Calgary Rob
> calgaryrob@shaw.ca
> I like Gravy