According to the BBC the UK National Health Service (NHS) is setting up a programme to sequence 100,000 Genomes by 2017 and use this data to develop new treatments:
Under the scheme, 11 Genomics Medicine Centres are being set up in English hospitals to gather DNA samples to help devise targeted treatments for a wide range of diseases.
...
Doctors will offer suitable patients the opportunity to take part in the scheme. They will have to agree to have their genetic code and medical records - stripped of anything that could identify them - made available to drugs companies and researchers.
The scheme, known as the "100,000 Genomes Project" is being co-ordinated by Genomics England, a company set up and owned by the Department Of Health, specifically for this purpose.
Also covered at The Guardian and The Independent.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MrGuy on Tuesday December 23 2014, @11:10PM
Call me a pedant, but isn't your genetic code by definition the very definition of something that can identify you?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Adamsjas on Tuesday December 23 2014, @11:45PM
You mistake the purpose of stripping ID from these samples.
Maybe they just don't want anything standing in the way of their patents.
(Score: 4, Informative) by cafebabe on Wednesday December 24 2014, @09:52PM
This has already discussed [soylentnews.org], although, six months ago, the dataset was to be constructed by stealth [soylentnews.org],
1702845791×2
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday December 24 2014, @03:11AM
Once that data is in the hand of the powers that is. It's out there period. Because the data can always be correlated to unmask the identities.
And the "Trust us" is bullshit in case anyone still buys it.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday December 24 2014, @04:41AM
Other than the potential for being unmasked, who would actually care?
If these people are donating some how unique or rare cell-lines to science they are probably doing it for the good that could come of it, and probably don't care all that much if someone was able to trace it back to them. Worst case is you embarrass your mother and enrage your father if someone decided to trace linage rigorously and discovered a secret parentage, but chance are wouldn't have access to that kind of info, and everyone will be dead by then anyway.
I don't think the removing of identifying information has any real purpose other than to remove objections to donating to the sciences.
Besides, this shit goes on all the time anyway, just without people knowing about it.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by mrchew1982 on Wednesday December 24 2014, @04:59AM
I used to think that way until I watched Gattica. And after completing a Bio major I can tell you that it's not that far from what could be. There are already more than a few scientists who want to start using genetics to grade possible performance, tendency towards criminal behavior, proclivity towards diseases, etc. And with the current population surplus there are plenty of politicians who would like to let them. And plenty of gluttonous CEO's that would like to use it to make shitloads more money.
Collection of genomic data en masse could be a huge boon to humanity, but it could also create serious problems. If we don't take the necessary steps to make sure that the information is handled appropriately I fear that it will be the latter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 24 2014, @03:55AM
I never thought I'd condemn science for enabling evil, but each time I see some irresponsible act like this I come a little closer.
Sure it isn't too dangerous now, but say criminal tendencies are found to be somewhat predictable from DNA?
Surely those people wouldn't mind extra surveillance? After all, if they have nothing to hide...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 24 2014, @04:21PM
I think you need to ask if regular people wouldn't mind the extra attention based on what may be in their genes. I mean, if only criminals know the results of their tests because they are already criminals, they'll know they can take actions to do what they can to diminish the monitoring.
Were I a criminal, simply knowing they can test for it wouldn't convince me that I need professional authoritative assistance in making sure I am monitored 24x7. Besides, we already do that to most folks. Based on the fact the internet is now about advertising, I'd say it was a success to get people to accept it. the only real holdouts are likely to be the criminals you mention, who clearly have nothing to hide if they've already been found out.
And yet, this is different! This will allow the authorities to try to cull such people from society and help fuel the private prisons (or hidden or simply just arrange for their mysterious disappearances) in a fashion not too much different from now, but with (more) science on their side! Why wait until they cause problems when they can be culled right from the source? And their genetic relations also removed from the pool, for safety?
It can't be worse than using phrenology to determine who the true criminals are. And this way, science can identify good looking criminals that phrenology would have to ignore because only ugly heads were criminalistic in nature.
But yes, I agree with your underlying context. Part of me says this can open a new era of some way to solve the ills of society--the world will overly warm, bacteria will take over, and we can have designer babies created to look good, be smart, and resistent to illness! But when it comes down to it, I will still be unable to afford the miraculous solutions available from medicine crafted directly for my genetic build, becuase my job was outsourced to another country and I was identified for culling, if I only would take those specially designed pills... maybe universal healthcare can keep the citizen compliance numbers up?
Sorry for the rant. coffee is kicking in, I think. at least i forgot to log in