Can Utard be far behind? The lard loves his profits you know.

Actually not unlike the DNA genealogy that Huntsman does but not non-profit.

http://www.naturalnews.com/052046_DNA_database_genetic_privacy_California.html

...good luck with that. Does anyone actually think that the State of California can manage and operate this "database"?...or could be contracted-out to be maintained and operated successfully? There will be screwups, followed closely by lawsuits.........IMO....not saying they won't try.

...those guys can screw up a free-lunch....or more likely, your DNA will be "statistically matched" to a canteloupe, carrot, or an antihistimine product..

That article contains a number of inaccuracies, and poor (intentionally poor?) choices of words.

Having just had a baby in California (and another one I had in 2001), I know how the program works.

Contrary to how the article presented the taking of the sample, what was being done was *clearly* explained to my wife and I 5 months ago when our daughter was born. It was the same in 2001 when my last daughter was born. We were also *clearly* given the option to either NOT have the sample taken, or NOT have the state "store" the sample. With both kids, we had the sample taken, got a report later on showing negatives for all of the genetic diseases they screen for, and allowed our daughters' "de-personalized" sample to be kept by the state.

It's not actually a "database," by the way. What they're NOT doing is taking the full genome of every kid and storing it digitally. The sample is kept (blood spot on a card), and the results of the genetic disease tests are kept both on paper and digitally. But there is NOT a digital copy of anyone's DNA or entire genome stored.

Finally, when researchers or companies purchase access to the information, they get *statistical* information -- they don't get your DNA. And if police request any individual's sample or statistics, they need a warrant.

I researched the program carefully before participating. Inaccurate "scare" pieces like the article above are ridiculous.

By the way, if you're convicted of a crime in California, your DNA IS sampled, and stored, whether you like it or not. That's not the case with newborns.

Reading the comments sent my woo detector off the scale.