|
On the other issue, about whether or not people would feel comfortable with the government having their DNA profile in case it got into the hands of insurance companies, etc. I don't think I would have much of a problem with this, namely for the fact that for crime purposes, they do not sequence a suspects DNA.
Basically, there are proteins called restriction enzymes that cut DNA at specific sites (for example, the restriction enzyme BamHI cuts DNA at the sequence GGATCC whereas SmaI cuts DNA at the sequence CCCGGG). Becasue each persons DNA sequence is not identical, these restriction enzymes will cut each person't DNA at different sites, and by looking at the size of the fragments that get cut, you can match the DNA to a specific person (because the size of no two people's DNA fragments after cutting will be identical).
To get to the point, if the police/government were required to destroy your DNA after they acquired your restriction profile, I would have no problem with them keeping a catalogue of people's DNA. However, if they banked the DNA and were able to sequence it later on to look for specific genes that may or may not be present and then share this information with others, I would most likely be opposed to the idea.
With the ability to sequence DNA growing easier every day, this is a debate that will not go away anytime soon.
|