Survivalist Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
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

http://infowars.net/articles/may2008/020507DNA.htm

Steve Watson
Friday, May 2, 2008

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.

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:

-Establish a national list of genetic conditions for which newborns and children are to be tested.
-Establish protocols for the linking and sharing of genetic test results nationwide.
-Build surveillance systems for tracking the health status and health outcomes of individuals diagnosed at birth with a genetic defect or trait.
-Use the newborn screening program as an opportunity for government agencies to identify, list, and study "secondary conditions" of individuals and their families.
-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 report 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 support 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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Will DNA still be admissable in a court of law now? This could change a lot of things. When is enough ENOUGH?
 

·
Watchin tha world go by
Joined
·
8,151 Posts
"Congressman Ron Paul warn new law could pave the way for a national DNA database"
could looks like would ta me.

how long before the rest of us are required to do so? just another step into the abyss
incrementally is the surest way fer em ta do it.just like social security was expanded--
it will always be for the common good or for the children.

ill bet our founding fathers are so proud.
when in the course of human events............
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Sorry folks but a lot of people DO know about this and just don't care. The same with joining with Canada and Mexico, they just don't give a crap. These same people will however claim to want something done about immagration though. They just don't get it. Nothing will be done. Why build a fence if your gonna have to turn around and tear it down?
The majority of people really just don't care and I don't know how to get them to care even just a little bit.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
So that article from Alex Jones was pretty one-sided, which always sets off little warning sounds in my head. I read the bill (it's only a few pages) and it appears to simply fund grants that will be used to expand screening for metabolic and congenital abnormalities in children. Of course this involves blood tests--I recently had a kid and they did blood tests for lots of things. It's possible that some of the samples were later used in research, but under the 1994 HIPAA law the researcher would have to have obtained my consent in order to do so legally. I'm a health care researcher and know how many hoops we have to jump through in order to get human samples.

I think newborn screening is good, it saves lives (e.g., by detecting PKU, tay-sachs, hyperbilirubinemia and many other conditions) and I will support the expansion of it. I really don't see a plausible way in which collecting a blood sample (with the consent of the parent which is required before drawing blood, unless the infant is in mortal danger or the parents are incapacitated) as a pretext for establishing a national DNA database. If "someone" is building such a database I promise to not share any samples from my projects with them!

HippieSurvivalist
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
875 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Can be used for good? Has the government ever done anything good with something like this? My blood and DNA is my mine. This is pure tyranny and unconstitutional. Whoever thought this up should be arrested and put on trial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,224 Posts
So that article from Alex Jones was pretty one-sided,
NAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! ya think?
How could a raving lunatic be one sided?


which always sets off little warning sounds in my head.
Me too, I watched a video he did a few ago depicting Marines stalking through some oddly not named suburb in some oddly not named state practicing for his usual hysterical whatever the false flag of the day was.
His commentary was all about how these were real Marines...in army fatigues.......and wearing the flag on the wrong sleeve.(Hint to Alex...the stripes are supposed to point rearward)
Yep...the illuminati are in on it for sure!

Although a DNA database is something Big Brother is lusting after and needs to be stopped at all cost I don't think from my read of this bill that's what this is unless it is just another example of mission creep.
Like Barbarossa said; it's my blood, my DNA and you have no business with it unless I give express consent and that includes my spawn until they are old enough to give their consent.
That's one reason if my wife and I get her into that family way the kid is being born in Philippines.
What I don't like is this is yet more spending.
 

·
Come quickly Lord
Joined
·
2,049 Posts
Shocking! I wonder what the real reasoning is behind this?
Control. Plain and simple. They want to be able to control every aspect of our lives. For people to just sit back and say "this could be good" only proves that the government is doing a good job at brainwashing the public.


For those of you that believe this is good:
While you are believing that them having our DNA is good, why don't you have your daughters get that cervical cancer vaccination. Because it "saves lives". Wow, people will believe anything, won't they? :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,090 Posts
Gee...can we say "race-specific bioweapons"? Oh...but its "fo the chillins"...
You can bet they already have an ongoing program of some nefarious purpose. Hmmm...if they mix dna from different samples,clone it,grow it,do they own that being? Human experiments?
 

·
I worship Ray Mears
Joined
·
250 Posts
This is scary plain and simple.... I can't even begin to comprehend what they will do with this... I wonder if the politicians are going to have their DNA and their children's DNA taken
 

·
just waitin' for it
Joined
·
680 Posts
General rule... If they make it public, it means they've been doing it for 20 years!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
I think newborn screening is good, it saves lives (e.g., by detecting PKU, tay-sachs, hyperbilirubinemia and many other conditions) and I will support the expansion of it. I really don't see a plausible way in which collecting a blood sample (with the consent of the parent which is required before drawing blood, unless the infant is in mortal danger or the parents are incapacitated) as a pretext for establishing a national DNA database. If "someone" is building such a database I promise to not share any samples from my projects with them!

HippieSurvivalist
Do you also support a government sponsored eugenics program? How can you honestly say it will save lives, when those babies with genetic defects will be aborted upon detection, or better yet the parents DNA will be scanned before breeding to prevent the defect from occuring at all(not a bad idea really!) Ever since I was in kindergarten, I remember thinking...look at those severly cripled or retarded kids, its a shame they have to exist like that. I guess the preventative, or 'positive eugenics' measure is much more civilized than drowning a defective baby in the lake(like folks used to do). Welcome to the expanding field of Biomedical Ethics, which will confirm these activitys and more as totally moral.

My stance: I think eugenics should be left how it is: totally voluntary. And I'm against being forced to give DNA to the gov, because that means that you are definetly not free. What happens if you refuse to give up your childs DNA sample to the 'authorities', do they have thugs arrest you and steal the child? Welcome to Amerika!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
While you are believing that them having our DNA is good, why don't you have your daughters get that cervical cancer vaccination. Because it "saves lives". Wow, people will believe anything, won't they? :rolleyes:
She will definitely get the HPV/cervical cancer vaccine. Cervical cancer kills 3,700 women in the US every year, and HPV (which the vaccine targets) is strongly associated with later development of cervical cancer. It's a no-brainer to me.

HippieSurvivalist
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
Do you also support a government sponsored eugenics program?
No.

How can you honestly say it will save lives, when those babies with genetic defects will be aborted upon detection...
This is the forbidden topic (and besides, what you're insinuating doesn't occur, unless the parents choose it)

HippieSurvivalist (doesn't wear a tinfoil hat)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,996 Posts
I wonder how long its going to be before insurance companies gain access to this information and deny people with genetic disease health insurance?

Or they will test your kid for all kinds of genetic diseases and you get a letter in the mail telling you "Sorry to inform you your child has the gene for Huntingtons disease, breast, colon cancer, etc".
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top