Mysteries, Chemtrails, Aerosols :: Mysterious NZ New Zealand based Discussion Forums The strange & mysterious, archaeological anomalies, modern oddities... Current affairs, health & medical issues, Aerosol Spraying in NZ... ...and general interest: ARCHIVES
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Posts: 814
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 11:59 pm Post Subject: NZ's DNA database 3.2 million strong?
I caught a remark on TV3's news tonight that NZ's DNA database has 3.2 million samples - with the police stating that 'most of the criminals are on it'. I find this staggering. Where did all those samples come from and are most of the people whose DNA populates the database aware of the fact that their samples are in the database?
I am assuming that the samples come from material gathered during routine medical tests and the like. Surely over 3 million samples didn't accumulate with fully informed consent in every case... Can anyone clarify this?
That is staggering. There are very few times that I can think of that a sample of my DNA would have been able to be retrieved and it was not given for that purpose at all. Makes you wonder what goes where and to whom...
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Posts: 814
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 9:51 am Post Subject:
Surely that figure must be wrong...
According to one document I found this morning:
"As of June 2002, the total number of DNA profiles stored in the national database was 24,001. Of these, 19,453 were obtained by consent and 4,426 were obtained by compulsory order."
Although, having said that, there's this from Sue Kedgley on the subject back in 2001:
Quote:
A huge database of DNA from almost every New Zealander born since 1969 is being held in storage without the knowledge of most donors and with no adequate control over its security and the use it can be put to, Green Party Health Spokesperson Sue Kedgley said today.
Nearly all infants over the last 30 years have been given a heel prick test, also known as a Guthrie test, to test for various congenital abnormalities that can be treated, if detected early enough.
"The tests obviously serve a valuable function in screening babies, but the present system of storage and retrieval is open to abuse and misuse," said Ms Kedgley.
In France and in most programmes operating in the United States, the blood samples are destroyed after the completion of testing.
Not so in New Zealand, where the samples are stored indefinitely, even after the original donor has died. In cases where the donor is dead, the samples become the property of the National Testing Centre.
"There is no justification for keeping the samples after the child has reached adulthood. The creation of a virtual databank containing the DNA of all New Zealanders raises serious legal and ethical questions.
"Medical experts contend that the DNA material is useful for research purposes, but to what end? What safeguards have we that such material cannot be used in GE experiments or for genetic testing," she asked.
Only in the last couple of years has it even been necessary for doctors to obtain parental consent for the taking and storage of their baby's blood sample, meaning up to a million New Zealanders have had their DNA recorded without their knowledge.
Recently, a sample was released by the National Testing Centre and used to identify the parenthood of a dead child, against the wishes of the mother who hadn't even been informed about the storage of her child's blood sample.
The practice of blood sample storage appears to contravene privacy legislation stating that people must be informed of information gathered about them.
"The Privacy Commissioner is sufficiently concerned about the practice to mount his own investigation. What I am calling for is public and parliamentary debate about the issues involved," said Ms Kedgley.
http://www.greens.org.nz/searchdocs/PR4902.html
But then there's this on the Auditor General's website:
Quote:
Under the Act, suspects can now administer their own DNA swabs with a simple saliva test (before this, collecting DNA meant taking blood samples and using medical personnel). Collecting DNA samples is now cheaper, and there are more samples on the national DNA database. The number of DNA profiles on the national DNA database has grown from 24,713 as at 30 June 2002, to 55,829 at 30 September 2005. For the last quarter of 2001, 38% of the samples taken from crime scenes were linked to profiles on the DNA database. The rate has grown to 56% for the 3 months to the end of September 2005.
http://www.oag.govt.nz/2006/burglary/part4.htm
I also found out, however, that New Zealand was only the second country in the world to create a National DNA databank.
I also found out, however, that New Zealand was only the second country in the world to create a National DNA databank.
Mmmm...seems strange that one. Why NZ? On discussing this further with my partner it could be because we're a small country and it's easier to do these things. Also that we're politically stable perhaps, no one minds about these things very much.....accepted as all for a good cause. But like the article indicates above, samples were being kept without parental consent until they found out about it. Unless these things are made public, challenged, and laws changed, authorities can do what they like it would seem.
ESR state on their website page “The New Zealand National DNA Databank” that:
……….64,198 individual profiles have been completed to the National DNA Database (NDD). This figure is currently increasing at a rate of approximately 800-1000 samples per month……………
