DNA database

mask of sanity

Hey Guys,

I’m in my final year of university studying forensic biology. This year I have a synoptic exam question looking at issues within forensics, primarily with regard to how the public perceive forensic techniques and how their perception differs to the reality. With the rise in popularity of programmes such as CSI it is an increasing problem that the general public are forming an opinion on evidence types and their relative strengths in court based on the programmes. Another factor causing issues is the press having articles on things such as the DNA database and including misleading information that leads to fear in the existence of the database.

So I'm posting on here in the hope of getting some information on peoples understanding of the DNA database. It would be great if after reading this you could give your understanding of the DNA database and principles of DNA profiling. Would also be great to know whether you agree or disagree with the existence of a DNA database and why.

I hope this makes sense. Any replies would be gratefully received!
Cheers, Rich.

Porgy

It's a database - and it's for DNA.

Anonymous

Don't answer the question, he is after our identities. :shock:

blackpanther

Im on it!

blackpanther

Im on it!

mask of sanity

dmclite wrote:

Don't answer the question, he is after our identities. :shock:

I know you were only joking (or taking the p1ss) but you've pretty much summed up the issues with peoples understanding of DNA profiling in those few words. DNA is not proof of identity! All that you can say about a DNA profile is that it's x times more likely to have come from one person than from someone else.

So thanks for the input. Definitly gives me something to consider for my exam

Anonymous

Ok, point taken.

As I understand it a database of DNA is where a unique to every individual chemical code is stored and can be used to match up samples taken from crime scenes. It can also be used for genetic research, geneaology and census programmes.
If DNA is as unique as I am led to believe it can also be used as a failsafe way of identification/security.
The cynical side of me thinks in an Orwellian way, but the optimist in me thinks it could be used for good, organ matching, blood bank screening etc.

Thats about it, sorry for taking the pi55 earlier, I couldn't resist.(Its in my DNA....)

STEFANOS4784

My DNA is on file because i was naughty. I think everyones should be on file as if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide IMO. Would make solving some of the most horrific crimes a lot less complicated i reckon.

My understanding of it is that if i'm naughty again and leave any blood/hair/ whatever else at the scene then i'll be caught, which is fair enough. I don't plan on being naughty anymore anyhoo....

STEFANOS4784

PS I also think some of the people who whinge on saying it breaches this and that are probably pedo's who are scared of getting caught. IMHO

fast as fupp

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

My DNA is on file because i was naughty. I think everyones should be on file as if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide IMO. Would make solving some of the most horrific crimes a lot less complicated i reckon.

My understanding of it is that if i'm naughty again and leave any blood/hair/ whatever else at the scene then i'll be caught, which is fair enough. I don't plan on being naughty anymore anyhoo....

'if youve done nothing wrong...............................' didnt the jews in pre ww2 germany say that?

STEFANOS4784

Very relevant, well done :roll:


Probably shouldn't expect more from a Guardian/Mail reader

Wooliferkins

Porgy wrote:

It's a database - and it's for DNA.

and some pillock civil servant will leave it on a train with a PostIt attached with the login details on.

STEFANOS4784

So? What is anyone going to do with DNA profiles?

STEFANOS4784

No-one has a problem typing in bank details for certain online purchases do they?


I'd personally prefer people to know my DNA profile than my bank account no's and credit card no's...

Frank the tank

It's a double edged sword. The potential for crime detection and genetic research etc is great. As with most things like this though, there is the potential for the data to be abused if it fell into the wrong hands. Also there is the Barry George (Jill Dando) case where the DNA eviidence was so miniscule the "evidence" could have got there quite innocently.

Overall I think the benefits would outweigh the possible drawbacks though.

Westerberg

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

Very relevant, well done :roll:

err..this happened 70 years ago (persecution of the jews), fairly relevant still I'd say given humans have been on earth about 2.5 million years. :roll:

Eau Rouge

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide IMO.

Remember it's not you who gets to define "wrong". Thinking someone else should be running the country has been defined as "wrong" quite often in many countries and here.
If you've done nothing wrong you've earned the right to not have some civil servant or police officer interfere with your life, IMO. This should be our country, not the governments
(but then, that's one of my opinions that technically could see me in a lot of trouble)

As for the DNA database...
Whatever the forensic science behind it, DNA samples can and have been used to conclude that so-and-so was somewhere. You need more evidence after that to say they were up to no goodof course, but it's a start, and often crucial to a case. It sounds simple and effective, but once your on it, it's like having a big "this person is scum" flag on you, even if you are one of the innocent people on it. Walk passed a crime scene a little before the crime occurs and before you know it your spending the next two days being interrogated for a crime you know nothing about, because your DNA was found at the scene and now it's all up to you to explain how it got there, and nobody believes your story. No thanks.
That's not the fault of the forensics, but how it's used, but the tool (the database) is still the easiest thing to deal with. I would have very serious misgivings about giving the police a DNA sample, no matter how much they said it wouldn't end up on the database.
DNA is still a very effective and useful tool for the police to use, it's the abuse the database will always be put to that is the issue with it.

fast as fupp

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

So? What is anyone going to do with DNA profiles?

eugenics?

genocide?

its been tried before- even easier with dna profiling

Crapaud

dmclite wrote:

Ok, point taken.

As I understand it a database of DNA is where a unique to every individual chemical code ...

Interedting. My understanding is that while your whole genetic code is unique it's not the whole DNA (it took years to decode the human Genome) that's on the database, but only parts (genes?). Around 20 years ago, IIRC, it was 1000 which resulted in a probability of about 1 in 10 000 that a match would be yours. It's considerably higher now, but still a probability. (My use of terminology is probably wrong)

My main concern about a database is that it'll eventually be used for insurance as happened in the USA in the 70s. Hispanic volunteers were tested for sickle cell anemia in a study and the results got onto their medical records. Insurance co.s got access and either denied or offered huge premiums (effectively denieing them) based on a probability. Children were born and from birth they would be denied things like mortgages and life insurance.

I doubt that the info will just sit there doing nothing.

Smokin Joe

Eau Rouge wrote:

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide IMO.

Remember it's not you who gets to define "wrong". Thinking someone else should be running the country has been defined as "wrong" quite often in many countries and here.
If you've done nothing wrong you've earned the right to not have some civil servant or police officer interfere with your life, IMO. This should be our country, not the governments
(but then, that's one of my opinions that technically could see me in a lot of trouble)

As for the DNA database...
Whatever the forensic science behind it, DNA samples can and have been used to conclude that so-and-so was somewhere. You need more evidence after that to say they were up to no goodof course, but it's a start, and often crucial to a case. It sounds simple and effective, but once your on it, it's like having a big "this person is scum" flag on you, even if you are one of the innocent people on it. Walk passed a crime scene a little before the crime occurs and before you know it your spending the next two days being interrogated for a crime you know nothing about, because your DNA was found at the scene and now it's all up to you to explain how it got there, and nobody believes your story. No thanks.
That's not the fault of the forensics, but how it's used, but the tool (the database) is still the easiest thing to deal with. I would have very serious misgivings about giving the police a DNA sample, no matter how much they said it wouldn't end up on the database.
DNA is still a very effective and useful tool for the police to use, it's the abuse the database will always be put to that is the issue with it.

+1.

As I get older my trust in the authorities diminishes greatly. We do not live in the benign democracy we like to think we do.

Westerberg

+1 the above few posts and, as someone already mentioned, it's not really the science that scares me and not even the deliberate misuse, but the very real chance of mistakes happening due to human administration error and IT system failure.

Westerberg

I wonder what use the BNP would make of a DNA database if they ever got in power. May seem far fetched (and probably is) but look at the 2002 results for Le Pen in France.

zanes

Smokin Joe wrote:

Eau Rouge wrote:

STEFANOS4784 wrote:

if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide IMO.

Remember it's not you who gets to define "wrong". Thinking someone else should be running the country has been defined as "wrong" quite often in many countries and here.
If you've done nothing wrong you've earned the right to not have some civil servant or police officer interfere with your life, IMO. This should be our country, not the governments
(but then, that's one of my opinions that technically could see me in a lot of trouble)

As for the DNA database...
Whatever the forensic science behind it, DNA samples can and have been used to conclude that so-and-so was somewhere. You need more evidence after that to say they were up to no goodof course, but it's a start, and often crucial to a case. It sounds simple and effective, but once your on it, it's like having a big "this person is scum" flag on you, even if you are one of the innocent people on it. Walk passed a crime scene a little before the crime occurs and before you know it your spending the next two days being interrogated for a crime you know nothing about, because your DNA was found at the scene and now it's all up to you to explain how it got there, and nobody believes your story. No thanks.
That's not the fault of the forensics, but how it's used, but the tool (the database) is still the easiest thing to deal with. I would have very serious misgivings about giving the police a DNA sample, no matter how much they said it wouldn't end up on the database.
DNA is still a very effective and useful tool for the police to use, it's the abuse the database will always be put to that is the issue with it.

+1.

As I get older my trust in the authorities diminishes greatly. We do not live in the benign democracy we like to think we do.

+So many times. Also holds true for the ridiculous attitude to surveillance/torture this country seems to have

All the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear, it helps the police" types on here have, I assume, been down to the local cop shop and volunteered a sample for inclusion on the database. Oh, wait, no they won't have. But it's us sceptical types that have something to hide......

Also, references to the Jews etc in WWII do have relevance, as I believe this is the reason the Germans gave for curtailing/restricting their database, in case another "Nazi" (or similar) Government came to power in the future. This objection goes against my understandings of what is typically stored (20 alleles iirc?) but I'm assuming the German Government have a few more resources to throw at researching it than I do and so probably have a better understanding of the potential consequences and if they have those concerns I think they're probably reasonable, whatever our "wonderful" government's propaganda says.

Another interesting point was a few months ago I was wondering exactly how the Nazis had identified who was a Jew in places like France. I started reading a little and came across a piece somewhere (might have been an IET mag) about how they had been made to register in the early 30s in France (again, under the nothing to hide nothing to fear pretext) and it all logged in a nice register. IIRC IBM had some involvement but I may be mistaken on that detail. I've got a friend who lost a (fairly distant, admittedly) relative in the Holocaust and is Jewish. Perhaps you "nothing to hide, Nothing to fear types" could show your rhetoric to her? See what she thinks?

Westerberg

zanes wrote:

Also, references to the Jews etc in WWII do have relevance, as I believe this is the reason the Germans gave for curtailing/restricting their database, in case another "Nazi" (or similar) Government came to power in the future.

Quite. Jorg Haider a few short years ago in Austria springs to mind - ok, not overtly a Nazi but too close in belief and timeframe for comfort.

Tail end Charlie

If the database means more people are caught when they do wrong, I'm all for it.

To answer the OP. My understanding is that DNA is almost unique to a person (I think identical twins have the same DNA) and comparing two different samples allows a probability to be given that they come from the same person.

I don't have a problem being on the system and like someone else said, I'd rather that than my credit card details and I buy lots online.

fast as fupp

Tail end Charlie wrote:

If the database means more people are caught when they do wrong, I'm all for it.

To answer the OP. My understanding is that DNA is almost unique to a person (I think identical twins have the same DNA) and comparing two different samples allows a probability to be given that they come from the same person.

I don't have a problem being on the system and like someone else said, I'd rather that than my credit card details and I buy lots online.

define 'wrong'

zanes

Tail end Charlie wrote:

If the database means more people are caught when they do wrong, I'm all for it.

To answer the OP. My understanding is that DNA is almost unique to a person (I think identical twins have the same DNA) and comparing two different samples allows a probability to be given that they come from the same person.

I don't have a problem being on the system and like someone else said, I'd rather that than my credit card details and I buy lots online.

As I said before, and people predictably will side step;

All the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear, it helps the police" types on here have, I assume, been down to the local cop shop and volunteered a sample for inclusion on the database.

Jez mon

I would say I'm against it. Not because I'm a paedophile(!), but rather because of the fact that it whether you like it or not, is another small step towards a police state, a step towards people's genuine feeling being "if you have done nothing wrong you've got nothing to hide" I see it as just another encroachment on my privacy.

To answer the OPs question, I think it can be a pretty blunt tool, but is reasonably accurate (i.e. if the persons DNA matches that found on the scene, that person was pretty much definitely on the scene)

Smokin Joe

I saw a former senior Flying Squad detective interviewed on this subject a few years ago and was pleasantly surprised to find he had grave reservations about the database. His reasoning was that once the police found a DNA match at the scene of the crime (which may have got there innocently)the natural tendency would be to stop looking any further and try to tie in whatever circumstantial evidence they had as further proof of guilt.

Couple this with the publics belief that DNA evidence is infallible and you can see how a jury could very easily be swayed into thinking they had a clear cut case of guilt in front of them.

awallace

"It sounds simple and effective, but once your on it, it's like having a big "this person is scum" flag on you, even if you are one of the innocent people on it. Walk passed a crime scene a little before the crime occurs and before you know it your spending the next two days being interrogated for a crime you know nothing about, because your DNA was found at the scene and now it's all up to you to explain how it got there, and nobody believes your story. No thanks"

I think "this person is scum" flag is JUST YOUR insecurity because that is certainly not how i or others would view you just for having your DNA taken. You may very well have been innocent and unfortunately innocent people are arrested because of circumstances leading to the arrest.

Further to that i dont think just walking past a crime scene will lead to you being interrogated for two days! Large amounts of DNA will be at certain crime scenes but not everyone present will be arrested. Intelligence will lead to an arrest.

Think of a shooting at a pub. Many people will be present and DNA left, however intelligence (a witness statement) may lead to a name of a suspect. The DNA will then be used to prove a person was present which is very useful if they state they have never been at the location.

However if you have been interrogated for 2 days for walking past a crime scene i stand corrected!

mask of sanity

Thanks for all the replies. Given me a lot of things to think about.

Those of you who think it's a violation of your privacy, what makes you feel that? Do you agree that convicted criminals should have their profile on the database? If so, is that not a violation of their rights? If I were to tell you that a DNA profile that they have on the database is a tiny proportion of all your DNA would you change your opinion?