Comments on: UC Berkeley Halts Its Freshman DNA Testing Project

By: Miss Stephanie

Miss Stephanie — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 06:13:39 +0000

I think everyone is blowing this out of proportion. Those students were given the option to give a sample of their DNA, not required to. I think the idea is a great way to stimulate interest in genetics and gives the chance for students who choose to give DNA to learn more about their own genetic profiles.
It’s a shame that something that could have been beneficial is being shown in such a negative light. Any such idea can have negative results if people- like those in our government for instance, those who seem to thrive on searching for the downside to every situation- choose to take the idea and run in a negative direction.

By: Chris the Canadian

Chris the Canadian — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:20:14 +0000

First, to Stokey Bob. Please take your poorly disguised political views to a political website. This article has nothing to do with who pays for DNA testing and who doesn’t. This article sheds further light onto the question of whether DNA is medical or not. As much as I agree with Eric H and his opinion about the FDA, in this particular case (the sampling, testing and monitoring of DNA) I would have to agree with the government agency. DNA testing should be in a clinical setting.

Now, if the tests ARE completed under clinical testing rules, the results should also be known to the individuals who provided their DNA. The whole ‘present to the entire data group then incinerate’ is crap. The government and the international community are being very VERY careful with DNA testing, mapping, gene splicing etc etc etc because of all the ethical issues surrounding such work. As for the students who volunteered to be tested, I would wager that 99.5% of them did so in the hopes of discovering that they had a higher tolerance for alcohol!!!

By: Idlewilde

Idlewilde — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:25:55 +0000

All those side effects yet they frown on weed…..

By: Eric H

Eric H — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:03:19 +0000

I object to that! As someone who is skeptical about everything dealing with government, for instance, the FDA. Its in cooperation with government no doubt for the safety of the people, now what I don’t understand is, why is almost every ad’s for FDA approved drugs include such lengthly lists of side-effects including “heart attack, stroke, or even death”. Or why the DEA is in a war on drugs while our FDA approved oxycontin has so many people addicted to and or dieing from? Who’s the real bad guys. Because it is legal doesn’t make it right. I believe big brother wants control over this for further reference on peoples vulnerability and ultimately how to dimished population. If it were left in our hands -which it should-we would live longer, not necessarily something big brother wants sadly.

By: StokeyBobIsConfused

StokeyBobIsConfused — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 02:30:50 +0000

StokeyBob that makes no sense at all…..Its like your trying to imply there is some sort of conspiracy and your trying to relate it to the article but you didn’t understand what the article was about or how conspiracies work…

your stupidity compelled me to write a comment

By: StokeyBob

StokeyBob — Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:11:39 +0000

Chapter 1. The Good

You mentioned genetic testing being a good thing.

It can be.

Say you’re an orphan, or know of some genetic defect in your family, or are worried that something may be hiding that you could benefit by knowing about. Maybe you decide the $1000.00 is worth spending to have the test done. That information could help you protect yourself by taking certain precautions.

Chapter 2. The Bad

Now say you decide that you may be able to benefit by having me tested. You’ve paid for the test and you’ve got the results. Now maybe protection for you is to see that I am not able to see the specialist or have certain test that could cost you down the road.

Chapter 3. The Ugly

And now to get really deep and on a different slant on the topic.

Say the government has convinced you that it is a good thing for them to do the test for you.

They pay for it. They get the results. What are their motives?

And to top it off. They have no money to pay for it. They print it up out of thin air and devalue the money you have with inflation.

See it’s like say you have all the money in the world. Say it’s a Brazillian dollars. They print up a Brizillion dollars to do the testing and all of a sudden your Brazillion is worth only half as much.

That is what counterfeiting does.

That is what they have been doing.

That may be why so many people can’t keep up with them and can no longer afford to work.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 19:51:14 +0000

“…the researchers can analyze the samples to present the entire group as a data set—and then they must incinerate them.”
This seems a little like I’ll tell you, but then I’ll have to kill you.