DNA is deoxyribonucleic acid which is generated long chain polymer that encodes our 'make up' It is in a double helix with each string being a mirror of the other chain using the four nucleic acids ATCG. DNA is what chromosomes are made out.

RNA or ribonucleic acid is like a photonegative of DNA. When DNA needs to be replicated a complex protein effectively unzips the DNA helix and another complex protein copies the DNA threads and makes single threaded RNA as a negative. Then multiple copies of new DNA can be made and then zipped it.

This happens when cells split for growth (mitosis).

DNA can be used to identify a whole range of direct genetic disorders, and the propensity to suffer other disorders. For example some people with certain genes are more likely to be prone to heart disease.

Today it would be possible for life insurers to introduce preferential rates for those with 'clean' DNA, i.e. free from known genetic markers.

This form of pricing has been outlawed by the industry and the government, however the thinking on this has softened considerably and it preferred pricing may well be introduced in the future.

 

...so you have...

...and yet you can't spell, or even Google and copy-and-paste fundamental evidential concepts, but we are supposed to believe your credentials???

mb

 

Oh, and it is DNA that is used for ID purposes and for identifying genetic markers.

The DNA evidence process uses operators that mimic the natural processes in the cell nucleus to replicate the DNA for analysis.

 

I am now on the DNA and fingerprint database, after i was arrested and detained on suspition of murder, when i was the passenger in a car that was incorectly flagged for stopping on the ANPR camera system. I was handcuffed and taken in locked van to the police station and detained for 8 hours. I had no choice in my photo being taken, or in giving fingerprint and DNA samples. I found the whole episode a disgrace and have failed to get any form of apology for their mistake.

I have no faith in the systems now in place to "protect" our society. I would rather live in a state that valued freedom over the systems that are now being systematically introduced and abused.

 

The profile on the NDNADB contains only two useful pieces of information:

1) Your gender.

2) Whether you have red hair or not.

That's it. It's possible that as genetic markers for other physical characteristics are found then other information (eye colour, height or whatever) are also added. But the police don't care if you have a family history of cancer because that won't help them identify you from an unknown donor sample - which is what the extra info is for. Since they don't care it won't be looked for, and if it's not looked for, it won't be part of the profile.


The rest of the DNA on the profile is an analysis of a length of junk DNA called Short Tandem Repeats. It contains no useful information whatsoever. Even if someone did get it, it would be absolutely meaningless.

M

 

Firstly, there is a saying about people in glass houses and throwing stones. If you are going to comment on someones intelligence, it's probably best to not spell "Honist" and "peadofillia" in that manner.

Regardless.


I am not sure why someone of your evidently massive IQ is struggling with the concept of the DNA on the computer being incorrect in the first place.

My DNA gets filed under the wrong name
That person commits a crime
They see a match to me on the database
I'm bang to rights.

Until of course I go through a age of eventualy proving my innocence. Why should I have to?

God help us


Yes, after almost a year waging a constant battle to prove his innocence of a crime he didn't commit. Wasn't his life serverly affected after as well?

What, you mean like I have right now?
Not on my top 10 list of fears.
No, I'm not, because you still haven't come up with how this works.


Let me say it again in simple terms.

How does DNA profiling stop someone commiting a crime?

If someone is disturbed enough to rape/blow themselves up in the first place, they are not going to think "ooh, better not, my DNA profile is on a computer"
Harvesting the DNA of people that haven't done anything wrong, will help in what way, exactly?

If you're the front line of defence against terorrism in this country, I think we are probably going to need it.


You know, this post could have been so more a debate and not me being a bit off, had you not been a complete tosser with your patronising tone, as it is, you can Foxtrot Oscar, look that up in your anti terrorism code book

 

Morning Pete, I can't believe you are still trying to get the message across. You forget sometimes that people are like sheep being shepherded by the government. When you try and argue things, the sheep may look up and listen but the still follow the flock.
I think people are starting see you as Mr Lewis' stand in and are trying to wind you up.

 

Morning. I didnlt look at the thread yesterday, I just saw this morning, so I replied.
Wicked, fame at last.

 

That does make me feel a little better in that they do not have the whole strand of DNA.

There are still some areas of concern. The database must have something to cross reference the data too for a start. I would have thought the database would have had something along the lines of the following:
1) name
2) DOB
3) last known address
4) DNA bits and bobs (red hair, gender, junk strand etc per your post).

Forgetting the DNA entirely, the first three pieces of information are amazingly valuable to commercial organisations if they can get their hands on it. Should a government become a little short of cash, they can sell this info to just about all the marketing companies in the UK.

We do live in an information age, and it is already a little worrying just how much information places hold on you. One example is that I walked into the Halifax the other day to open a new account. I have had no dealings with them for over 10 years. They did not know my current address, but had 5 of my previous addresses (plus associated credit history) listing back over 15 years...and I did not have an account with them at this time.

I really do get why they want to have this database. It could be useful. They should be required to debate its introduction, clearly stating what it will and will not do. I would also want to hear a permanent guarantee that its contents would never knowingly be sold, and expect compensation should it be found they were leaked. We are meant to have a democracy, and I want to be involved in the discussion about this. What I don't want is for it to be introduced by the back door.

In the commercial world, imo, there is already too much info out there. A lot of which is woefully inaccurate. Yes we do have the Freedom of Information act to help with that, we can now actually check up with a company should we wish too. However, its up to us to know who to contact, and up to us to sort any mess out.

 

pete brant, firstly as you are painfully aware, spelling is not my forte.
and i did not think that it was a pre condition of anti terrorism ?
secondly, its you that cant grasp the consept, about DNA "protecting" you, your details (read DNA) cant be assigned to someone else, it can be cross referenced by mistake, yes, but easly re checked to "clear you".
thirdly, you say "god help us" to my involvment with terrorism, if only you knew pete
finaly, by resorting to personal keyboard insults, you have lost the battle.

good luck

 

With regards to Keyboard insults, I wasn't insulting your keyboard. Had you not replied in the manner you did perhaps I would have been more diplomatic in my response.

Anyway, back on topic.

Right, so still not actually able to answer my question of "how does having a DNA database stop someone from commiting a crime?"

And I think, this is the third time I have tried to explain this - You shouldn't have to clear your name if you have done nothing wrong. If through mistakes in the DNA process, you lose income, work and people think you actually did something (all of which happened) that is not a price I am willing to pay.

As for having a "battle" I wasn't aware I was having one, I was having a debate, what you were having persoanlly, is your business.

 

I'm not sure you have put this one to rest. Pete did make a good point with this, I quote:

"My DNA gets filed under the wrong name
That person commits a crime
They see a match to me on the database
I'm bang to rights."

If that happened to me, you would call at my door and take my DNA. My DNA would match the DNA on your database, but under a different name. I am sure many people have given you false names in the past. It could be assumed that the original data was correctly entered in the past, as I could have given a false name. It could still be assumed to be me.

Unless there are photographs available to prove the mistake I could be in trouble. Photos may not be available depending on how the original evidence was gathered, and any images from the crime scene.

 

Sorry to hear about that. Now for one moment consider a mistake that could have happened.

Just imagine the sample that was given by you at the point of comparison accidentally marked up as the crime scene sample. Your DNA is now the one they are looking for.
1 Year later they recheck you for another reason and... lookey here, this guys DNA matches the one we collected at the murder crime scene.
You are now tried and convicted for murder and everytime you appeal they say your DNA matches the crime scene one. This is only because they accidentally filed the wrong sample away in the first instance.

This is what we need to worry about. the larger the collection gets the more open it becomes for human error and of course computer error. Lets face it every government computer project has been a disaster why wouldnt this one be.

 

Hi,

Said it dozens of times on this forum, you guys are losing ALL of your liberties and freedom of expression thanks to a very useful excuse, "terrorism".


Before you know it "they" will be on this forum like a plague of locusts, censoring everything.....

Best start listening out well, and do something to stop these stupid actions.

 

AFAIK samples are submitted under name only - it's the police's job to find out where they live - but I'd have to check. Not sure how they deal with several people with the same name.

And there's already a database of 1 and 3 - it's called electoral roll. I can't imagine adding 2 makes a lot fo difference.


M

 

[quote=ONE 234;7156655]"there cant be a mistake with DNA evidance (sic)

Ooops this seems to disprove the thought that DNA testing is 100% relieable
False result fear over DNA tests | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited

Quote "cant be assigned to someone else, it can be cross referenced by mistake, yes, but easly re checked to "clear you".
All well and good putting something right after a mistake but in this country mud sticks.
Remember the case of the Pediatrician hounded by the baying mob at his home because the great British public doesn't know the differance between a Pediatrician and a pedophile. That bloke must have gone thro hell.

 

I honestly dont know what frightens me more: the gradual slide into a totalitarian state, where our rights and freedoms are eroded and disregarded, or the stupidity of people who will allow it to happen.....

 

Quite agree it's frightening what info the Gov can get their hands on.
They know what bank/building soc accts you hold the balance, the interest rec'd they can alsio get copies of current accts showing spending habits.
They know if you own a car boat plane.
If you rent a house to people in receipt of benefits reports of payments made sent in to HMRC.

 

I think the word Blox comes to mind.

so with the above information all male gingers are guilty of a crime.

hardly worthwhile is it.

you like the rest of us, only get told, what is appeasing at the time.

how long before the bib adopt genetic criminal profiling?

Sub class of people, (criminal genetic marker on file)

work camps? a shower before you start work?

Perhaps if we had decent immigration controls, and utilized more coppers on the beat rather than cameras in cans, then we may have a start.

btw. i wont volunteer my samples willingly

Mart

 

The Tazer will provide that.....

 

OK, I give up: WTF are you talking about? The only reason those two tests are done is because they are the only external characteristic so far found which seems to be governed by a single gene - and are thus cheap and easy to test. It means that, faced with an unknown donor, at the least the police know the gender of the unknown suspect, and whether they have red hair or not.

How you get from that you your quip completely escapes me. If it turned out that there was a single gene for big noses, that would go in as well. Would that mean, following what appears to be your logic, that all ginger men with big noses were guilty of a crime? And would that mean that ginger men with small noses were now free to go?


M

 

Well, that's EXACTLY what the Police are here for. To find this kind of stuff out.....

It makes me weep.

 

exactly it searches for one gene! of which we have approximately 60-70k and still counting

and given the odds on males having red hair committing a crime are about one in a blue moon, its going to provide you with rafts of data

F*ck me why not go the whole hog and tattoo a number on every persons forearm, that way your sure to be able to link DNA to a person.

BTW this isn't a pop at you personally

Why is this government obsessed with databases, and collating data on everybody?

Given its disastrous history with computer systems and over budget and f8ked up projects, the last thing i want is my personal data being stored by that lot.


At least with other data holders there is some albeit accountability, with this lot there about as trustworthy as a saltwater croc.

if they told the truth for once and didn't hide behind any or all legislation possible, then people may start to believe them, but given that the biggest liar of the lot started it all, what do you expect.

You don't play by the rules with the data you take, so why should we believe you.


Mart

 

This is the point. Nu Labia are pushing forward with a fundamental change in the way of the Law in the UK. It still is the case that you have to be PROVEN GUILTY to face a tariff - More and more you you will see the balance shift to PROVING INNOCENCE which is a Joke. It is a damn sight easier to prove someone DID DO something that it is to prove they DIDN'T.

In Fact - Is it possible to prove a negative 100% ?

 

I would have tought that you might have worked out what is really going on by now.

Do you really think they care about immigration and the problems it can bring after they have spent all this time encouraging it. Do you believe they have any feelings at all for the people of this country, or even the country itself.

Have you not noticed the continuing build up of ways of monitoring everything we do or where we go. Has it not occurred to you that they want a complete rundown of everything there is to know about us which will give them total power over us eventually. Can you trust politicians to have that much power over the people.

Pete Brant is trying to tell you that there is a principle involved here and it is time that we took a stand against this sort of thing.

Looking at past performances do you think they migght actually do anything significant to punish any of the real criminals if they track them down?

Try reading those two famous books and make a few comparisons. Otherwise just continue to sleepwalk to a world of utter domination by the few.

Les

 

I dont know much, but I do know that people like you are required to keep a low profile about your work in public, which includes the internet.

The very fact your bragging about it makes me think you're lying, but I'll link this post to Scotland Yard so they can trace your IP, just to be on the safe side
Lots of love,
astraboy.

 

the system will get sub contracted out and immigrants etc on £3 an hour will be arranging it all, thats when i would get worried, you know it will happen too.