Andy1976

Can you tell religion from DNA?

The chances are probably equivalent of you being convicted of a crime incorrectly now, as they would be were DNA kept on a database. The probability is so small as to be next to nothing. I also struggle to see how it could 'accidentally happen? But it does both. It shows that if people were falsely accused of a crime, they can explain that DNA isn't infallible. Didn't quote the quote you were quoting, which was that it could be used to sell you things. The fact remains that happens now. Cookies ensure that's what happens. Besides, what's the problem with having services tailored to what you want? Isn't it better that I see adverts for razors over tampons, seeing as one applies to me and the other doesn't? It's surely better that way? Why would that be a bad thing?

Almost. I'm saying that there's often a huge panic about ID cards, DNA databases etc, but when I've asked people what their concern is, no one has ever answered me properly. As I've said numerous times, perhaps I'm missing something. It may be that there's a risk I can't see, but I can't see the risk in either, beyond 'It's my information and I don't want to share it'.

It's not idiotic at all. The suggestion isn't that people should be forced, or anything similar. Padders was suggesting that people volunteer a sample, as a method of preventing and solving crime, which is far from idiotic.

Not the most serious thread I suppose, but there's some fact to it. 'Real women have curves', but apparently real men don't (although thankfully the 'dad bod' seems to be addressing that) There are other examples in a similar vein, but equally there are examples where women are unfairly treated. Will always be that way I suspect.

The risk of those errors is so small as to be of no consequence in my view. Let's look at the logistics of doing this. Someone deliberately wants to frame me for a crime. First question is why? I'm no one. In the scheme of things, I'm a nobody. Why would someone want to frame me? They wouldn't. It's egotistical to think I'm that important to anyone. Second point is that I would very likely have an alibi. The huge number of ANPRs, CCTV etc would be very helpful, and it's highly likely I could prove it wasn't me. It would take literally astronomical levels of design to implicate me without any possibility of me being able to prove my innocence. Final point is covered in the article you quoted. DNA matches are based on the fact, from memory of my criminal law days, that it's accurate to about one in a billion. That, in effect means that 6 people in the world would share the same DNA as me (this came from a DNA expert in a trial I did). As your article says, DNA testing isn't as accurate as it's suggested to be, and there are instances such as those you mention where people have similar enough DNA to trigger false-positives. So basically, yes, someone could try to frame you for a crime, but:- 1. GSK or whoever gets the data won't do that as there's literally no point; 2. You, I, everyone on this forum, and 99.99999% of the population are of so little importance in the scheme of things that it's not worth bothering doing; 3. As your article points out quite rightly, it's not as accurate as portrayed, and with alibis, CCTV, ANPR, mobile phone tracking etc, it's fairly likely that unless someone has created a literal masterpiece of lies (again, why would they), you'd be able to prove it wasn't you, so what's the point. It's really not a big enough risk to even give passing thought to in my view. This also goes for it accidentally happening by the way.

Ok, apologies, I have had to queue when I've been, but those have always been at the weekends, as I work Mon-Fri 9-5 (clearly working hard right now in fact...). When I've been at the weekends, I've always queued. It's not an excuse, but I think it's probably a reason.

The problem with the tip is that it's closed a couple of days a week, and when it's open, there's often a massive queue. I've queued for an hour to get in before. The issue is that whilst I'm angry about having to queue, and will complain vocally about that fact, I'm not the sort of person to think 'sod it, I'll chuck my waste in a forest'. I'll wait, angrily, and then I'll calm down. Sadly, people don't all take that view.

Thank you for answering! Dimple clearly didn't want to See, as I said, perhaps I'm not being as concerned as I should be. Perhaps I don't get it. If they lost it, I'd go back to the same question though - what's the worst that would happen? So someone found my DNA profile - they'd find, I assume, that I'm a white male, 35-45, a few health issues etc. I don't see what use anyone could put that to. I'm happy to share that with you all. With life insurance, possibly, but I see that as a likely step soon enough anyway. If DNA can show predilection of your body to develop certain diseases, it won't take long before a DNA test is a standard part of an insurance application - it's a risk based concept after all. Obviously if you're hiding something and you die, they'll refuse to pay anyway. I see this risk as so small as not to be a worry though I have to say personally. Thinking about it, they'd have to say why they were loading your policy against say your partner, and would leave themselves open if they got the info through nefarious means, so I can't see them taking that risk, unless it was common practice.

It's ridiculously annoying. I was driving up Ringinglow Road last weekend, and at the side of the road, someone had dumped most of an old bedroom set. Cupboards, chairs, you name it. They're just morons.

That's the state of politics at the moment sadly. I can't stand either Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn. (I leave out the Lib Dems as they are unlikely to have any chance). I like some of the policies of the main two, but dislike a lot also. I can't remember a time in my years that the main parties have been so awful. It's rather depressing. I voted simply based on one policy that would affect me the most that one party would introduce that the other wouldn't.

And on that, I 110% agree with you! They're useless. For me, crime and traffic here are the main two concerns personally. As you say, the Council certainly have an impact on one of those. Sadly, Sheffield will continue to vote in these people regardless. They could literally have a massive sign over the town hall saying "We hate Sheffield" and they would be re-elected.

And yet again.... So they'll sell it. And? What are you scared the company they will sell it to are going to do with it? Am I talking a different language here? Your concern is they will sell your DNA profile. So what? What will the company who buys it do with it that you're so scared of?

But you haven't. You've said they might sell it. I go back to my question, yet again. Let's say they sell it to GSK (example). What are you worried that GSK will do?

Yep, and I'm still not worried. Their council needs x amount of money raising from council tax. They raise it. They spend it on things for their borough. Job done. Our council is useless, and wastes money. They need to raise more. They charge us more. I have more pressing concerns about things happening in Sheffield to be honest.

Not anyone - you need a reason. Even we Solicitors need a reason and the form to get the info (V888 if you're looking) asks for reasonable grounds. They refuse quite often. But still, you haven't answered my question. Let's say the NHS take samples from every newborn, and it goes on a Govt database. Let's say they sell it to, first name that comes to mind, GSK. What are they going to do with your DNA profile that you're so concerned about? Again, I may be hideously wrong here, and perhaps I should be more worried than I am. I'm human, I have flaws, I make mistakes. Perhaps I'm making one here, but you haven't convinced me or even given me anything to worry about. What specific thing should I be concerned about?

Again, I go back to the same question - what do you think the NHS/the government/Hank Scorpio/whoever else you're worried it'll be sold to is actually going to do with your DNA profile? I ask this question every time this issue comes up (ditto ID cards) and no one can ever answer. If there is an answer, great - persuade me I'm wrong not to worry and I'll worry, but to this date, no one has. It's not Batman. No one is going to frame someone for killing the police commissioner. People worry too much.

Stats for that? I've been in SW London many, many times, and I'd say it's not vastly different in the areas I've been to Sheffield, in terms of diversity. As for people contributing - well the people I know in that area earn a lot, and are 45% tax payers, so contribute a lot. I live in S2, and there are a lot of folk here who certainly don't give HMRC a bean, but use the services quite significantly! This just really isn't an issue for me. So some people in London pay less than us for one thing. So what quite frankly. Good luck to them.

Quite simply because their council sets the bands at a lower rate. The bands look similarly spaced apart, just lower. Fair play to them. Their council are perhaps more competent, perhaps they have lower expenses, who knows. Their council can clearly cope on whatever the figures work out at - population multiplied by council tax equals budget. Good for them. Am I angry about it? Not really. I can buy a very nice 4 bed house for £400k. My friend in Chiswick would pay about £1.2m. I can buy a pint for under a fiver in a pub. It's swings and roundabouts.

I've no idea what it's assessed on - you'd need an FOI request to K&C for that. If, as has been said, it's based on the fact that social services required are less in that area, and it's certainly possible, as it's a nice area, then wouldn't you feel angered if you were made to pay for something that wasn't your fault? I know I would. Bear in mind also that many/most of the people in London, or rather in that area, are higher rate tax payers, paying either 40% or 45% of their salary to HMRC. I think they contribute enough already. Why hit them yet again to support people 200 miles away?

You could say that about so many things though. Why should people without kids pay the same taxes as people with kids? Those people's taxes are used to fund schools that they will never use. (Or rather they used them as kids themselves, but won't for their own kids). Why should people in low crime areas of Sheffield pay the same council tax/police subsidy as people who live in higher crime areas. Without setting individual council tax based on individual circumstances which is impossible, there will always be some level of disparity.

I can give you a good reason to have a record - it means that catching serious criminals becomes far easier, in a sufficient number of cases to make it worthwhile. It also means things like tissue matches for donations would be easier. What's the counter? Why would it be a bad thing? I've asked many people this, but have yet to have a good answer!

I'm a dad, not a mum, but thought I'd chip in anyway. My wife went back to work near enough full time (4 days) after our daughter was born. 6 months off on maternity, then back to work. Little one went to nursery - that's always been our preference as in our view it's far better than being at home all day - just our view of course. Yes it's hard as you have to fit housework etc in, and when they're at school, fitting homework in is a challenge every night, but it's doable. And wine. Wine helps.

What do you actually think they'll do with it? I'm genuinely curious as to what scares you so much about it.

You'd need to be quite paranoid to think that someone would go to such lengths to set you up for a crime you didn't commit, leaving aside the fact that generally you could fairly quickly prove you were elsewhere. It reminds me of Americans justifying owning semi-automatic weapons on the basis that someone might want to rob and shoot them in their homes. How many enemies do these people make?! I have no problems with a national DNA database, nor would I have an issue with my daughter providing her DNA if the school asked. Similarly I wouldn't have an issue with identity cards.