GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265570374


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] CNN article: The government has your baby's DNA
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 14:19:34 -0500
References: <8CC763A8FCC1BF4-31CC-1C389@webmail-m061.sysops.aol.com><007001caa824$20835f50$5e82af48@Ken1><AF922FB7380345759B85C01FBFEAD3B1@HP><008901caa827$78be5190$5e82af48@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <008901caa827$78be5190$5e82af48@Ken1>


Well, when you find those alternative means, do let us know. In the meantime,
who apologizes to the parents for the unnecessary deaths of their children?

I'm a (retired) scientist, so I like to think I have an objective worldview, but
my objectivity doesn't include allowing babies to die out of reverence to some
"context."

Diana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Ken Nordtvedt
> Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 1:58 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] CNN article: The government has your baby's DNA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 11:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] CNN article: The government has your baby's DNA
>
>
> >I look at it from a cost-benefit perspective. The privacy
> >given up is totally outweighed by the health benefits, if
> >not for me, personally, then for society, generally, and
> > for some individuals, especially.
>
> I'm sure very many, if not most, also look at cost versus
> benefits. But they may have different valuations of the
> costs versus benefits when viewed in total context, and
> even versus achieving similar ends by alternative means.
> Ken
>
>


This thread: