Nickname - Time - Message <BenEdelman> (Tue, February 08, 2000 at 20:07) testing... <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:13) The live video feed is now fully operational. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:13) Hi Ben -- This is a test. <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:13) If anyone has audio problems, please let me know and I'll do my best to fix them. <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:13) Hi, Michael. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:18) Hello Phil and Rachel. I am the moderator. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:18) Hello Brian. I am the moderator. <RachelErlich> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:19) Hello <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:20) We are getting ready to start. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:20) Thank you for joining us today. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:21) Is anyone having any technical problems? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:21) Hi Alexis. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:22) Hi michael and no, I am not having any technical problems <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:22) hi tanya! <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:22) hi Alexis <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:23) I cannot hear anything yet... <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:24) Ben, can you help Alina with sound? <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:24) The sound is working properly on our end. <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:24) Alina, is sound working properly in your computer otherwise? <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:25) Can you play other RealAudio files? Or other sound files generally? <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:25) hi charlie we are are listening and seeing you form lismore australia <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:25) ok, now it's ok... <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:25) t'nk's :-) <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:26) Welcome Rahul. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:26) I thought that was you Brian. How's the weather back home? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:26) howdy <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:27) weather is fine - shouldnt you be listening to charlie! <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:27) I am!! <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:29) hola maria <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:29) Hello Maria. Welcome. <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:29) hello, all thanks <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:30) you're welcome... <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:31) Hello, I am Michael Rader and I am the moderator tonight. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:31) (the on-line moderator, that is) <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:31) hi <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:31) Oliver are you in the class, can we see you? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:32) I am in the class, but I'm hiding <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:34) You can all think about questions you might like to pose, and submit them later. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:34) Mike, is this a group project or just part of the normal class <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:34) anyone else online having volume issues? <TheodoreHong> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:34) suddenly hit congestion just now <TheodoreHong> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:35) oh, it's back <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:35) Alexis, this is a class project. We have a group that has helped to put this particular session together. <PhillipProcyk> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:35) Thanks for the volume boost <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:35) ditto! <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:36) The group is known as an E-LAB. <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:36) Ben, not as good as two way video conference but will do. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:40) great, glad to have you with us Brian <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:42) Michael, we are really enjoying this. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:42) Awesome Brian! <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:44) did I miss it or is no one concerned with the privacy issues that the genome project raises? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:44) oops,I spoke to soon <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:44) John Van Amsterdam did raise that issue. I expect it will be addressed. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:44) Oh, you have a 15-second time lag!!! <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:45) anyyone else getting major congestion? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:45) That means you too! If you have questions, you can pose them through me and I will ask the panel for you. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:47) I do not want to think that the DNA offers all the answers to the complexities, including illnesses of a huma being. Thinking that way means believing that a human being is a machine. Thinking that way means having no faith. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:47) This is the Iceland project which surprisingly has a tremendous amount of support in Iceland. <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:48) Brian is currently in a meeting for a short while and will be back soon. <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:49) Is volume still down for anyone? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:52) messing around with genetics is like opening the Pandora box, we have not learnt the lesson of the Brave New World.scientists activities should be strongly regulated. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:52) Maria, is this a question for one of the panelists in particular? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:53) i do not know it is just a thought <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:53) Here comes the microphone -- Oprah-style! <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:53) the issue is how to morally regulate this topic <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:53) I agree with u Maria <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:53) hi tatiana it is m e victoria <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:54) Hi Vic <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:54) If you do not think about the social regulation that is necessary before you open the box, there will be no controlling it once it is opened - or do scientist just not htink that way? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:54) How can you use gene therapy for the cure of cancer? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:56) this guy is asking an important question... <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:56) I cannot accept the narrow view that an individual's potential exposure to cancer can be found in the DNA <TheodoreHong> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:57) Alexis, sometimes it is also the case that you don't know what social regulation might be necessary because you don't know what potential a technology has before you start to research it. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:57) Tatjana, you seem to be formulating an important question which we will want to ask the panel at the appropriate time. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:57) That view ignores the environmental factors that may cause the illness concerned <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:58) Yes, but you can attempt to put some structure in place. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:58) I agree tanya <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:58) If I understand you correctly, you are expressing discomfort with the reliance society is placing on decoding the genetic map, which ignores theological concerns. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:58) I always thought that scientists thought that both environment and genetics were involved in cancer? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) Shall I ask the doctor on the panel what the current thinking is on environment vs. genetics in causing cancer? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) i soemtimes find the scientiest's attitude towards nature's limits as challenging adn irrespectful of its wisdom. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) Yes <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) OK. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) No one is saying that the genetic code provides ALL the answers! but it certainly will help doctors understand some portion of the causes of some diseases... <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 18:59) I agree with Alexis, I beleive that the number of past examles where social regulation has not been put in place at the beginning, the industry becomes enormous and carries enough weight for the regulation to never appear. EG Mobile Phones <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:00) Environment and events in a life..I had leukemia and the cause were probably Chernobil and/or some sad events that affected my well being <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:00) Tatjana, shall I mention that or would you prefer not? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:00) You can <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:00) OK I will go next. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:02) Her comment seems to illustrate my point that a structure needs to be in place first <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:03) hi b. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:04) you're doing great Michael!!! <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:05) If you have any follow-up questions or if I did not summarize properly, let me know. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:05) my video stream must be behind... <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:05) i woudl like to ask what sort of limits shall be recogniced or imposed bu the scientific community in manipulating genes. <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) either moral, or legal ??? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) I would say both <JohnTsui> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) Is there any inheritate difference between gene modification and those obtained from hybrids of plants? <SriramDas> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) what type of rights should Celera Genomics have over the human genomic information that it is producing? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) but then the questiion is in what concept of morality shall we rely? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) But whose morals? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:06) a moral based on natural principles? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) Drawn from where? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) do not we have a common sense of basic moral set of principles? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) and whose laws? this is a global issue and genetic research can be conducted anywhere... <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) And will be conducted by rouges where laws are lightest\ <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) What kind of life can a genetics engineer reproduce? <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) should not be nature the limit? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) I think that there are some morms that we all agree on - for example genetic info should not be used to deny someone insurance or work or etc. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:07) yes.call me <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) Maria, I'm not sure I understand what a "natural limit" would be <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) Maybe in America, but other nations might have a different view <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) Looks like we are getting to some of the legal issues now. <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) gene i mean natural law <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) Alexis, I wonder if EVERYONE would agree on that proposition... <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) "Shouldn't insurance companies be able to price discriminate based on genetics?" <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) (Surely not the insurance companies) <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) different laws, yes, but this seems to me to not be culturally relative <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:08) I agree with Alexis: genetics should have limits so that the information derived cannot be used as a means of discriminating people against other <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) Huxley's predictions are true, and we all agree on the fact that that is morally wrong. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) insurance: i believe that laws such as these are starting to come into the public view (clinton's recent pronouncements) <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) How would you distinguish genetic information from other information like whether a person smokes? <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) Australian Gov has allowed Health Insurance Companies to discriminate on age why not on Genetic info <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) Or more relevantly, whether that individual's family has a history of disease <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:09) Discrimination in insurance is driven by the purchasers not the insurance company. If I know I'm healthy I won't pay to subsidize the sick. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:10) ok you guys are taking the insurance example to seriously - I was merely trying to illustrate that I think that there are some overarching social norms that span cultures and discrimination might be one of them - or at least I hope so. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:10) But how would an insurance company get YOUR personal genetic info? That is a serious issue. Could they require it as a matter of contract law? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:10) You deprive an individual of his rights if ex ante you have access to information saying that that individual will becom a serial killer...especially when we don not know whether that info is reliable <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:10) Nor is it reliable to change someone's auto insurance premium for having an accident <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) Oliver, I think that at the right price all information can be traded and companies would pay a very high premium for that <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) What about the potential benefits and dangers of collecting DNA samples from everyone who is arrested? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) wait a minute... there are some fundamental errors in some of the reasoning here... DNA will not dispose people to "serial killing" <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) I completely agree. <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) Is this screen being shown to the class eg: on the whiteboard <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:11) sorry, i meant "DNA does not" <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:12) No. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:12) There is actually some evidence that criminal behavior is in part genetic. See James Q.Wilson On Crime 1995. <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:12) Pity <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:12) we can't see the screen in class <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:12) I think it's important to remember that someone's genetic makeup does not predetermine their behavior. There are environmental influences that act on our development. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:13) Not predetermine, but make more likely... <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:13) I like Nesson's question on whether privacy will be available only for the rich <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:13) At what probability would discrimination be acceptable <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:13) This presupposes that we all will have equal bargainingpositions - Michael can you ask about how this will be accounted for? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:13) This is like Prof. Nesson's question, right Alexis? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) "Let's have an auction. What is your willingness to sell your code? I'm trying to get a sense for willingness to sell." <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) Or is it a bit different -- please explain. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) But it wasn't really answered <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) Michel, I think that seems accurate <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) OK, so you want me to push it a little bit with Steve Henry? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) What's your asking price? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) yes <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:14) Rahul: according to some articles that I read, theoretically from the DNA you can even find out whether you will be a faithful husband or not....Personally I do not believe in that...but this shows how there should be limits in trusting genes info <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) I agree Tatjana... <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) "Would you sell it for $10,000/one time payment?" <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) it's one thing to say that your genetic code indicates a predisposition to some behavior, and another thing to say that it predicts that you will do something <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) What info do you want? All of it, or just a bit? <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) hi Jo :-) <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:15) Rahul, but that's what insurance companies do, estimate your risk <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) "Access to the whole code" <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) that's why i don't think insurance companies should have access... <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) I think it is just unfair...a way to penalize people <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) Then no. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) $50,000 <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) And what are your rights with my information? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) Shall I mention the different asking prices? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) How can you keep insurance companies from doing so? Wouldn't the efficiency argument ultimately win out? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:16) :) <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:17) I agree with Gene. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:17) That's a big trout! <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:17) not necessarily gene - it's already a regulated industry <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:17) I want to market pharmaceuticals and medical devices to a targeted consumer segment. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:17) If we accept the argument that the science will be pushed forth faster then maybeto balance out the risk of abuse of the information, then we should require that the "cure" discovered be offered at a discounted rate so that it is affordable for all <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) Sure, but under a new regime of insurance, let's imagine that you KNOW your risk of cancer is 30%... wouldn't it only be fair that you bear a higher cost? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) I don't know anything about Iceland? Where is Iceland? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) What happens with the results of the research using my gene into? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) But you sell yourself ultimately <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) bob= george w.? <TheodoreHong> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) PANEL QUESTION: If you license the genetic database for an entire country to a single company, does this raise a problem of monopoly power? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:18) Oops - "info" <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) in re theodore: can a NATION sell its citizens' genes? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) We sell your code to the pharmaceutical company to help them in market development. They can then sell directly to you. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) gene: i think this gets back to the question of how much your code can tell you about your risk of getting cancer... environmental factors are huge... my hunch is that the standard deviation on that risk % will still be pretty high <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) Yes, but would I see royalties from the use of my genes? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) Gene info should not have a price <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) Michael - when are we going to get to participate in the discussion <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:19) No way. One time dee. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Then I'd have to say no. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) however, understanding predispositions to a certain condition can certainly help medical diagnosis and treatment... <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Alexis, I will try to be next. I will ask your question. Prepare to follow up. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Rahul, sure, but let's say you factor all that in... and your "natural" risk is still, say 2% higher than average. Should you pay for that? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) $100,000 <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) i think that is a question of human dignity as+ to rpivacy, you can not sell it, tehy can not use it <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Now I'm nervous <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) *GRIN* <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) dignity as =privacy, sorry <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) No. <JoachimBjerke> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Hi, Alina, I'm still here... <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) Come on, Oliver. You're not worth that much. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:20) That's what you think!!! <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) oops <DongyuLiu> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) /help <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) Hey <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) i was trying to slap becca <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) I know -- we are next. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) I value my privacy more than the money. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) no offense, becca <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) ok, now I've seen u! <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) gene: if the predictive accuracy is worse than +/- 2%, then no, but if it is less than that, perhaps that's a different issue (i'm thinking on the fly here, hope that's ok) <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) "However, there always is a price. Why don't you give it to me. Listen to the lawyer right now. He's talking big cash. <AlinaAntoci> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:21) are u home? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:22) There's more to life than cash - I'd prefer anonymity. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:22) "Oliver, come on, how much? Are you really saying there is no amount of money you would take? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:23) my hunch is that environmental factors will blur the predictive ability of the genetic code to such a degree that it will be difficult for insurance companies to make a great case for customer segmentation to such a fine degree... <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:23) I have to admit that I'm not really tempted Bob. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:23) There's just something about a market in personal information that sits uneasily with me. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:23) "Anyone else want to play auction? Is no one willing to sell their code? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:23) bob, try ebay <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) When it comes to privacy the US should learn from Italy <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) ebay is probably down, given hacking that's been going on the past few days <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) we could learn lots from italy <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) Italy? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) italy? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) Yes <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) Italy or Iceland? <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) italy? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) tell us more about italy those who know <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:24) This is a blind sell. I wouldn't sell my genome without knowing what it was worth, based on any useful genes I might have. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) Why not? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) what do you mean by "useful gene"? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) Don't you already know some of your genes are "useful"? For example, if you are good looking, etc. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) Alexis, did I do justice to the question? <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) what if they could clone your mum, whatever <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) yes <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) In Italy we have very rigid privacy rules that limit the dissemination of information ranging from health, sex inclination, beliefs to more general info.. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:25) SOLD. $100,000 <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) Hmm .. by 'useful gene' I suppose I meant one with therapeutic potential. But the value of the genome will change with technology. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) they don't want MY sperm, for example, because I'm too short... <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) Hi Alison. I am the moderator. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) Oops I meant to laugh at gene <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) Brave new world <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) Doesn't this raise the risk of a more realistic risk of the ubermenscher? <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:26) why is that a risk <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) Did anyone see this movie she's talking about? <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) Gattaca <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) Gattica <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) I agree with oliver <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) gore vidal <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) Everyone would want a particular genetic makeup, reducing the size of the available gene pool <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) good call greg <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) It would be like the movie Gattaca <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:27) You got it Alexis! <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) would it increase or decrease the effectiveness of "natural selection" <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) what if your looks <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) Decrease since it wouldn't be natural at all <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) Namsloch, natural selection would become human selection, the same way we bred dogs <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) winston churchill:" yes but you will still be ugly in the morning." <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:28) I'm sure that would would happen, if there were no ethical limits, is that we could experiment with our genes to create artificial diversity <SriramDas> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:29) messed up kids have no right to be born <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:29) I think he is too dismissive of the movie - I can imagine exactly such a world with no problem <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:29) What do you mean by "messed up" <EliseTillinghast> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:29) testing... <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:29) Alexis, did you read Brave New World? much earlier scifi, same theme <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) why doesn't a "messed up" kid have no right to be born? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) Yes I have read it <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) what if, like, they could grow a dog with the head of an ant and a tail of a lion. <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) deltas have the right to be born. <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) whatever <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:30) ;) maria <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:31) oops <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:31) eugenics was born at harvard <SriramDas> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:31) what I mean is that if you know that a given gene produces a greater proclivity to violence in a child, it is a material disservice to society to bring that child into the world who is predisposed to anti-social violent behavior <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:31) Le'ts come up with a list of the top five industries that would benefit from selling this code- Insurance, Pharma, Ag-- What else? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) I think a lot of our moral feelings about the use of genetics comes from the sense that we have no control over our own genes <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) BUT, what if it were true, as the moderator proposed, that we do have control over our own genes? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) Predisposed does not mean will commit.... <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) So this way favors abortion <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) Sriram - aren't you trying to play "God" there. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) Then, is it our own fault that we don't eliminate our own genes that make us predisposed to violence, or alcoholism (as has been demonstrated and asserted by AA) <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:32) Seriously, why would genetic "planning" neceessarily decrease the effectiveness of human development and evolution. Instead of reproductive decisions being made through the smoky haze of a bar, they could be soberly evaluated. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:33) although i agree that sriram's comments are a bit scary, let's leave god out of this... <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:33) is genetic code simply an internal aspect? does it have an operational external dimension? is the traces i leave through digital environment an operational stament of gene structure? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:33) Genetics as such is very "hitlerian" didn't he want the perfect man. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:33) sorry, still trying to get the hang of these expressions <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:33) Sorry, that's why I put God in " marks" <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:34) Brian, depends on how deterministic you think genes are <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:34) If you think it's my genetic makeup that is typing right now, then sure <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:34) i laugh at myself often. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:34) Hitler raises an interesting question - would we be so sceptical of this new science if there had been no hitler <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:34) true, just because Hitler wanted a "perfect person" doesn't mean that desiring a healthy child is hitlerian. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) No, but deciding the genetic make-up of your child in advance might be. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) DOes anyone want to consider what the dimensions of this debate are in regards to abortion? <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) what about the freedom ship <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) book recommendation: "remaking eden" by lee silver <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) Gene, can you swing the first few bars of that? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) oops -- sing <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) look at doberman dogs , for instance...the perfect breed..so perfect that when they get older they turn crazy because of the genetical manipulations <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:35) Although I am pro-choice in most respects, one major concern I have with abortion <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) where do you draw the line? is it OK to genetically engineer kids to be disease free? but not to be intelligent? and who decides what is a permissible criteria and what is not? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) tanya why do you know that? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) Is the possibility that people will start aborting for increasingly petty reasons <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) is my credit card part of genetic structure? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) I had 2 doberman <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) For example, right now I believe people do genetic testing and can abort if the child is severely retarded <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) what is the freedom ship? and yes, i think that the whole idea of aborting fetuses who are not genetically desirable is a an important issue to bring up.. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) I doubt it Brian. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) What about when you can determine whether a child will be nearsighted, or short, or ugly? <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:36) i got me ticket on the freedom ship <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) gene, a child, retarded or not, is a gift of love and a gift of god <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) gene do you have a comlex about being short? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) Yes I do <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) Ouch. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) An attached question to this is does a parent own the genetic material of her child? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) Certainly, we wouldn't want a policy that allowed abortion based on physical characteristics. However, one the info is available motives are hard to monitor. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) tatjana: your last comment is an opinion... not something you build legislation on... <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) Such that the parent can decide to abort the child <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) are we talking about whether someone should abort a 1 month old fetus for reasons of shortness or other "genetic defects," or whether the government should attach conditions to otherwise legal abortions? i.e you can't do it for impermissible reasons, and genetic qualities deemed insignificant is one of them? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:37) That is an interesting point. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) The problem is defining "impermissible reasons" <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) What's impermissible exactly implicates what we as society decide is "normal" <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) Kahlil Gibran wrote "the children are not your children"...we should not decide for them <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) But how would the government know you rmotivation? Just say you can't afford to support the child or something. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) exactly. I think there is no role for the government in this, while it's still interesting <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:38) namsloch, so we should allow people to abort a child solely because it's going to be ugly? <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) yes <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) who is kahlil gibran to craft national policy? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) or global policy, for that matter? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) Here's one for the lawyers: What is the justification for granting patents in genetic information. After all, all they did was "discover" it, and facts as a general rule can't be owned. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) who is we? if the fetus is 1 month old and it is otherwise legal, what is the government to do? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) Perhaps disallow genetic testing of fetuses <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) Exactly. It would be impossible for us to monitor the motive of the parent in choosing the abortion. Therefore, there will be no way to avoid abortion based on predicted physical characteristics once the info. becomes available <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) Oliver, I will ask that question. Good one. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) i agree with bob, once the technology is available decisions will be made based on it and the govt. won't be able to control it. there's some play about that -- a fetus is determined to be homosexual, and the parents struggle over whether to abort... <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) Oliver isn't that only applicable to copyright <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:39) how sad <BrianFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) But then you would miss the many diseases that could destory the childs quality of life. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) very sad... <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) No. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) Oliver: While the discoverer didn't create the gene, it wasn't available for any use or clinical application until the discoverer purified it. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) How do you feel about cloning? if the technology exists, and I can't have a child, can I clone myself? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) here's the answer oliver... <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:40) Neither did Newton's discoveries <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:41) in the end, some of the answers will be economic unfortunately... regardless of the law, rich folks will be able to pay some doc off for an abortion while poorer couples in the same situation will not.... extrapolate this out several generations... could be scary... Info tech has already widened the gap between the rich and poor... think of what this will do... <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:41) Then you get a clone who can't have a child. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:41) sure he can, he'll have to clone himself, or have his future wife be artifically impregnated <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:41) Oliver -- here is the answer to your question. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:41) Too much cloning. Insurace won't cover it. <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:42) brian eno would clone <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:42) no role for insurance, definitely, but should the government prevent you from cloning yourself if you so desire? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) Absolutely. We shouldn't allow criminals to clone themselves or drug addicts. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) So the answer seems to be to me: where money can be made, we will grant ownership rights <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) Poor justification if you ask me. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) As Rahul said, it's about $$$ <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) Shouldn't we be concerned about this? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) Oliver, how are you coming along with your willingness to sell? Any movement? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:43) Nope. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Would you sell Bob? <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) bob, i think you are going to have a serious constitutional problem with saying that certain classes of people can clone themselves and certain can't <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Oliver keepmholding out <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Yes, but money drives innovation which betters society. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) hey, i wasn't necessarily advocating it, just throwing out a reality check: this is a capitalist society and an increasingly capitalist world... that's a reality that will not be changing anytime soon... <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Oliver: what if your genes are appraised for $10, you are offered 100,000, and the identity of the genetic owner will be private? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) People have always innovated irrespective of the rewards <JonZittrain> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Greetings. <ezlover> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) lawyers overuse the word "parse" <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) and not every innovation helps society <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Economic gain is not evil; because of it we will find cures to disease. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Oliver: that's why the USSR is still around, right? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:44) Wecome Prof. Zittrain <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) Everyone is so worried about losing their privacy, but losing your privacy has benefits. People can develop individualized medical treatments and product offerings designed specifically to make you happier or healthier. So yes actually I'm on the market. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) When you say genetic owner, do you mean me? <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) Hi Prof Zittrain <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) no its not evil but it is not always great either <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) unfortunately, money DOES drive innovation. instead of people working for the GOOD of society, you have scientists working against each other to be the first to discover a cure. instead of sharing information and getting a cure faster, they compete.. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) people may continue to innovate, but incentives make an extremely tangible difference, and you don't have to be an economist to realize that <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) Losing your privacy to a doctor is one thing Bob, losing it to the world is another. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:45) bob, I lived in a communist country: privacy has no price <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) Bruce, but the point is that it gets done at all <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) How much privacy do you have now <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) sorry Zittrain, but that's for my lowest grade last term! <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) more than in Yugoslavia, less than in Italy <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) bruce: not always, research based companies collaborate all the time - alliances are growing daily... <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) Money only drives innovation because we have structured our society that way. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) if there were another incentive --- it might get done faster and more efficiently through more cooperative efforts.. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) Amzon has your credit card number. HLS has your social security number. Doubleclick tracks what websites you visit. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:46) oliver, i agree. i'm a communist. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) Bob, I agree with you, I love having these guys track my moves (for now) because then they send me great coupons for their money-losing web sites <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) oops i take that back.. i'm a theoretical communist, i mean. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) oliver & bruce: do you see that structure changing anytime soon? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) Monsanto is too often slapped around on its ag technology. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) JZ: yes, and of course i;m just kidding, it was a great class <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) But I think the distinction between tracking your actions on the Web and your genes is themoral sense that one is the product of your decisions, whereas the other is the (partial) instigator <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) not going to change. i'm moving to a deserted island. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) No. Too many people are comfortable with the current system. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) Is it fair for somebody with a genetic predisposition to, say, heart disease to hide that fact from a health insurer? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:47) The Terminator Seed is awesome. It allows you to wipe out all weeds. I've seen it work. I agree GMO1. I'll see you at the office at Monsanto tomorrow. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) yes, oliver. there's no revolution. too many people in power are happy with it. <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) the system , i mean. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) These advances stand to dramatically improve our ability to feed the populations of developing countries. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) Neil, are you suggesting that individuals should bear the burdens of their health situation, rather than the collective? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) Watch the developing world though. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) It doesn't bother the monsanto users to be beholden to the company? <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) You're all so worried about privacy - a question: How many of you accept all cookies? They are tracking you now!! <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) Do you want the panel to address this issue? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) GMO, we CAN feed the developing nations, NOW <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) I don't accept cookies!!!!!1 <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:48) It's not a problem of technology <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Gene' <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Gene <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Michael -- What is the fair balance of information between an individual and their insurer? <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Gene: I agree <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) The food problem is a problem of distribution. See Oxfam. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) There is a big difference between the type of profiling that can be done fromtracking me on the web and profiling my gentic makeup <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) GMO1 companies like Monsanto hold hostage the people of developing companies to buy Monsanto's seeds. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Critics expect a corporation to act with purely eleemosynary motivations, but the fact is that the promise of profit drives their innovations. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Why should healthy people have to subsidize the sick if they know they won't get sick based on their genes. Insurance is predicated in large part on not knowing what can of health problems will develop ex ante. <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Neil -- interesting question. Let me try to get that in there at the appropriate moment. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:49) Why shouldn't the healthy (rich?) subsidize the sick (poor?) <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) The terminator gene was seen as a way to preserve valuable intellectual property. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) Bob, because we are a community <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) alexis - not a big ayn rand fan are you? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) I agree Alexis <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) the terminator gene wasa way to create intellectual prop not protect one <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:50) That brings we back to an earlier point. Not letting the insurance companies have your genetic info won't prevent discrimination. If people know their own code no one will pay the avergae price for insurance. The healthy people will want a lower rate which undermines the whole notion of pooling. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) The unhealthy will simply not be able to get any insurance <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) I disagree. Monsanto's R& D in developing the recomb seed technology is drastically undervalued if farmers can simply reuse seed stock from year to year without having to purchase more. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) Alexis, that's not true, they'll just have to pay out thenose <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) Bob -- Don't people already pay different rates for insurance based on smoking and family history of disease? What new factor does DNA information introduce? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) GMO, isn't the whole point that these seeds are sterile? <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:51) DNA information introduces thousands of other factors...are you kidding? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) More accurate price discrimination <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) Health insurance will be no longer, the healthy dont need it and the sick cant get it. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) which means they wont have any - just like the sad state of health care in this country <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) No just really expensive insurance that covers their high costs. The only real solution is a mandatory pool, but that's sort of Un-American. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) Asked and answered <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) Genetics do not DETERMINE your diseases <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) furthermore, innovation as stifled as the corporation has no further interest -- viz., profit motive -- in developing a better product because the farmers are using seeds developed for an earlier generation. <GregFitzgerald> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) A mandatory pool - Australia is moving towards private health cover for all - are we going the wrong way? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) Its not price discrimination per se. Remember the customers not the company creates the discrimination. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:52) Yes!!!!!!1 <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:53) Yes, the sterility compels farmers to buy new seed stock in the next planting season. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:53) Genes are not determinative, there are still environmental factors. I doubt health insurers will ever be able to predict who will get a disease and when. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:53) bob - how do you figure that/ <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:53) Neil, that's oversimplifying the other direction <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) I find the discriminatory attitude European states have taken toward GMO foods to be especially counterproductive to the progress of agricultural science. <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) of course genes are not perfectly determinative, but with current research looking for "cancer genes", etc, the insurance companies will have a much easier time claiming that you are "high" risk than they do now <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) But the protectionistic themes behind European states' positions are not hard to discern. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) GMO foods do not have any taste <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) theoretically, to price differentially, an insurance company would have to be selling different "products" - the same way that airline seats are different "products" depending on when they are bought. i question the ability of insurance companies to meaningfully design a product portfolio that can remotely mirror the complexity of the human genome..... but i guess we'll find out! <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) Insurance has always been based on probabilities. Genes will allow more accurate prediction,but it will still be prediction. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:54) Sorry for interrupting you Rahul. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) Let's say the insurance company doesn't know your genetic info. On average people cost the company in medical bills $100 a year but healthy people only cost 50 and sick people cost 150. Assume that half the pop is sick and 1/2 healthy. Now if people know there own code the healthy won't pay 100 its too expensive and the sick get off too cheap. The whole pool will collapse. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) I'm with Tatjana on that one. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) GMO foods should taste no different from non-GMO foods. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) Bob, but you will then have 2 pools, one cheap and one expensive <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) Have you eaten in Europe? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) British food is the pits. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) That's cooking, not food. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) well, this insurance problem creates a new incentive for genetic engineering--it will really suck to be genetically predisposed to sickness in the future <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) Bob -- Why haven't smokers caused life insurance to collapse? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:55) Europe, I'm thinking France with particularity, still considers the "small farmer" to be an integral part of the national culture. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) Because they are charged to smoke <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) I think it's amusing that we assume that "natural" food is safe, but GO food is dangerous <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) Exactly - France is protectionist to preserve the French "way of life" <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) First of all, the food we eat HAS been genetically engineered, by centuries of human selection <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) especially considering that half of the produce at the grocery store is GM <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) I wouldn't go that far... <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) I guess it's not really fair to charge people for having a particular gene. But what about a family history of heart disease? Is it fair to charge higher premiums in that case? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:56) Second, we don't know all the side effects of food as it stands right now. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Gene - yes it has been genetically engineered, but not in the same way. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Also smokers in empirical studies tend to value their life less than non-smokers. They may not even want life insurance in the same quantities as the non-smoking population. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Oliver, and why do you distinguish? <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) GMO1--Don't people in developing countries have the right to be self-sustainable and not dependent on western companies for food? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Yes, you see the artificial distinction between recomb GMO foods and hybridization (an ancient technique) genetic modification. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Neil: it is no less fair to do it on genetic testing than on family history--both are beyond teh control of teh insurance customer <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) And does "ancient" make it safe? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Of course you have to charge higher premiums for a family with heart disease unless you have a government mandated pool that you cannot opt out of. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) The theory of comparative advantage holds that all nations benefit when each does what it does best. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) Is gene info just a sophisticated version of family history? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:57) I distinguish because of the technique of GM (i.e. labratories) and the speed of it today. Vastly different <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) If America can produce large quantities of food relatively cheaply, the people of all other nations benefit. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) Neil, I'd say yes - so the problem / tension is already there <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) A bit but much more personalized and descriptive. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) yes, but it is so accurate that the implications are tougher for people predisposed to illness <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) People of other nations would benefit from not having to produce cash crops for Western nations. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) Notwithstanding the current difficulties some developing nations have in feeding their own populations (e.g., N. Korea). <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) Oliver, and how do you know the food we are eating that is not GM is safe? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) What's the deal with Soy Burgers? <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:58) We do produce large qty of food. the benefit to developing countries...questionable? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:59) History would seem to be a good guide ... <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:59) Isn't hydorgenated vegetable oil great? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:59) (1) They have access to food they otherwise wouldn't (because of resource and political exigencies) <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:59) (2) We export food to them in exchange for their exports (whatever they produce most efficiently) to us. <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 19:59) everyone - it's been fun, gotta run.... <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) The increasing interdependency of the global economy cannot be evaded. <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) In N.Korea's case, we export food so they won't develop nuclear weapons. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) Here we go again on cloning. On your mark, get set, GO <RahulShendure> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) hey! i felt that gene! (wasnt quite gone yet...) <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) Cloning...brrrrr <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) Why slap someone with a trout, a flounder is really better for slapping. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) How is cloning related? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) Should I bring up insurance? <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) And if so, how should I formulat eit? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) [b]Michael[/b], yes <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:00) oops, HTML doesn't work <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) Cloning is a minor problem. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) Yeah, let's talk insurance Michael. Ask about price discrimination <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) OK. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) why minor? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) I don't think that somatic cell cloning overcomes the simple reality of advanced senescence. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) Why haven't we talked about the value of a DNA database so we can solve crimes? <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) Bob -- That has some invasion of privacy problems. <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) The risk of Big Brother ... <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) Hypo: can you clone yourself, kill the fetus after two months, and grow the liver/llungs/heart to save your own or someone else's life? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:01) That is, a sheep cloned from a cell two years old starts out life, for cell biology purposes, at "two years old." <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) Why not just fingerprint the whole population while we're gathering their genetic info. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) does anyone have a moral problem with this? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) namsloch, the idea is to just clone the heart, not the entire body <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) Namsloch - Yes. <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) but assuming to do certain medical procedures, you have to clone a fetus for at least 2 months <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) Of course it has invasion of privacy problems but so does a strip search when you get arrested. Any yet we still do it. So why not take a blood sample? <JoachimBjerke> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) You can have a DNA register for people already convicted criminals <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) someone remember th crim law on blood samples? <ashley> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:02) once you get arrested, your rights are a lot different <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) Oliver--yes you have a moral problem? if so, do you have a moral problem with abortion after 2 months and are the two any different? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) We do a strip search with reasonable cause. Collecting DNA on mass lacks this element. <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) A strip search has to be done on some kind of probable grounds. A DNA database, I assume, would include everybody to be useful. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) As it stands, police get your DNA when you smoke their cigarettes <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) I know somebody who is paying $$$$$ in genetics research with the ultimate aim of cloning himself <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) (There was an article on how police trick people into giving up their DNA recently) <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) Are Americans afraid of genetically modified foods? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) Is dna that different from fingerprints? <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) Gene -- Isn't that a violation of due process? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:03) I have a moral problem because it treats human life as a utilitarian factor. I am not opposed to abortion however. Maybe there is a contradiction there <BruceRichman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) fingerprints have no predictive value. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Neil, that was the point of the article - is it self-incrimination? or is it just objective data? <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) The contradiction is striking. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Oliver, the clock is ticking- Going Once, Going Twice, Are you going to sell tonight? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Men are not machines that can be reproduced <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) some americans are, but since there was no notification procedure in place, must of us have been eating it without even knowing <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Gene -- What was the title of that article? <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) You'd need to make me a much better offer. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Would you prefer a notification procedure existed? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Sorry, it was in the Sunday globe a few weekends ago...? <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) yes <mariasanchez> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) they are tempting you Oliver <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) We are running out of time and I may not get to ask about insurance. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Why? <namsloch> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) Oliver what's wrong with sacrificing the life of a 2 month old fetus to save the life of a 30year old human with two kids, especially if it's OK to abort a 2 month old fetus if you just don't want to have a baby? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) "Oliver, you name the price. That's what I've wanted all night. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) oh, it's over! <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:04) oliver is ther someting special about you that we should know <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:05) Its a secret <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:05) That's why I wont sell my genetic code!!!!!!! <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:05) Did anyone get my "LOL" comic strip in the beginning fo the year? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:05) No rotisseries, please. <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) The only rotisserie I want is a Roger's roaster. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) Kenny Roger's BABY!!!!1 <NeilCave> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) I had not idea Email could be used to prepare dinner. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) Mike - my suggestion for nesson is that the next session work in the chat better because while our conversation was interesting it was removed from the overall discussion <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) I met up with the gambler <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) Bye Alexis, see you soon <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) What the --- are they talking about, "rotisserie"? <ken> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) ibid...alexis <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) I wonder also if you can't create separate chat rooms for different topics <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) It's hard to keep track <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:06) Tanya are you in NY this weekend? <bob> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) Maybe the trout slapping scared people away. <GMO1> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) that Boston Market place closed <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) no, I will go on Sunday <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) Thats too bad <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) Hey Alexis, are you here in class? <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) When are u leaving <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) For on-line people, <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) I'm leaving fri. <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) gene -no <BenEdelman> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/eon/ei <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) Ben is going to tell you the URL <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:07) There it is. <TatjanaKeselj> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) I will talk to u next week..we should have dinner together <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) ok <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) I want to see this chat room turn into a dating service <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) Thank you all for participating. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) no genetic testing required <MichaelRader> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) :) <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) are you asking me out? <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) you wish! <alexiscoppedge> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) Goodnight all. <GeneKoo> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:08) bye buys <JoachimBjerke> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:09) bye Alina, hope you are fine <OliverBennett> (Wed, February 09, 2000 at 20:09) bye, I'm taking my genes with me now