What do you think of this? States are drawing samples of the blood of every newborn and keeping it for up to 23 years, and are able to sell it or distribute it to whoever they want for the purpose of DNA experimentation, testing, the maintenance of a DNA database, or whatever.
That is insane. The state has no right to do this. How in the heck does custody of the blood get transferred from our private medical providers to the government?????? We've gone from: -Drawing the blood to test for diseases -Taking some for medical research -Handing it off to government for law enforcement purposes There is one known case where the government has used the blood of a 9 year old child (that was taken when he was an infant) to gather evidence against the kid's father in a sexual assault case. Since the state already owned the blood sample, they did not have to go through the court to get permission. A pediatrician and bioethicist said an unwillingness to participate in research programs reflects larger trends, including more emphasis on the individual and less on contributing to the general good. Personally, I'm not inclined to be lectured by the suspect institutions of medicine and government on the subject of "the general good."
I was unaware that this was going on, but there have been voluntary "cord blood banks" set up around the country to bank cord blood from births in some states, but as far as I know, this was/is voluntary and the parents have to sign a document and pay a fee to have it done. This was originally to be used in case the child developed genetic diseases unknown at the time of birth. It should always be illegal to sell ones blood to third parties, although I think it is done with blood donations at blood banks if it is not used for transfusion purposes. I have also read of the Chinese government buying the blood sent to reference labs concerning pregnancy testing and genetic testing. That might actually be what this is about. No one knows what the Chinese do with the blood or why they want it, but the conspiracy folks believe it could be to develop a biodisease of some sort that target specific gene groups, ethnic group, or racial group. Who knows? Somebody is making money or doing something nefarious with the DNA though.
I read the fine print when I went in to give blood recently and left without donating when it was required I consent to giving my blood for research if they wanted it. So much for the blood shortage.
Yup. The commercial says "Roll Up Your Sleeve To Save Lives," while the reality is "Sold To The Highest Bidder."
I had tons of blood draws when I was in cancer treatment. I signed papers saying they could use the blood and any tissue removed for research. IBC is a rare cancer so if any of my cells can help with research I'm all in. As far as the state keeping newborn blood samples... apparently it varies by state and in some states parents can request that the samples are destroyed after newborn testing. Here's the NIH paper... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3065077/
Back when my kids were in grade school, they were trying to get parents to sign them up for finger printing 'for their safety'. ??????? I said NO.
The issue (as I understand it) is that for newborn blood, it's Opt Out rather than Opt In AND the parents have no idea that it's being kept in the first place, so they don't even know that there's anything to Opt Out of. They are told that taking blood is a "standard procedure" to test for diseases. Then (in some cases) the hospital turns it over to the state without the parent's knowledge.
Those are the states that are gonna mandate full disclosure on the part of private corporations because they're "looking out for us."
When I had my sons back in the day, the hospital took full hand prints and foot prints of the babies, and my finger prints. I got copies of them. I guess I don't see the problem with the retention of blood samples. I'm not big on conspiracy theories so I wouldn't care if they retained it.
Since we touched on blood donations at blood centers, I didn't mean they do no good. Blood donors save lives of trauma patients, cancer patients, and surgical patients every day, as well as many others. What I meant was that not all blood get used and that gets sold to research and reagent companies before it gets too old and is useless. If you are AB blood type, I would recommend giving apheresis blood only, as the cells are usually discarded. If you are type O or A, almost all, if not all, of the blood is used for patients and saves many lives. If you are B, most of the blood will get used for patients as well. The issue is with infant blood, and that should be at the discretion of the parents until the person is 18, then they should have the right to have it discarded if they see fit and the samples still exist. Most of the real research is done on aborted fetuses, and the "mother" has no say over what happens then as far as I know. It is considered discarded surgical tissue.
Here when my kids were born, they did foot prints for identification. I have heard of babies switched by mistake. No fingerprints.
My healthcare provider was taking blood samples for genetic research is what they were saying. I opted out because if they found I was genetically predisposed to some kind of condition, they might decide not to treat it because of my age and the expense involved on their part.