
Florida becomes first state to enact DNA privacy law, blocking insurers - coronadisaster
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/florida-becomes-first-state-to-enact-dna-privacy-law-blocking-insurers-from-genetic-data
======
ChrisMarshallNY
I would think the DNA companies would support this.

Right now, I have no plans to ever get a test. My curiosity as to whether I
descended from Dr. Zaius or Cornelius is not strong enough for me to risk
having my information available for things like insurance companies dinging
me.

On another note, I heard that the jury is still out on the lingering
aftereffects of COVID-19, and there's a better than even chance that testing
positive means that we can be discriminated against for a pre-existing
condition for the rest of our lives.

~~~
shadowgovt
It'd be nice if the government banned preexisting condition consideration.
Extremely possible; it would take one law. It'd change the economics of the
market, but would it actually change them enough to make a business model
where people hand you money, for free, while they're still alive unprofitable
or merely less profitable?

~~~
dragonwriter
> It'd be nice if the government banned preexisting condition consideration.

It...has: [https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-aca/pre-existing-
co...](https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/about-the-aca/pre-existing-
conditions/index.html)

------
nullc
What about GINA?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrim...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimination_Act)

> The act bars the use of genetic information in health insurance and
> employment: it prohibits group health plans and health insurers from denying
> coverage to a healthy individual or charging that person higher premiums
> based solely on a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the
> future, and it bars employers from using individuals' genetic information
> when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions.

~~~
johncearls
I had to scroll down way too far to see this. The added value of the Florida
law was at the end of the article. It included:

> long-term-care, life and disability insurers.

------
Hithredin
Great decision! What is the point of insurance if they can predict your health
issues.

~~~
toomuchtodo
To properly price the product. Otherwise, people at higher risk are subsidized
more heavily by people at lower risk.

 _This isn’t about healthcare insurance (which is protected against the use of
DNA data by federal statute)._

If you’re at higher risk of early death or needing extended long term care,
even through no fault of your own, shouldn’t you have to pay more for these
optional products? That’s what insurance premiums are for: to appropriately
price risk.

~~~
cure
> To properly price the product. Otherwise, people at higher risk are
> subsidized more heavily by people at lower risk.

But that's the very definition of insurance: spread the risk over the entire
pool.

US health insurance does not work this way, and it's part of the reason that
system is so messed up and super expensive.

~~~
umvi
Right, but people that have gotten into a lot of car accidents pay higher
premiums than people with accident-free records.

Insurance is not socialism. If my risk of getting into a car accident is low,
shouldn't I pay low premiums? Why should I subsidize bad drivers?

~~~
isbvhodnvemrwvn
Why should you pay higher premiums for color of skin or sexual orientation?
After all you don't choose these. Same goes for your DNA.

I think we already have precedents which go further. With ADA you have to
provide reasonable accommodation for disabled people. Some of them are
disabled purely by chance, but some are disabled because they are dumb (they
dived head on and are now on a wheelchair). No difference under that law.

~~~
toomuchtodo
In some circumstances (life, disability, and long term care insurance are not
compulsory nor necessary in all situations), you should pay for risk you
incur, whether by choice or not.

This isn’t about race or sex (and the discrimination argument made), but the
underlying genetics that present as those traits (and any risks, such as
premature death or the need for extended assisted care, that come along for
the ride).

Using systems like social security and universal healthcare are better models
if the desire is to ignore identifying and pricing risk (as insurance does)
and spread the costs across the population with less admin overhead.

------
Animats
_But the prohibition doesn’t apply to life, disability or long-term care
coverage._

So it's meaningless unless you buy an individual non-Affordable Care Act
policy.

~~~
huntermeyer
Did you read the article? That's the current federal law.

Florida is extending that federal prohibition, it now applies to long-term-
care, life, and disability insurers.

~~~
paul_f
Nobody reads the articles apparently. This is getting as bad as reddit :-(

------
awinter-py
health is a fascinating area of privacy because

(1) it's one of the best-known and beefiest privacy statutes (HIPAA)

(2) you have a legit negotiation interest in keeping your info private
(wouldn't want to tell an insurer about past history lest they charge you
more)

and (3) insurers can punish you for witholding information by revoking
coverage when they find out

this is an important step

~~~
Spooky23
> (1) it's one of the best-known and beefiest privacy statutes (HIPAA)

HIPPA protects you from gossiping staff, everything else is fantasy thinking.

When my wife miscarried and was hospitalized from an ectopic pregnancy,
sufficient PII was available through various channels for enfamil to send a
“Welcome Baby” biz via fedex on the would-be due date.

~~~
elliekelly
I’m so sorry. I hear advertising stories like this more and more frequently
and I wonder when the US will at least ban targeted advertising based on
health data - actual and inferred. It‘s despicable.

~~~
Spooky23
Thanks, I appreciate the thought.

We felt really violated by this, and I ended up buying the marketing list in
question for my zip code to understand what happened better. It’s unlikely
anything will change for the better. The scrubbing of identity data is pretty
easy to reverse engineer by design, as the stream of data is used by
pharmaceutical companies, insurance subrogation, etc to do all sorts of
things. A pharmaceutical sales rep has a scorecard for your doctor — they bpm
now how many scripts were written and filled. The people who gather
prescription data have your prescription before your pharmacy does.

Some states have fed things like Medicaid claim data to companies to mesh
against data from insurers to build models designed to target opioid abuse. By
correlating events or behaviors tied to abuse to diagnoses, predictive models
can be built from unprivileged data. (Remember when Target predicted someone’s
pregnancy before they knew a few years ago?)

------
zmmmmm
I really wish strong protections would be adopted universally for all forms of
discrimmination based on genetics. There is an amazing amount of value to be
unlocked but we will never get there if people have to roll a giant dice to
access their genetic information. I wish I could have any faith that insurance
companies would see the longer term benefit in enabling people to freely learn
about their health risks and manage them. However I have observed completely
the opposite so far - people with very mild genetic results being denied
completely unrelated insurance because an insurance algorithm auto-banned
them.

------
bitwize
Interesting. Florida became the home of "Florida Man" because it is
notoriously _lax_ on privacy restrictions in another area (arrest records).

~~~
nichos
It's often credited as being one of the most "free" states, with things like
information and no income tax.

------
dooglius
Does the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act not already cover this?

~~~
elliekelly
Unfortunately it does not. The definition of “biometric identifiers” is pretty
narrow: finger print, iris scans, facial geometry, and voice recognition. IIRC
genetic information is specifically _excluded_ from the definition as are a
host of medical-related types of data (x-rays, for example).

------
dkural
Relevant background:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrim...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrimination_Act)

------
bozoUser
I hope this California bill[0] soon gets enacted into law, that would give
extra protection to the residents against selling a customers data without
written consent. Written consent is big here!!

[0] [https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-
aler...](https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-
alert/article240227106.html))

------
jmpman
Can we add this to the constitution?

------
ausbah
"Federal law prevents health insurers from using genetic information in
underwriting policies and in setting premiums, but the prohibition doesn’t
apply to life, disability or long-term care coverage."

------
coronadisaster
My profile says that I posted this link 11 hours ago, but the front page says
that I posted it 9 hours ago... that was done to boost the post, I guess? (I'm
not sure when I posted it)

------
Vaslo
It’s like that film Gattaca is becoming reality

