Yumi Mita
Mr. Ippolito
Forensics AB ODD
8 December 2015
Current Event 8: Review
Homeland Security's Science & Technology Directorate. "Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 October 2015. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151022130341.htm>.
A newly technology known as a Rapid DNA was developed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). It can be used to assist first responders and law enforcements when there are a mass of people in chaos and in need to contact their family or verify their deaths; possible scenarios involve massacre, refugee camps around the world, or at immigration offices. The S&T Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA) Resilient Systems Division (RSD) Program Manager Chris Miles explains "responders have often used DNA to make familial connections, but the process typically takes multiple days to process in a forensics laboratory and can take up to a few months to get the results". Midst conflict, time and resources become scarce. With DNA results’ time-consuming process, people often become apprehensive and frustrated; worsening the situation. However, with this "Rapid DNA technology can be used in the field to confirm kinship between a parent and a child with 99.5 percent likelihood of relationship in 90 minutes” (Miles).
Given this positive result, it is not surprising to know many entities across the homeland security enterprise have expressed the need for this type of technology. This technology came about when the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approached S&T about a solution more reliable than documentary evidence and interviews to help verify blood relationships in refugee camps while joining forces the Departments of Defense and Justice to develop and test such technology. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and U.S. Customs and Border Protection also support their development when required for disaster response and law enforcement missions. Not only government services, but also the local medical examiners have expressed their interest in Rapid DNA technology. Soon after S&T made public of the technology, the Massachusetts Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (MA-OCME) purchased it to be prepared for any disasters or life endangering situations.
In order to produce Rapid DNA that was functional and affordable, S&T found two companies, NetBio and IntegenX, that made it possible. Since DNA testing by traditional forensic laboratories typically costs around $500 per sample, the goal for Rapid DNA to cost is less than $100 to process a sample. Today it is already down to $235 per sample and the costs will continue to fall as production increases.In addition to its cost reduction, S&T constructed Rapid DNA with a 'privacy by design' approach. It requires identity authentication for operators to check data. Moreover, Rapid DNA only looks at DNA locations required to confirm a match and does not specifics: physical traits, race, ethnicity, or illness.
The capabilities Rapid DNA instill have an immense effect on the society today since immigration issues and mass conflicts like terrorism occur on daily bases. With this tool, people will be able to figure out each other’s whereabouts more easily. I thought this invention would be perfected soon, and many, not only the authority but also locals, will begin to make use of it. I think the article did a good job of informing the innovation by presenting the background and quotes from its producers.
6 comments:
This review clearly explained the importance and need for a technology that identifies DNA and relationship between people in the state of an emergency. The review also explains that there is technology that the Department of Homeland Security is working on that would help in a situation of chaos where a mass group of people are in need of contacting their family members. Also, the review brought light upon two specific companies, NetBio and IntegenX, that are in the process of developing this technology to be more affordable and accurate. There is definitely a need for a technology that can identify the relation of one person to another in a shorter amount of time especially considering the past attacks and shootings that have taken place in our world. Technology like this would be of critical use in a situation such as these.
Overall, the review was interesting and easy to follow but there were a few grammar mistakes that could have been easily fixed. Also, I would have liked to have known more about instances where this DNA technology has been successful and under what circumstances it was used for. I was surprised to know that we do not already have technology that can identify a person’s DNA in a short timespan and this article was very eye opening to me.
Homeland Security's Science & Technology Directorate. "Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 October 2015. .
I enjoyed the way Yumi wrote her article in a comprehensible way. She explained step by step how the process works, how it is improving and what problem it solves. It was also nice that she gave the device’s history and how Rapid DNA went to two companies for funding and development. The fact that this device has even been created is, in and of itself is an incredible feat. Yumi also revealed that they are decreasing the cost of the whole procedure. I like the way Yumi related this new technology to current events. I can envision it being used to locate family members of Syrian refugees in various European countries and even in the US and Canada. It may also have been helpful during the recent incident in California or in the recent plane crash in Russia.
Yumi’s article review was beautifully presented and I have hardly any complaints but I was left with many questions. It is not Yumi’s fault because after reading the article, I still had some questions. It is nice that the cost of this technology is decreasing but who pays for this technology to reunite someone with his or her loved one? the taxpayers? the person requesting the information? the Police Department or the Department of Homeland Security? Also, the device does not collect, store or use names so if there is a match between you and your loved one who is in a refugee camp, how does it know where your relative is? ‘Somewhere’ in a refugee camp? At least that narrows it down a bit. Another thing that can be improved in the summary is to tell us how the machine is an improvement from the old way of performing this task. I realize that it is a whole lot faster and less expensive but how so? How exactly does it work?
I never knew that there were so many problems associated with not being able to identify your loved one at a mass death or in a refugee camp. I can imagine that the location would be rife with restless, paranoid people, frantic to find their family members and I hope I never have to experience this situation. For this reason, I can see that not being able to confirm DNA could lead to more problems than not solving the case quickly. I believe there needs to be multiple task forces assigned to handle each situation: one to figure out the circumstances of the predicament and one to handle the relatives of the victims. This new device will certainly help mitigate the associated agony one way or the other.
Homeland Security's Science & Technology Directorate. "Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 October 2015.
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151022130341.htm.
I read the article “Bringing a New Biometric Capability to Verify Families Separated by Crisis.” Yumi did a very good critique on the article. She included ways that this new technology has improved, such as how Rapid DNA can verify DNA in 90 minutes as opposed to the few months from the older tech. The Rapid DNA technology was made by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). I liked how Yumi included how this device got invented. She wrote, “This technology came about when the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services approached S&T about a solution more reliable than documentary evidence and interviews to help verify blood relationships in refugee camps while joining forces the Departments of Defense and Justice to develop and test such technology.” The article made good choices on the quotes it used as well. Although the article was short, the quotes had good information such as the importance of this technology on all of our lives and current problems.
I think Yumi could have worked on her critique of the article a little more since most of it is a summary of the article with one small paragraph explaining the significance of the technology as well reviewing the article. The article could have some description of how the device looks like and the ways/situations that this device would not work, or in what ways can this device be improved on.
I found this article interesting and how much we are improving in making these devices to aid investigators. However, it would be more interesting to see a more up to date article since this article was a few months old so I would rather see an article about the ways that this tech has been improved.
I enjoyed the review and the article “Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis” and learned a lot about a new technique I have never heard of. I liked many aspects of this review. First, I really liked how the author of the review gave a clear and thorough description of this new process called “Rapid DNA” and coherently explained its purpose. Also, I liked how Yumi gave specific information and data collected from this process, it helped me understand it better. I also liked how Yumi brought in quotes on this topic, specifically from the RSD where Program Manager Chris discussed the benefits of this new method. Lastly, I liked how she talked about this topic on a wide scale and its effects on other companies and businesses. Overall, this article provided strong information.
Although this article had good information, there were some flaws. First, Yumi summarized the article well and gave good data but did not critique the article as much. Also, even though the article and review provided good statistics on this technology and its benefits, I did not get a clear image in my head of what I thought it looked like. I think I would have understood the article and review better if they described what this looked like. These mistakes are minor and do not take away from the good parts in the article.
I learned a lot from reading this article and review. First, I learned so much about a new process I did not know of and how beneficial it is in society- it could solve problems much faster. Also, I learned about other companies and their views on this method. Knowing this will change my views because I now known of a successful process created and its potential benefits on society. Lastly, I enjoyed reading this article and the review and learned interesting information that changed my views on society.
I think Yumi did a really good job in summarizing the article. I like how she explained the importance of this technology/device which is that it can identify DNA and then see the relationship between a parent and children. I also like how she gave realistic emergency examples like the immigration crisis where the device would be helpful. I like that she gave us the percentage of how likely the device will confirm the blood relationship between a parent and child. It helps me understand how accurate this technology is. The review was easy to read and understand.
One thing Yumi could have done better is critique the article a little more because her paragraph is mostly a summary of the article. She could have also explained how the prices are going to fall over time and in what ways this device can be improved.
This article was very interesting. I know that when DNA is examined it can take months to get the results back and so it is good that the Rapid DNA was created because now it only takes 90 minutes to confirm the blood relationship between a child and a parent. I think that this technology will become very useful in future emergencies. Overall, this review was well done.
Homeland Security's Science & Technology Directorate. "Bringing a new biometric capability
to verify families separated by crisis." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 October 2015.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151022130341.htm
Homeland Security's Science & Technology Directorate. "Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 22 October 2015. .
Yumi Mita’s Bringing a new biometric capability to verify families separated by crisis review was written with a unique voice. Her writing was excellent and she organized her ideas well. All ideas were introduced in the same sequence that they were addressed in the article. Mita’s review was also relevant and well-chosen too, since we are currently studying databases in class, such as CODIS, which is used to store DNA and fingerprint profiling. However, she makes it evident that Rapid DNA will not be able to store fingerprints or DNA prints. She utilizes and cites the information from the article well.
While Mita’s current event review was rather lengthy, there were two structural issues that need to be addressed. First of all, all of the paragraphs except for the very last one only summarize the article. Secondly, her relevance paragraph and her critique paragraph are combined into one small block of text at the end. Yumi Mita should have one summary paragraph, one relevance paragraph, and one critique paragraph. It is rather confusing why she decided to do it otherwise. Nonetheless, she wrote a compelling review for an article based on a timely and engaging subject.
Post a Comment