Green, Robert C., and Mr. George J. Annas. “The genetic privacy of presidential candidates.” The New England journal of medicine 359.21 (2008): 2192.
Dr. Robert C. Green of the Department of Neurology and Epidemiology at the Boston University and author of books and articles, explains how the DNA will be harvested and examined to establish the information that is genetically risk and be used for or against individuals who want to be president. He uses different examples to show the way the press has perceived the health status of presidential candidates as a fair game.
The author explains that it the right of the public to know about the future risk at which the presidential candidate can conduct diseases as a significant indicator of fitness for office. He uses different examples like the one-page medical summary released by President-Elect Barack Obama and the information published by Senator McCain. Dr. Robert reports that in the future, the candidates for presidential seats could give information about their genomes for them to give factors that are to winning elections.
Cohen, Joshua T., Peter J. Neumann, and Milton C. Weinstein. “Does preventive care save money? Health economics and presidential candidates.” New England Journal of Medicine 358.7 (2008): 661-663.
The author, Joshua T. Cohen, explains how health care is an issue of concern when it comes to one to become a president. In the article, he gives different ways in which the presidential candidates focus on prevention and wellness, not sickness like Hillary Clinton. The commentaries explain that indeed there are many ways to using less money and improving the health of the people through prevention. Prevention is said to be a significant source of cost savings in health care. It is supported by President Barack Obama, who argues out that small amount is spent on prevention and public health. The article expresses that broad generalizations made by the presidential candidates do save the people.
Ambriscoe, Jaclyn G. “Massachusetts Genetic Bill of Rights: chipping away at genetic privacy.” Suffolk UL Rev. 45 (2011): 1177.
The author shows how the privacy and dignity of the people of the country are being whittled away by unnoticed steps. It explains how the average human loses its DNA between 40 and 100 strands of hair each day. It affects everyone and discourages the presidential candidates for those that are old who may not be able to serve the people well. Hair, skin and saliva are the significant methods that the author explains that individuals can lose their identity. DNA has become an undeniable method of identifying an individual. The author uses different ways to show the importance of DNA.
Joh, Elizabeth E. “DNA Theft: Recognizing the Crime on Nonconsensual Genetic Collection and Testing.” BUL Rev. 91 (2011): 665.
The article by Elizabeth E. Joh, who is an author of books and articles, gives a clear explanation of the theft of DNA. She indicates that it is not good to leave behind genetic information since third parties may retrieve it. She gives an example of a third party as police and also members of a political party. For presidential candidates, DNA can be used to discover and publish any inclination to diseases that might render the candidate for presidency unsuitable for office. The article explains the importance of keeping DNA safe. Additionally, the article uses different examples to show the different cases the DNA can cause when in the hands of a third party.
Hotz, Robert Lee. “Gene screen: will we vote against a candidate’s DNA?.” Wall Street Journal (2008): A14.
The author of this exciting article, Robert Lee Hotz, expresses how fast the technology is developing and the changes that will see the presidential candidates be judged not just by looking at their characters but also on the possibilities that are revealed in their genes. The article shows how efficient the best candidates will be chosen since people will vote according to the genes of the individuals. Altogether, in the coming days, people will vote against the gene.