<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_21_1548255</id>
	<title>100,000 Californians To Be Gene Sequenced</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1256142780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:my/.username@@@gmail.com" rel="nofollow">eldavojohn</a> writes <i>"A hundred thousand elderly Californians (average age 65) <a href="http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/23777/">will be gene sequenced by the state</a> using samples of their saliva. This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced, and it is hoped to be a goldmine for genetic maladies &mdash; from cardiovascular diseases to diabetes to even the diseases associated with aging.  Kaiser Permanente patients will be involved, and they are aiming to have half a million samples ready by 2013.  Let's hope that <a href="http://science.slashdot.org/story/08/06/17/2026201/California-Cracks-Down-On-Genetic-Testing">they got permission from the patients' doctors first</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eldavojohn writes " A hundred thousand elderly Californians ( average age 65 ) will be gene sequenced by the state using samples of their saliva .
This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced , and it is hoped to be a goldmine for genetic maladies    from cardiovascular diseases to diabetes to even the diseases associated with aging .
Kaiser Permanente patients will be involved , and they are aiming to have half a million samples ready by 2013 .
Let 's hope that they got permission from the patients ' doctors first .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eldavojohn writes "A hundred thousand elderly Californians (average age 65) will be gene sequenced by the state using samples of their saliva.
This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced, and it is hoped to be a goldmine for genetic maladies — from cardiovascular diseases to diabetes to even the diseases associated with aging.
Kaiser Permanente patients will be involved, and they are aiming to have half a million samples ready by 2013.
Let's hope that they got permission from the patients' doctors first.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825081</id>
	<title>Don't you mean.....</title>
	<author>netruner</author>
	<datestamp>1256147760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i> Let's hope that they got permission from the patients' doctors first.</i> <br> <br>
I would think that getting the <i>patients'</i> permission would be a little more important.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's hope that they got permission from the patients ' doctors first .
I would think that getting the patients ' permission would be a little more important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Let's hope that they got permission from the patients' doctors first.
I would think that getting the patients' permission would be a little more important.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29831699</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256143800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they should start their own insurance corporation which caters to their unique problems? Why should I do their thinking for them, and why are you insulting them by suggesting they can't solve their own problems except by suicide?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should start their own insurance corporation which caters to their unique problems ?
Why should I do their thinking for them , and why are you insulting them by suggesting they ca n't solve their own problems except by suicide ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should start their own insurance corporation which caters to their unique problems?
Why should I do their thinking for them, and why are you insulting them by suggesting they can't solve their own problems except by suicide?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826127</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825003</id>
	<title>Consent</title>
	<author>kidsizedcoffin</author>
	<datestamp>1256147460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't see it in the article, but was consent obtained from each of these patients to use their DNA in this study?  Or is this one of those OPT-OUT programs that companies think consumers like?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't see it in the article , but was consent obtained from each of these patients to use their DNA in this study ?
Or is this one of those OPT-OUT programs that companies think consumers like ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't see it in the article, but was consent obtained from each of these patients to use their DNA in this study?
Or is this one of those OPT-OUT programs that companies think consumers like?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787</id>
	<title>Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't live in California. Just what I need, some company taking and patenting my genetic sequence and suing me for using it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't live in California .
Just what I need , some company taking and patenting my genetic sequence and suing me for using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't live in California.
Just what I need, some company taking and patenting my genetic sequence and suing me for using it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825189</id>
	<title>Quick, your state needs you!</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1256148180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>California needs samples of saliva.  If you live in California, proceed directly to the capital and spit on the front door.  Your state is counting on you.</p><p>At least that way they can get saliva samples of conservatives.  Of course, in California, that's a sample size of about four, but it's a start...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>California needs samples of saliva .
If you live in California , proceed directly to the capital and spit on the front door .
Your state is counting on you.At least that way they can get saliva samples of conservatives .
Of course , in California , that 's a sample size of about four , but it 's a start.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>California needs samples of saliva.
If you live in California, proceed directly to the capital and spit on the front door.
Your state is counting on you.At least that way they can get saliva samples of conservatives.
Of course, in California, that's a sample size of about four, but it's a start...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826127</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1256151720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can claim Godwin if you want, but the topic is so close to eugenics and eliminating the untermensch anyway, it's hard to avoid.</p><p>What do you propose that those people whose premiums woud be impossibly high (or who are insurance pariahs) should do? Euthanasia? (illegal anyway).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can claim Godwin if you want , but the topic is so close to eugenics and eliminating the untermensch anyway , it 's hard to avoid.What do you propose that those people whose premiums woud be impossibly high ( or who are insurance pariahs ) should do ?
Euthanasia ? ( illegal anyway ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can claim Godwin if you want, but the topic is so close to eugenics and eliminating the untermensch anyway, it's hard to avoid.What do you propose that those people whose premiums woud be impossibly high (or who are insurance pariahs) should do?
Euthanasia? (illegal anyway).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>BlowHole666</author>
	<datestamp>1256148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Prove we are overpopulated. Did someone find an Earth manual someplace that says only 7billion humans can be supported? I am sure wise ass will come back and say "We are overpopulated because people are starving in ". Well people starve in American and Americans are considered some of the fattest. So I think maybe we are not overpopulated we just have a food delivery problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Prove we are overpopulated .
Did someone find an Earth manual someplace that says only 7billion humans can be supported ?
I am sure wise ass will come back and say " We are overpopulated because people are starving in " .
Well people starve in American and Americans are considered some of the fattest .
So I think maybe we are not overpopulated we just have a food delivery problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prove we are overpopulated.
Did someone find an Earth manual someplace that says only 7billion humans can be supported?
I am sure wise ass will come back and say "We are overpopulated because people are starving in ".
Well people starve in American and Americans are considered some of the fattest.
So I think maybe we are not overpopulated we just have a food delivery problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</id>
	<title>The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The good thing is that this kind of data will help us develop tests to predict the occurrence of many diseases, and perhaps understand their causes better.
<br> <br>
The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.
<br> <br>
Where it gets ugly, is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses, and potentially selective abortions. I'm not personally against this. We're overpopulated anyways, but some people clearly don't like that idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The good thing is that this kind of data will help us develop tests to predict the occurrence of many diseases , and perhaps understand their causes better .
The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually * require * you to get a DNA sample , and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases .
Where it gets ugly , is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses , and potentially selective abortions .
I 'm not personally against this .
We 're overpopulated anyways , but some people clearly do n't like that idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The good thing is that this kind of data will help us develop tests to predict the occurrence of many diseases, and perhaps understand their causes better.
The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.
Where it gets ugly, is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses, and potentially selective abortions.
I'm not personally against this.
We're overpopulated anyways, but some people clearly don't like that idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825011</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1256147520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.</p></div><p>Look at it on the positive side: consumers can get the same data too, and I'm sure that if they get accurate enough the people who don't actually need the insurance can either skip it completely, or go for cheaper "accident only" coverage.  If the insurance companies tighten their grip too much and try to only sell to people who absolutely don't need it, they may find that they end up eliminating their customer base.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually * require * you to get a DNA sample , and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.Look at it on the positive side : consumers can get the same data too , and I 'm sure that if they get accurate enough the people who do n't actually need the insurance can either skip it completely , or go for cheaper " accident only " coverage .
If the insurance companies tighten their grip too much and try to only sell to people who absolutely do n't need it , they may find that they end up eliminating their customer base .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.Look at it on the positive side: consumers can get the same data too, and I'm sure that if they get accurate enough the people who don't actually need the insurance can either skip it completely, or go for cheaper "accident only" coverage.
If the insurance companies tighten their grip too much and try to only sell to people who absolutely don't need it, they may find that they end up eliminating their customer base.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832529</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>1s44c</author>
	<datestamp>1256243100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Prove we are overpopulated.</p></div><p>I can't prove we are overpopulated right now, but I can prove we are either overpopulated now or will be in the near future.</p><p>Exponential growth is not stable in any finite system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Prove we are overpopulated.I ca n't prove we are overpopulated right now , but I can prove we are either overpopulated now or will be in the near future.Exponential growth is not stable in any finite system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prove we are overpopulated.I can't prove we are overpopulated right now, but I can prove we are either overpopulated now or will be in the near future.Exponential growth is not stable in any finite system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825439</id>
	<title>Illegal to Discriminate</title>
	<author>Schickeneder</author>
	<datestamp>1256149260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As of 2008, it is illegal for insurance companies to require any information about a DNA sample.</p><p>Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act</p><p><a href="http://www.genome.gov/10002328" title="genome.gov" rel="nofollow">http://www.genome.gov/10002328</a> [genome.gov]</p><p>One of the last things Bush did in Office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As of 2008 , it is illegal for insurance companies to require any information about a DNA sample.Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Acthttp : //www.genome.gov/10002328 [ genome.gov ] One of the last things Bush did in Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As of 2008, it is illegal for insurance companies to require any information about a DNA sample.Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Acthttp://www.genome.gov/10002328 [genome.gov]One of the last things Bush did in Office.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826103</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>bzipitidoo</author>
	<datestamp>1256151660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Knowledge is power.  All in all, it's good that we are learning about ourselves.  Ultimately it gives us more choices.

</p><p>But power always cuts two ways.  Insurance companies won't be able to resist the temptation to abuse this knowledge.  Though they aren't qualified, they'll pass judgment on genes, deciding which ones are "bad" and "good".  They'll take a lot of shades of gray and paint them black and white, and they won't get it right.  Suppose they find something like a correlation between baldness and skin cancer?  Suddenly, being bald might be "bad".  There's too much chance that those of us so unfortunate as to have "bad" genes will be punished for it.  Also possible is the use of it to make certain no one can be right.  Those who've had a bit of bad luck-- injured in an accident, say-- might suddenly be informed that they've been found to have some genetic condition that voids their coverage.  For those whose conditions really are debilitating, that's punishment enough without some faceless committee sitting in judgment and further reducing their chances because they've been judged not a good bet.

</p><p>We so need a system where such judgments are not needlessly harsh and incentives needlessly perverse.  Too many cures are overlooked in favor of much more profitable chronic care needed to handle symptoms.  For instance, the standard treatment for high blood pressure is to take medication-- daily, for the rest of your life.  Life and evolution are quite harsh enough, we don't need Neo-Eugenics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Knowledge is power .
All in all , it 's good that we are learning about ourselves .
Ultimately it gives us more choices .
But power always cuts two ways .
Insurance companies wo n't be able to resist the temptation to abuse this knowledge .
Though they are n't qualified , they 'll pass judgment on genes , deciding which ones are " bad " and " good " .
They 'll take a lot of shades of gray and paint them black and white , and they wo n't get it right .
Suppose they find something like a correlation between baldness and skin cancer ?
Suddenly , being bald might be " bad " .
There 's too much chance that those of us so unfortunate as to have " bad " genes will be punished for it .
Also possible is the use of it to make certain no one can be right .
Those who 've had a bit of bad luck-- injured in an accident , say-- might suddenly be informed that they 've been found to have some genetic condition that voids their coverage .
For those whose conditions really are debilitating , that 's punishment enough without some faceless committee sitting in judgment and further reducing their chances because they 've been judged not a good bet .
We so need a system where such judgments are not needlessly harsh and incentives needlessly perverse .
Too many cures are overlooked in favor of much more profitable chronic care needed to handle symptoms .
For instance , the standard treatment for high blood pressure is to take medication-- daily , for the rest of your life .
Life and evolution are quite harsh enough , we do n't need Neo-Eugenics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Knowledge is power.
All in all, it's good that we are learning about ourselves.
Ultimately it gives us more choices.
But power always cuts two ways.
Insurance companies won't be able to resist the temptation to abuse this knowledge.
Though they aren't qualified, they'll pass judgment on genes, deciding which ones are "bad" and "good".
They'll take a lot of shades of gray and paint them black and white, and they won't get it right.
Suppose they find something like a correlation between baldness and skin cancer?
Suddenly, being bald might be "bad".
There's too much chance that those of us so unfortunate as to have "bad" genes will be punished for it.
Also possible is the use of it to make certain no one can be right.
Those who've had a bit of bad luck-- injured in an accident, say-- might suddenly be informed that they've been found to have some genetic condition that voids their coverage.
For those whose conditions really are debilitating, that's punishment enough without some faceless committee sitting in judgment and further reducing their chances because they've been judged not a good bet.
We so need a system where such judgments are not needlessly harsh and incentives needlessly perverse.
Too many cures are overlooked in favor of much more profitable chronic care needed to handle symptoms.
For instance, the standard treatment for high blood pressure is to take medication-- daily, for the rest of your life.
Life and evolution are quite harsh enough, we don't need Neo-Eugenics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832241</id>
	<title>Re:With or without permission?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the Wikipedia article on HeLa cells, a human cell line derived from cancer cells taken from a woman, Henrietta Lacks, and commmercialized without her consent:</p><p>"The cells were propagated by George Otto Gey without Lacks' knowledge or permission (neither she nor her family gave permission)[1] and later commercialized, although never patented in their original form. Then, as now, there was no requirement to inform a patient, or their relatives, about such matters because discarded material, or material obtained during surgery, diagnosis or therapy was the property of the physician and/or medical institution. This issue and Ms. Lacks' situation was brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California. The court ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized."</p><p>Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Wikipedia article on HeLa cells , a human cell line derived from cancer cells taken from a woman , Henrietta Lacks , and commmercialized without her consent : " The cells were propagated by George Otto Gey without Lacks ' knowledge or permission ( neither she nor her family gave permission ) [ 1 ] and later commercialized , although never patented in their original form .
Then , as now , there was no requirement to inform a patient , or their relatives , about such matters because discarded material , or material obtained during surgery , diagnosis or therapy was the property of the physician and/or medical institution .
This issue and Ms. Lacks ' situation was brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California .
The court ruled that a person 's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized .
" Link : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Wikipedia article on HeLa cells, a human cell line derived from cancer cells taken from a woman, Henrietta Lacks, and commmercialized without her consent:"The cells were propagated by George Otto Gey without Lacks' knowledge or permission (neither she nor her family gave permission)[1] and later commercialized, although never patented in their original form.
Then, as now, there was no requirement to inform a patient, or their relatives, about such matters because discarded material, or material obtained during surgery, diagnosis or therapy was the property of the physician and/or medical institution.
This issue and Ms. Lacks' situation was brought up in the Supreme Court of California case of Moore v. Regents of the University of California.
The court ruled that a person's discarded tissue and cells are not their property and can be commercialized.
"Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826605</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1256153580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Predisposition to death." I'm really surprised that some insurance company hasn't tried this one yet.</p><p>"So, your great grand mother, how healthy is she?"<br>"Well, she died about 30 years ago"<br>[checks off box]<br>"And your grand mother?"<br>"She died just last year."<br>[checks off another box].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Predisposition to death .
" I 'm really surprised that some insurance company has n't tried this one yet .
" So , your great grand mother , how healthy is she ?
" " Well , she died about 30 years ago " [ checks off box ] " And your grand mother ?
" " She died just last year .
" [ checks off another box ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Predisposition to death.
" I'm really surprised that some insurance company hasn't tried this one yet.
"So, your great grand mother, how healthy is she?
""Well, she died about 30 years ago"[checks off box]"And your grand mother?
""She died just last year.
"[checks off another box].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825155</id>
	<title>This is not frikin sequencing !</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not sequencing.<br>It's using a microarray to assay for known SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms).</p><p>Side note: you should have the right to have analysis done independently of the assayer.  An Medical Degree is no not necessary to evaluate the results.   Computer algorightms tied to a website can do a better job.  There is no evidence that and M.D. is required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not sequencing.It 's using a microarray to assay for known SNPs ( single nucleotide polymorphisms ) .Side note : you should have the right to have analysis done independently of the assayer .
An Medical Degree is no not necessary to evaluate the results .
Computer algorightms tied to a website can do a better job .
There is no evidence that and M.D .
is required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not sequencing.It's using a microarray to assay for known SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms).Side note: you should have the right to have analysis done independently of the assayer.
An Medical Degree is no not necessary to evaluate the results.
Computer algorightms tied to a website can do a better job.
There is no evidence that and M.D.
is required.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826409</id>
	<title>Re:Not sequencing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anonymous coward is correct. This is genotyping, which is orders of magnitude less resource-intensive than gene sequencing.</p><p>Genotyping | sequencing || driving down the highway | Lewis and Clark's journey</p><p>Sequencing is pathfinding (they are not doing this). Genotyping is exploring the path that you already know is there (this is what they are doing). On the sequencing front, there is currently a 1000 genomes project - a massive collaboration of worldwide importance due to its difficulty and expense. On the other hand, genotyping 100,000 people is done all the time (heart attack GWAS, etc). The two concepts are enormously different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anonymous coward is correct .
This is genotyping , which is orders of magnitude less resource-intensive than gene sequencing.Genotyping | sequencing | | driving down the highway | Lewis and Clark 's journeySequencing is pathfinding ( they are not doing this ) .
Genotyping is exploring the path that you already know is there ( this is what they are doing ) .
On the sequencing front , there is currently a 1000 genomes project - a massive collaboration of worldwide importance due to its difficulty and expense .
On the other hand , genotyping 100,000 people is done all the time ( heart attack GWAS , etc ) .
The two concepts are enormously different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anonymous coward is correct.
This is genotyping, which is orders of magnitude less resource-intensive than gene sequencing.Genotyping | sequencing || driving down the highway | Lewis and Clark's journeySequencing is pathfinding (they are not doing this).
Genotyping is exploring the path that you already know is there (this is what they are doing).
On the sequencing front, there is currently a 1000 genomes project - a massive collaboration of worldwide importance due to its difficulty and expense.
On the other hand, genotyping 100,000 people is done all the time (heart attack GWAS, etc).
The two concepts are enormously different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825351</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm all for screening unborn fetuses and aborting them as long as we are alowed to screen the born ones and abort them as well.</p><p>"I'm sorry Sir, but your parents feel after 30 years of living at home you are unfit to live, please come with me."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm all for screening unborn fetuses and aborting them as long as we are alowed to screen the born ones and abort them as well .
" I 'm sorry Sir , but your parents feel after 30 years of living at home you are unfit to live , please come with me .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm all for screening unborn fetuses and aborting them as long as we are alowed to screen the born ones and abort them as well.
"I'm sorry Sir, but your parents feel after 30 years of living at home you are unfit to live, please come with me.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825341</id>
	<title>s/Sequenced/Genotyped</title>
	<author>ianbean</author>
	<datestamp>1256148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe everyone should read the article.  They're being genotyped (700,000 SNPs by Affymetrix array) not sequenced.  There is a significant difference...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe everyone should read the article .
They 're being genotyped ( 700,000 SNPs by Affymetrix array ) not sequenced .
There is a significant difference.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe everyone should read the article.
They're being genotyped (700,000 SNPs by Affymetrix array) not sequenced.
There is a significant difference...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813</id>
	<title>Not sequencing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256146680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This not (gene or genome) sequencing. Rather, it picks up single nucleotide changes (SNPs). Still valuable information, but no new mutation will be discovered with this method.</p><p>Sequencing would be a couple of orders of magnitude more expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This not ( gene or genome ) sequencing .
Rather , it picks up single nucleotide changes ( SNPs ) .
Still valuable information , but no new mutation will be discovered with this method.Sequencing would be a couple of orders of magnitude more expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This not (gene or genome) sequencing.
Rather, it picks up single nucleotide changes (SNPs).
Still valuable information, but no new mutation will be discovered with this method.Sequencing would be a couple of orders of magnitude more expensive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256147220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were black... and if evolution is real... then that's all the proof you need that niggers are a more primitive throwback while the white man and the asian man are more advanced.  This is obvious considering that it was the white man who circled the globe with his technology and encountered the nigger in a primitive tribal state.  It's also obvious considering that even today, after many generations of modern life, the knee grow still has lower test scores, lower income, and higher crime rates, much more than any racism could hope to explain.  They can't help it, after all they had to be introduced to this whole civilization thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were black... and if evolution is real... then that 's all the proof you need that niggers are a more primitive throwback while the white man and the asian man are more advanced .
This is obvious considering that it was the white man who circled the globe with his technology and encountered the nigger in a primitive tribal state .
It 's also obvious considering that even today , after many generations of modern life , the knee grow still has lower test scores , lower income , and higher crime rates , much more than any racism could hope to explain .
They ca n't help it , after all they had to be introduced to this whole civilization thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were black... and if evolution is real... then that's all the proof you need that niggers are a more primitive throwback while the white man and the asian man are more advanced.
This is obvious considering that it was the white man who circled the globe with his technology and encountered the nigger in a primitive tribal state.
It's also obvious considering that even today, after many generations of modern life, the knee grow still has lower test scores, lower income, and higher crime rates, much more than any racism could hope to explain.
They can't help it, after all they had to be introduced to this whole civilization thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826083</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Earth is overpopulated because our technology, which we need in order to support the current number of people, has an unsustainable impact on the environment, which will eventually cause a reduction of the population. Whether you see it this way is of course very subjective: Like you said, we could distribute our resources more efficiently and settle on a less luxurious lifestyle. However, that is wishful thinking. Could've, would've. You can also argue that the environmental impact is not as big or that we'll use technology to handle the consequences. I say we'll see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Earth is overpopulated because our technology , which we need in order to support the current number of people , has an unsustainable impact on the environment , which will eventually cause a reduction of the population .
Whether you see it this way is of course very subjective : Like you said , we could distribute our resources more efficiently and settle on a less luxurious lifestyle .
However , that is wishful thinking .
Could 've , would 've .
You can also argue that the environmental impact is not as big or that we 'll use technology to handle the consequences .
I say we 'll see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Earth is overpopulated because our technology, which we need in order to support the current number of people, has an unsustainable impact on the environment, which will eventually cause a reduction of the population.
Whether you see it this way is of course very subjective: Like you said, we could distribute our resources more efficiently and settle on a less luxurious lifestyle.
However, that is wishful thinking.
Could've, would've.
You can also argue that the environmental impact is not as big or that we'll use technology to handle the consequences.
I say we'll see.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825397</id>
	<title>Likely a scam to support 23 and me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256149140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Likely a scam to support 23 and me</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Likely a scam to support 23 and me</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Likely a scam to support 23 and me</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830119</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>TheSync</author>
	<datestamp>1256127960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>here is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $100 for a doctor's visit that costs $30 for Aetna (even if the poor person can haggle them down to $50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered).</i></p><p>FYI, a <a href="http://www.minuteclinic.com/services/" title="minuteclinic.com">CVS Minuteclinic</a> [minuteclinic.com] exam costs $62.  You need no appointment, and they are open evenings and weekends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>here is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $ 100 for a doctor 's visit that costs $ 30 for Aetna ( even if the poor person can haggle them down to $ 50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered ) .FYI , a CVS Minuteclinic [ minuteclinic.com ] exam costs $ 62 .
You need no appointment , and they are open evenings and weekends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>here is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $100 for a doctor's visit that costs $30 for Aetna (even if the poor person can haggle them down to $50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered).FYI, a CVS Minuteclinic [minuteclinic.com] exam costs $62.
You need no appointment, and they are open evenings and weekends.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826337</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829719</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1256124900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;I'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance? We just need to sequence your genome first. Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease. Good luck with that."</p><p>The nice thing about my health insurance through Kaiser is that they don't screen applications. You're charged an amount based on your age, and that's it. I think you have to fill out a thing about your existing conditions (they won't cover cancer if you have it already, I think) but that's about it.</p><p>What worries me is if these patients' DNA was used without their consent. Yes, it may be in the greater good to steal people's DNA, but Michael Crichton has a reasonably good rebuttal to this in Next.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; I 'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for " You want health insurance ?
We just need to sequence your genome first .
Oh , sorry , you 're going to get Huntingtons disease .
Good luck with that .
" The nice thing about my health insurance through Kaiser is that they do n't screen applications .
You 're charged an amount based on your age , and that 's it .
I think you have to fill out a thing about your existing conditions ( they wo n't cover cancer if you have it already , I think ) but that 's about it.What worries me is if these patients ' DNA was used without their consent .
Yes , it may be in the greater good to steal people 's DNA , but Michael Crichton has a reasonably good rebuttal to this in Next .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;I'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance?
We just need to sequence your genome first.
Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease.
Good luck with that.
"The nice thing about my health insurance through Kaiser is that they don't screen applications.
You're charged an amount based on your age, and that's it.
I think you have to fill out a thing about your existing conditions (they won't cover cancer if you have it already, I think) but that's about it.What worries me is if these patients' DNA was used without their consent.
Yes, it may be in the greater good to steal people's DNA, but Michael Crichton has a reasonably good rebuttal to this in Next.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825185</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Too bad you don't have a Public Option huh AmeriCUNTS??? Hahahahaha, fucking idiot Americans.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad you do n't have a Public Option huh AmeriCUNTS ? ? ?
Hahahahaha , fucking idiot Americans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad you don't have a Public Option huh AmeriCUNTS???
Hahahahaha, fucking idiot Americans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256147760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.</p></div><p>That's only "bad" if you turn out to be predisposed, in which case your higher risk will no longer be subsidized and you'll have to pay fair premiums in proportion to your risk. For the majority who lack such predispositions, however, this is good news, as it means the cost of providing normal insurance will decrease. (And that, via competition, the price should decrease as well.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually * require * you to get a DNA sample , and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.That 's only " bad " if you turn out to be predisposed , in which case your higher risk will no longer be subsidized and you 'll have to pay fair premiums in proportion to your risk .
For the majority who lack such predispositions , however , this is good news , as it means the cost of providing normal insurance will decrease .
( And that , via competition , the price should decrease as well .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bad is that private insurance companies are likely to eventually *require* you to get a DNA sample, and possibly reject you if they determine your genes predispose you to old-age diseases.That's only "bad" if you turn out to be predisposed, in which case your higher risk will no longer be subsidized and you'll have to pay fair premiums in proportion to your risk.
For the majority who lack such predispositions, however, this is good news, as it means the cost of providing normal insurance will decrease.
(And that, via competition, the price should decrease as well.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441</id>
	<title>With or without permission?</title>
	<author>Manip</author>
	<datestamp>1256149260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article seems to gloss over this BIG question.... Did they get the patients permission before they scan in their DNA and link it into their medical records?</p><p>If they didn't or aren't, then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals (if any diseases are identified that aren't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance).</p><p>Also breaks the doctor/patient trust entirely since your doctor is more or less stealing from you...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article seems to gloss over this BIG question.... Did they get the patients permission before they scan in their DNA and link it into their medical records ? If they did n't or are n't , then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals ( if any diseases are identified that are n't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance ) .Also breaks the doctor/patient trust entirely since your doctor is more or less stealing from you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article seems to gloss over this BIG question.... Did they get the patients permission before they scan in their DNA and link it into their medical records?If they didn't or aren't, then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals (if any diseases are identified that aren't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance).Also breaks the doctor/patient trust entirely since your doctor is more or less stealing from you...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827707</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1256158440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were black</i></p><p>Then you are also distantly related to a black person, and by your logic, you are the very thing you hate.</p><p>Bloody throwbacks<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were blackThen you are also distantly related to a black person , and by your logic , you are the very thing you hate.Bloody throwbacks : - (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were blackThen you are also distantly related to a black person, and by your logic, you are the very thing you hate.Bloody throwbacks :-(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825101</id>
	<title>god save us all...</title>
	<author>mapkinase</author>
	<datestamp>1256147820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All bioinformaticists who are annotating this data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All bioinformaticists who are annotating this data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All bioinformaticists who are annotating this data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825043</id>
	<title>The doctors' permission?!</title>
	<author>icebrain</author>
	<datestamp>1256147640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, let's hope they got the doctors' permission, because, you know, it's not like the <i>patients</i> have a say in it or anything...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , let 's hope they got the doctors ' permission , because , you know , it 's not like the patients have a say in it or anything.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, let's hope they got the doctors' permission, because, you know, it's not like the patients have a say in it or anything...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826639</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>CrimsonAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1256153760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>China had circled the globe in 1300s</p></div></blockquote><p>Citation?
</p><p>In general, other than somewhat exaggerating the capabilities of non-European nations, you're correct - Europe wasn't the height of civilization back then.  But don't undermine your own arguments by adding items of questionable veracity.
</p><p>Also, note that even if China had been inclined to conquer Europe then, they'd have been unable to do so - the logistics situation would have been impossible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>China had circled the globe in 1300sCitation ?
In general , other than somewhat exaggerating the capabilities of non-European nations , you 're correct - Europe was n't the height of civilization back then .
But do n't undermine your own arguments by adding items of questionable veracity .
Also , note that even if China had been inclined to conquer Europe then , they 'd have been unable to do so - the logistics situation would have been impossible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>China had circled the globe in 1300sCitation?
In general, other than somewhat exaggerating the capabilities of non-European nations, you're correct - Europe wasn't the height of civilization back then.
But don't undermine your own arguments by adding items of questionable veracity.
Also, note that even if China had been inclined to conquer Europe then, they'd have been unable to do so - the logistics situation would have been impossible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29833845</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Gulthek</author>
	<datestamp>1256217540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GP's dates are a little off, but here's the standard starting point:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng\_He" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng\_He</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>It's quite a poorly written article, even by Wikipedia standards; but good enough to get you where you want to go.</p><p><a href="http://www.international.ucla.edu/asia/news/article.asp?parentid=10387" title="ucla.edu">http://www.international.ucla.edu/asia/news/article.asp?parentid=10387</a> [ucla.edu]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GP 's dates are a little off , but here 's the standard starting point : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng \ _He [ wikipedia.org ] It 's quite a poorly written article , even by Wikipedia standards ; but good enough to get you where you want to go.http : //www.international.ucla.edu/asia/news/article.asp ? parentid = 10387 [ ucla.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GP's dates are a little off, but here's the standard starting point:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zheng\_He [wikipedia.org]It's quite a poorly written article, even by Wikipedia standards; but good enough to get you where you want to go.http://www.international.ucla.edu/asia/news/article.asp?parentid=10387 [ucla.edu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826639</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825297</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn, are you professionally stupid, or is this just a hobby?  Whites weren't even the first to circle the globe</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn , are you professionally stupid , or is this just a hobby ?
Whites were n't even the first to circle the globe</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn, are you professionally stupid, or is this just a hobby?
Whites weren't even the first to circle the globe</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827737</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256158560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm under the Kaiser plan and was asked for spit sample. The whole thing was voluntary. They give me an informed consent form with lots of details. I believe massive data mining of gene sequences from 1000s of people is necessary to get statistically valid data to find new drugs and cures. So I was happy to do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm under the Kaiser plan and was asked for spit sample .
The whole thing was voluntary .
They give me an informed consent form with lots of details .
I believe massive data mining of gene sequences from 1000s of people is necessary to get statistically valid data to find new drugs and cures .
So I was happy to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm under the Kaiser plan and was asked for spit sample.
The whole thing was voluntary.
They give me an informed consent form with lots of details.
I believe massive data mining of gene sequences from 1000s of people is necessary to get statistically valid data to find new drugs and cures.
So I was happy to do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29828119</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>michael\_cain</author>
	<datestamp>1256116920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>...hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance? We just need to sequence your genome first. Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease. Good luck with that."</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
At least for this group, doesn't matter. At age 65+, they're all eligible for the kind of can't-be-turned-down everyone-pays-the-same-premium government-operated socialized health insurance that Congress seems to think would be a disaster for the rest of us.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...hoping this will pave the way for " You want health insurance ?
We just need to sequence your genome first .
Oh , sorry , you 're going to get Huntingtons disease .
Good luck with that .
" At least for this group , does n't matter .
At age 65 + , they 're all eligible for the kind of ca n't-be-turned-down everyone-pays-the-same-premium government-operated socialized health insurance that Congress seems to think would be a disaster for the rest of us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance?
We just need to sequence your genome first.
Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease.
Good luck with that.
"

At least for this group, doesn't matter.
At age 65+, they're all eligible for the kind of can't-be-turned-down everyone-pays-the-same-premium government-operated socialized health insurance that Congress seems to think would be a disaster for the rest of us.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826013</id>
	<title>Re:With or without permission?</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1256151420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If they didn't or aren't, then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals (if any diseases are identified that aren't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance).</p></div><p>This depends entirely on the proper collection and use of the data.  If they're looking for trends across a huge dataset, HIPAA rules allow them to de-personalize the data.  Thus the sample comes from Male03241, whose identity is stored in a discrete location used only for specific purposes.</p><p>Thus, they'll know that someone has the gene for Parkinson's, but will not have access to who that person is outside their own study.  And with a set of data this large, there's a solid chance they don't really need that info anyway.  They're almost certainly looking for trends and head-counts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If they did n't or are n't , then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals ( if any diseases are identified that are n't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance ) .This depends entirely on the proper collection and use of the data .
If they 're looking for trends across a huge dataset , HIPAA rules allow them to de-personalize the data .
Thus the sample comes from Male03241 , whose identity is stored in a discrete location used only for specific purposes.Thus , they 'll know that someone has the gene for Parkinson 's , but will not have access to who that person is outside their own study .
And with a set of data this large , there 's a solid chance they do n't really need that info anyway .
They 're almost certainly looking for trends and head-counts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they didn't or aren't, then that is a big privacy violation with perhaps huge negative ramifications for those individuals (if any diseases are identified that aren't treatable but will impact their ability to get insurance).This depends entirely on the proper collection and use of the data.
If they're looking for trends across a huge dataset, HIPAA rules allow them to de-personalize the data.
Thus the sample comes from Male03241, whose identity is stored in a discrete location used only for specific purposes.Thus, they'll know that someone has the gene for Parkinson's, but will not have access to who that person is outside their own study.
And with a set of data this large, there's a solid chance they don't really need that info anyway.
They're almost certainly looking for trends and head-counts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830893</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1256133840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A possible upside to private insurance companies doing this is that if they accept you, you know you probably don't need it so bad after all!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A possible upside to private insurance companies doing this is that if they accept you , you know you probably do n't need it so bad after all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A possible upside to private insurance companies doing this is that if they accept you, you know you probably don't need it so bad after all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826337</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1256152560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup - insurance only works in the absence of knowledge.  If you could predict with 80\% accuracy whether somebody's house would burn down, then almost everybody could get dirt-cheap fire insurance (which they wouldn't buy anyway since they wouldn't need it), and a small number of people wouldn't be able to afford it and would lose everything they have in a fire.  The insurance companies would go out of business since nobody would bother buying insurance either way.</p><p>The only thing that would work once genetic testing becomes reliable is a system that has these attributes:<br>1.  No denial of claims for pre-existing conditions.<br>2.  No differential charging based upon genetic factors.<br>3.  All people must pay in - coverage is not voluntary.</p><p>If you don't have all three the system breaks down.  Either people rip off the insurers, or insurers rip off the people.  Neither works.</p><p>Most of what people consider "health insurance" isn't really insurance anyway - it is more of a buyer's club for health services.  IMHO a major area of reform should be to eliminate this aspect of health insurance entirely.  There is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $100 for a doctor's visit that costs $30 for Aetna (even if the poor person can haggle them down to $50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered).  This alone wouldn't fix health care for the poor, but it would certainly make that problem a lot easier to solve.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup - insurance only works in the absence of knowledge .
If you could predict with 80 \ % accuracy whether somebody 's house would burn down , then almost everybody could get dirt-cheap fire insurance ( which they would n't buy anyway since they would n't need it ) , and a small number of people would n't be able to afford it and would lose everything they have in a fire .
The insurance companies would go out of business since nobody would bother buying insurance either way.The only thing that would work once genetic testing becomes reliable is a system that has these attributes : 1 .
No denial of claims for pre-existing conditions.2 .
No differential charging based upon genetic factors.3 .
All people must pay in - coverage is not voluntary.If you do n't have all three the system breaks down .
Either people rip off the insurers , or insurers rip off the people .
Neither works.Most of what people consider " health insurance " is n't really insurance anyway - it is more of a buyer 's club for health services .
IMHO a major area of reform should be to eliminate this aspect of health insurance entirely .
There is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $ 100 for a doctor 's visit that costs $ 30 for Aetna ( even if the poor person can haggle them down to $ 50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered ) .
This alone would n't fix health care for the poor , but it would certainly make that problem a lot easier to solve .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup - insurance only works in the absence of knowledge.
If you could predict with 80\% accuracy whether somebody's house would burn down, then almost everybody could get dirt-cheap fire insurance (which they wouldn't buy anyway since they wouldn't need it), and a small number of people wouldn't be able to afford it and would lose everything they have in a fire.
The insurance companies would go out of business since nobody would bother buying insurance either way.The only thing that would work once genetic testing becomes reliable is a system that has these attributes:1.
No denial of claims for pre-existing conditions.2.
No differential charging based upon genetic factors.3.
All people must pay in - coverage is not voluntary.If you don't have all three the system breaks down.
Either people rip off the insurers, or insurers rip off the people.
Neither works.Most of what people consider "health insurance" isn't really insurance anyway - it is more of a buyer's club for health services.
IMHO a major area of reform should be to eliminate this aspect of health insurance entirely.
There is no reason that a poor person without insurance should have to pay $100 for a doctor's visit that costs $30 for Aetna (even if the poor person can haggle them down to $50 - assuming they are in the condition to haggle BEFORE the services are rendered).
This alone wouldn't fix health care for the poor, but it would certainly make that problem a lot easier to solve.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825623</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256149920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Where it gets ugly, is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses, and potentially selective abortions.</p></div><p>... maybe someone will make a movie about it and call it Gattaca (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177/).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Where it gets ugly , is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses , and potentially selective abortions.... maybe someone will make a movie about it and call it Gattaca ( http : //www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177/ ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where it gets ugly, is that this will be yet another tool that could allow screening of unborn fetuses, and potentially selective abortions.... maybe someone will make a movie about it and call it Gattaca (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177/).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826539</id>
	<title>Re:With or without permission?</title>
	<author>CupBeEmpty</author>
	<datestamp>1256153280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It would be completely illegal without informed consent. They would have had to go to their Internal Review Board (IRB) and get approval and would be required to follow federal guidelines. This is a highly regulated part of medical privacy and IRBs do not screw around with the rules because the institutional consequences are massive. They range from massive lawsuits to federal crimes.  The scientists doing the SNP arrays would also be forbidden from knowing any patient information. Only the doctors involved with patient treatment would know any identifying information.</p><p>Now one of the interesting caveats to this is that the doctors involved with the patient's care are privy to the results of the SNP array. Presumably they would be told "Patient X Y and Z have mutations correlated with early onset Alzheimers and Huntington's Disease. They would be obligated to tell their patients and begin any appropriate care. My guess is that is why they decided to study patients around 65 years old. Any genetic predispositions would already have manifest themselves. I am curious if it was done to avoid any ethical concerns with "diagnoses" arising from the study.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be completely illegal without informed consent .
They would have had to go to their Internal Review Board ( IRB ) and get approval and would be required to follow federal guidelines .
This is a highly regulated part of medical privacy and IRBs do not screw around with the rules because the institutional consequences are massive .
They range from massive lawsuits to federal crimes .
The scientists doing the SNP arrays would also be forbidden from knowing any patient information .
Only the doctors involved with patient treatment would know any identifying information.Now one of the interesting caveats to this is that the doctors involved with the patient 's care are privy to the results of the SNP array .
Presumably they would be told " Patient X Y and Z have mutations correlated with early onset Alzheimers and Huntington 's Disease .
They would be obligated to tell their patients and begin any appropriate care .
My guess is that is why they decided to study patients around 65 years old .
Any genetic predispositions would already have manifest themselves .
I am curious if it was done to avoid any ethical concerns with " diagnoses " arising from the study .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be completely illegal without informed consent.
They would have had to go to their Internal Review Board (IRB) and get approval and would be required to follow federal guidelines.
This is a highly regulated part of medical privacy and IRBs do not screw around with the rules because the institutional consequences are massive.
They range from massive lawsuits to federal crimes.
The scientists doing the SNP arrays would also be forbidden from knowing any patient information.
Only the doctors involved with patient treatment would know any identifying information.Now one of the interesting caveats to this is that the doctors involved with the patient's care are privy to the results of the SNP array.
Presumably they would be told "Patient X Y and Z have mutations correlated with early onset Alzheimers and Huntington's Disease.
They would be obligated to tell their patients and begin any appropriate care.
My guess is that is why they decided to study patients around 65 years old.
Any genetic predispositions would already have manifest themselves.
I am curious if it was done to avoid any ethical concerns with "diagnoses" arising from the study.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826425</id>
	<title>Re:Don't you mean.....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256152860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is California. Getting the money necessary is the most important thing of all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is California .
Getting the money necessary is the most important thing of all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is California.
Getting the money necessary is the most important thing of all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825081</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29840517</id>
	<title>Re:With or without permission?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256208000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The doctor is not stealing from the patient.  This is similar to turnitin.com and copyright.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The doctor is not stealing from the patient .
This is similar to turnitin.com and copyright .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The doctor is not stealing from the patient.
This is similar to turnitin.com and copyright.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825271</id>
	<title>Re:The Good, the Bad, the Ugly...</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1256148540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>God I hope you guys get your healthcare shit together before that happens. In a modern country the data could be used to save lives... In the US I can only see it saving money and costing many thousands of lives.</htmltext>
<tokenext>God I hope you guys get your healthcare shit together before that happens .
In a modern country the data could be used to save lives... In the US I can only see it saving money and costing many thousands of lives .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God I hope you guys get your healthcare shit together before that happens.
In a modern country the data could be used to save lives... In the US I can only see it saving money and costing many thousands of lives.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827623</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>icebike</author>
	<datestamp>1256158080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA: " University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), with a $25 million, two-year NIH grant that tapped federal stimulus funds ".</p><p>That would seem to me to make all this research public domain, and prevent Kaiser from patenting any genes, holding any information proprietary, or selling it to drug companies.</p><p>While you can't legally discriminate (see GINA in this subtread), there are many other ways this study could end up benefiting Kaiser alone, or Kaiser in cahoots with some drug company unless there is close supervision of this process.</p><p>I would also hope the patients, (and not just their doctors) have a say in this effort, and prohibitions exist from using existing patient samples drawn for other purposes.</p><p>But I would question the choice of One health care provider and one state. The sample seems already biased, once by socioeconomic status, and again by region.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : " University of California , San Francisco ( UCSF ) , with a $ 25 million , two-year NIH grant that tapped federal stimulus funds " .That would seem to me to make all this research public domain , and prevent Kaiser from patenting any genes , holding any information proprietary , or selling it to drug companies.While you ca n't legally discriminate ( see GINA in this subtread ) , there are many other ways this study could end up benefiting Kaiser alone , or Kaiser in cahoots with some drug company unless there is close supervision of this process.I would also hope the patients , ( and not just their doctors ) have a say in this effort , and prohibitions exist from using existing patient samples drawn for other purposes.But I would question the choice of One health care provider and one state .
The sample seems already biased , once by socioeconomic status , and again by region .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA: " University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), with a $25 million, two-year NIH grant that tapped federal stimulus funds ".That would seem to me to make all this research public domain, and prevent Kaiser from patenting any genes, holding any information proprietary, or selling it to drug companies.While you can't legally discriminate (see GINA in this subtread), there are many other ways this study could end up benefiting Kaiser alone, or Kaiser in cahoots with some drug company unless there is close supervision of this process.I would also hope the patients, (and not just their doctors) have a say in this effort, and prohibitions exist from using existing patient samples drawn for other purposes.But I would question the choice of One health care provider and one state.
The sample seems already biased, once by socioeconomic status, and again by region.
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824967</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Ethanol-fueled</author>
	<datestamp>1256147280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do live in California and I know why they chose Californians for the sample: they're trying to locate the elusive gay gene. San Francisco and Cupertino residents are the test group, while the rest of the sample acts as a control group.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do live in California and I know why they chose Californians for the sample : they 're trying to locate the elusive gay gene .
San Francisco and Cupertino residents are the test group , while the rest of the sample acts as a control group .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do live in California and I know why they chose Californians for the sample: they're trying to locate the elusive gay gene.
San Francisco and Cupertino residents are the test group, while the rest of the sample acts as a control group.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826651</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256153820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And that's why the Chinese got conquered by the Brits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And that 's why the Chinese got conquered by the Brits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And that's why the Chinese got conquered by the Brits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826139</id>
	<title>Re:Illegal to Discriminate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256151780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a much needed act.  Unfortunately, insurance companies are already breaking this act.  They denied insurance to an "overweight" baby and an "underweight" toddler.  The problem with these kids are their genes.  It's not like they are eating candy, McD's, 5 liters of soda, and 6 meals a day.  These are normal kids denied coverage due to their genes.</p><p>I hope these people sue the insurance companies, get a huge settlement, and force insurance to actually obey GINA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a much needed act .
Unfortunately , insurance companies are already breaking this act .
They denied insurance to an " overweight " baby and an " underweight " toddler .
The problem with these kids are their genes .
It 's not like they are eating candy , McD 's , 5 liters of soda , and 6 meals a day .
These are normal kids denied coverage due to their genes.I hope these people sue the insurance companies , get a huge settlement , and force insurance to actually obey GINA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a much needed act.
Unfortunately, insurance companies are already breaking this act.
They denied insurance to an "overweight" baby and an "underweight" toddler.
The problem with these kids are their genes.
It's not like they are eating candy, McD's, 5 liters of soda, and 6 meals a day.
These are normal kids denied coverage due to their genes.I hope these people sue the insurance companies, get a huge settlement, and force insurance to actually obey GINA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825439</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825261</id>
	<title>RTA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're not being sequenced, they're being genotyped on a SNP chip. There's a huge difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're not being sequenced , they 're being genotyped on a SNP chip .
There 's a huge difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're not being sequenced, they're being genotyped on a SNP chip.
There's a huge difference.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824993</id>
	<title>nice</title>
	<author>Emesee</author>
	<datestamp>1256147400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>nao, maybe they'll be able to start growing limbs back soon.

and maybe they can make SENS work so we'll all be "effectively immortal" . god bless california. cause it's warm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>nao , maybe they 'll be able to start growing limbs back soon .
and maybe they can make SENS work so we 'll all be " effectively immortal " .
god bless california .
cause it 's warm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nao, maybe they'll be able to start growing limbs back soon.
and maybe they can make SENS work so we'll all be "effectively immortal" .
god bless california.
cause it's warm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825159</id>
	<title>Death to clutter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great! Now we won't need social security numbers! We'll just use our DNA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great !
Now we wo n't need social security numbers !
We 'll just use our DNA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great!
Now we won't need social security numbers!
We'll just use our DNA!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825355</id>
	<title>Not the first time....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256149020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced"</p><p>Obviously they have forgotten about the coal mine / medical file catalog / alien landing site, as seen mid-series on the X-Files.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced " Obviously they have forgotten about the coal mine / medical file catalog / alien landing site , as seen mid-series on the X-Files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This will be the first time such a large group has had their genes sequenced"Obviously they have forgotten about the coal mine / medical file catalog / alien landing site, as seen mid-series on the X-Files.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829305</id>
	<title>Re:Not sequencing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256122380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More accurately, this is targeted resequencing (IAACMB).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More accurately , this is targeted resequencing ( IAACMB ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More accurately, this is targeted resequencing (IAACMB).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256148480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>At least get your racist history right. China had circled the globe in 1300s created the great wall of China, the still current largest man made channel, and the forbidden city, while they mapped the sky. At this time they didn't bother even trading with the Europeans because they were so much more advanced that they seemed like dirty savages. The largest fleet that Europe had at the time were Venician longboats armed with bows. Would have been easy for China to conquer them and the anchors of their ships weighed more than the European ships and the fact that they had bombs at the time.<br> <br>Oh and if you go back further. Africans built great civilizations and had lots of math that the europeans stole from them. Some cities were very well educated. Timbuktu rivaling Alexandria in some respects.<br> <br>Or further forwards, the inuit haven't fared nearly as well as america. Even though they are an offshoot of americans. I'm sure you made a mistake in your calculations somewhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least get your racist history right .
China had circled the globe in 1300s created the great wall of China , the still current largest man made channel , and the forbidden city , while they mapped the sky .
At this time they did n't bother even trading with the Europeans because they were so much more advanced that they seemed like dirty savages .
The largest fleet that Europe had at the time were Venician longboats armed with bows .
Would have been easy for China to conquer them and the anchors of their ships weighed more than the European ships and the fact that they had bombs at the time .
Oh and if you go back further .
Africans built great civilizations and had lots of math that the europeans stole from them .
Some cities were very well educated .
Timbuktu rivaling Alexandria in some respects .
Or further forwards , the inuit have n't fared nearly as well as america .
Even though they are an offshoot of americans .
I 'm sure you made a mistake in your calculations somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least get your racist history right.
China had circled the globe in 1300s created the great wall of China, the still current largest man made channel, and the forbidden city, while they mapped the sky.
At this time they didn't bother even trading with the Europeans because they were so much more advanced that they seemed like dirty savages.
The largest fleet that Europe had at the time were Venician longboats armed with bows.
Would have been easy for China to conquer them and the anchors of their ships weighed more than the European ships and the fact that they had bombs at the time.
Oh and if you go back further.
Africans built great civilizations and had lots of math that the europeans stole from them.
Some cities were very well educated.
Timbuktu rivaling Alexandria in some respects.
Or further forwards, the inuit haven't fared nearly as well as america.
Even though they are an offshoot of americans.
I'm sure you made a mistake in your calculations somewhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095</id>
	<title>Re:Damned sure glad...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256147820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't consider yourself safe just yet:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>"This is a force multiplier with respect to genome-wide association studies," says Cathy Schaefer, a research scientist at Kaiser Permanente, a health-care provider based in Oakland, CA, whose patients will be involved...<br>Kaiser Permanente is meanwhile trying to expand its collection of biological samples to 500,000 by 2013.</p></div><p>While the scientists running the experiment are clearly doing this to actually advance research, and it will, I'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance?  We just need to sequence your genome first.  Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease.  Good luck with that."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't consider yourself safe just yet : " This is a force multiplier with respect to genome-wide association studies , " says Cathy Schaefer , a research scientist at Kaiser Permanente , a health-care provider based in Oakland , CA , whose patients will be involved...Kaiser Permanente is meanwhile trying to expand its collection of biological samples to 500,000 by 2013.While the scientists running the experiment are clearly doing this to actually advance research , and it will , I 'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for " You want health insurance ?
We just need to sequence your genome first .
Oh , sorry , you 're going to get Huntingtons disease .
Good luck with that .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't consider yourself safe just yet:"This is a force multiplier with respect to genome-wide association studies," says Cathy Schaefer, a research scientist at Kaiser Permanente, a health-care provider based in Oakland, CA, whose patients will be involved...Kaiser Permanente is meanwhile trying to expand its collection of biological samples to 500,000 by 2013.While the scientists running the experiment are clearly doing this to actually advance research, and it will, I'm thinking someone at Kaiser is hoping this will pave the way for "You want health insurance?
We just need to sequence your genome first.
Oh, sorry, you're going to get Huntingtons disease.
Good luck with that.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29828119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29840517
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830893
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826651
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826103
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829305
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825297
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29833845
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826013
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29831699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826127
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832529
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824967
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826539
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825081
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826409
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825185
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830119
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826337
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832241
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826083
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_21_1548255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827737
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824993
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824813
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826409
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825189
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825441
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832241
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29840517
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826013
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824787
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825095
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827623
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29829719
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29828119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824949
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827707
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825297
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825247
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826639
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29833845
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826651
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29827737
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825081
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_21_1548255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29824887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826337
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29830893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825333
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826083
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29832529
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825077
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826127
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29831699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825271
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825439
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29826139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_21_1548255.29825351
</commentlist>
</conversation>
