SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
There are many reasons to avoid the plethora of direct-to-consumer DNA tests on the market these days. Recent data suggests that many may produce alarming false positives for disease risks, while others that claim to predict things like athletic abilities and wine preferences are simply dubious. Another, perhaps less-common concern is that an at-home genetic analysis may unveil completely unexpected, deeply disturbing information that you just can’t prepare for.
That was the case for Washington state’s Kelli Rowlette (née Fowler), who took a DNA test with the popular site Ancestry.com back in July 2017.
Rowlette was likely expecting to discover new details about her distant ancestors, but she instead learned that her DNA sample matched that of a doctor in Idaho. The Ancestry.com analysis predicted a “parent-child” relationship. Befuddled and in disbelief, Rowlette relayed the findings to her parents, Sally Ashby and Howard Fowler. According to a lawsuit the family filed in the US District Court of Idaho, she told her parents she was disappointed that the results were so unreliable.
But little did she know that her parents—who previously lived in Idaho—had trouble conceiving her and, in 1980, underwent an unusual fertility procedure with a doctor near their Idaho Falls home. The name of that doctor was Gerald E. Mortimer—who happened to have a DNA sample with Ancestry.com that matched Rowlette’s.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday April 06 2018, @02:25PM (1 child)
The flip side of the story is my mom's side of the family tree has an adopted orphan who's parents died in the great 1919 influenza outbreak and we know almost nothing of her ancestry at all, which is too bad. Based on ancestry racial reports and percentages her adopted parents must have been in the same ethnic neighborhood or church parish as her birth parents, that's all we know.
Haven't found anyone on 23andme that relates to the adoption about a century ago. I suppose its possible given the number of flu deaths that she was literally the sole survivor from her family.
Two REAL annoyances about genetic stuff today in 2018:
1) Everyone is worried about big brother sharing everything but for profitability reasons 23andme won't/can't share with ancestry, this is the case across the board. No or minimal interop.
2) For weird legacy FDA reasons the analysis providers can't provide certain analysis but there are 3rd party providers you can upload for genetic marker analysis, usually at great annoyance and inconvenience.
There is, currently, no central big bro or google for genetic data.
(Score: 2) by danmars on Friday April 06 2018, @04:03PM
I doubt they'll deal much with each other, but it seems very likely the feds will send over some sequenced DNA to all relevant companies and say, "Who do you have who's a close match for this, and how close?"
In that way anyone who participates in these services becomes part of a huge not-just-criminals database of DNA which can be used not to just find repeat offenders but relatives of anyone who's ever participated.
Oh yeah, the mystery DNA is from a person who is a first cousin of both this Jane Smith and that John Doe. Combine that with census or tax data and now you know which 3 people may be the person you're looking for.