GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-02 > 1012575197


From: "Orin R. Wells" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Native Amerucan Indian testing
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 06:53:17 -0800
References: <129.bbb24d6.298ad9f5@aol.com><4.1.20020131191212.046189c0@wells.org><4.1.20020131202229.046a4100@wells.org>
In-Reply-To: <3C5A531F.D335E335@route66web.com>


At 01:34 AM 2/1/02 -0700, Allan S. Gleason wrote:

>What is the point of doing a DNA study on a monolithic group?<<

Do you know for a fact it IS a monolithic group? I certainly don't. And
apparently the researchers are looking for something but they have not
shared exactly what that is with me. Are all the North American Indians
from the same origin? I personally doubt it but that is just my instinct
speaking here with no basis in fact. Are they all "polluted" with outside
blood (other NA tribes or European)? Again I doubt it. There are most
certainly families in most if not all recognized tribes who are still
full-blooded just as you may not have any Native American or African blood
in your family.

>>What kind of variance would one expect other than the injection of
European DNA over the last few centuries as per my hypothetical story last
year where I showed that it was possible for a full blooded Amerindian not
be able to prove he was an Indian via DNA testing.<<

I think you make an assumption that is possibly not backed by research. I
know that the researchers have found at least one marker that can be used
for this testing, but it is still in the research arena and not available
from one of the famous testing labs although one of the labs is advertising
the ability to test for NA ancestry. Once it is publilshed, you can bet it
will start showing up as an offering from our favorite labs.

>Or is there some suggestion that they are not as monolithic as they are
supposed to be?<<

I think there have been seveal studies suggesting this. In fact they seem
to be pretty sure that there have been AT LEAST two migrations.

>>What kind of DNA testing do they plan to do?<<

The group I referred to are only looking at y-chromosome testing right now.

>>Will it involve other chromosomes which take it out of the genealogical
province and into the medical area? <<

Not as far as I know.

>Why would National Geographic be interested in DNA?<<

National Geographic is probably not intested in DNA as such. They are
interested in the geography of man. Thus the name of the program they are
preparing called "The Journey of Man". It is the research group they are
backing who are interested in the DNA, but for the same purpose.

>I thought that something like 4% of Navajos had northern European
pre-historic DNA as do 25% of the Chippewa (Ojibwa). How did they get
those numbers if they hadn't
already been tested by others?

The software I usually write has been written by others probably many
times. That does not stop my clients from asking me to write it.

I bet these numbers did not come from a comprehensive testing project. My
hunch is it was derived by testing a few subjects and extrapolating to the
whole as is common for the researchers with limited access and/or means.
Aren't statistics wonderful? I really don't know.

I don't know what they are after or why. Obviously if they thought someone
before had come up with all the answers, I suspect they wouldn't bother.
Or, maybe they don't have your knowledge of what is known and are simply
working on a silly redundant research project because someone is willing to
give them the funding.



>
>Just curious . . . . Allan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>==============================
>To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go
>to:
>http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237
>


This thread: