GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1115051692


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 10:34:52 -0600
References: <126.5c3709fb.2fa78de4@aol.com> <BAY104-DAV167D2EBDFD1AB6600E643CF1270@phx.gbl> <000b01c54f2c$5360b810$c6559045@Ken1> <009f01c54f2f$248c2a30$72a0bf43@YOURF8387228BF>


Phil, Your site is a very good comparison and serves your participants
well. The only missing information in my view is DNA Heritage's possible 43
markers and FTDNA's possible 37 markers, and similarly for others. If
people become really interested in the hobby, then encouraging
cost-effective testing for as many markers as available will really help
surname projects.

Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phil Goff" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA
Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc


> Bill, Ken:
>
> Following the NGS announcement, I waited for FTDNA to explain how this
> potentially large volume of new business would be handled to avoid
> testing/reporting delays. I don't recall seeing any explanation, even
though
> I believe someone on the List asked this precise question. I concluded
that
> I need to outline the different testing choices in a simple table for
> participants in the Goff Surname DNA Study. For now, there are three
> companies on my list. Many participants are sensitive to cost while
others,
> like a benefactor who has financed six tests out of his own pocket, are
more
> interested in speed of reporting. In other words, everyone's needs are
> different. As long as I have access to the results and participants are
> cooperative, I let them choose their testing company. Here is the
comparison
> chart:
>
> http://home.comcast.net/~philgoff/GoffDNA.htm
>
> Any (constructive) comments are welcome.
>
> Phil Goff
> The Four Goff Brothers of Western Virginia site:
> http://home.comcast.net/~philgoff/GoffBook.htm
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 11:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Newbie: National Geographic, Relative Genetics, DNA
> Heritage,Family Tree DNA etc
>
>
> > Bill, The wording that many use on this list to promote FTDNA really
> > bothers me. It is often done without a "in my judgment" or "from my
> > experience", etc., and therefore comes across as an assertion of fact.
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more.
> Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more:
http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx
>
>



This thread: