GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-10 > 1193070999


From: Jerry Lobdill <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Response to genetic genealogists from authors of Oct.19thScience article
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:36:39 -0500
References: <mailman.3369.1193012025.16856.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3369.1193012025.16856.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>


I agree, Gabriela. I have now read the article, thanks to a couple
of list subscribers who each kindly sent me a copy. This article
contains primarily complaints about genetic ancestry testing that are
not based on science or statistics. It contains about 1600 words, and
required 14 authors to create, few of whom seem to have credentials
specifically indicating experience in the area of genetic
genealogy. Two of the authors are lawyers, and the tenor of the
article seems to be that there may be fraud associated with genetic
ancestry testing.

I wonder how the authors were selected, why so many were needed to
create such a non-scientific paper, and why lawyers were
included. I wonder if any of the authors are genealogists (amateur
or professional).

Jerry Lobdill


At 07:13 PM 10/21/2007, you wrote:
>Message: 9
>Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 20:01:22 -0400
>From: "Gabriela Novak" <>
>Subject: Re: [DNA] Response to genetic genealogists from authors of
> Oct.19th Science article
>To: <>
>Message-ID: <>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
>When I first decided to get my dad's Y-DNA done, I found that pretty much
>every company I looked into had a very good explanation about what to
>expect. It would be nearly impossible for anyone to get the test done and
>expect data regarding all their ancestors. The whole thing seems to be
>orchestrated and biased. Obviously they couldn't get anyone who knows
>anything about the field to say such nonsense.
>G.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
>[mailto:] On Behalf Of Jerry Lobdill
>Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 5:34 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: [DNA] Response to genetic genealogists from authors of Oct.19th
>Science article
>
>I'm pretty sure I can find a copy of this issue of Science in my
>public library. It is now evident that I need to do that.
>
>Here's what bothers me about the 60 Minutes segment most of all. The
>lawyer showed the chart of the geometric growth of direct ancestors
>with number of generations--4, 8, 16, 32, etc. and then complained
>that the DNA testing information offered by companies like FTDNA
>fails to emphasize that the testing would not provide full disclosure
>about these ancestors. My question is, who has purchased test kits
>under the misconception that all this would be revealed? And how
>many traditional genealogists who purchase a test kit are even
>interested in all these ancestors?
>
>It seems to me that most traditional genealogists who have gotten
>into genetealogy know very well what they can learn from Y-DNA and
>mtDNA testing even if they may be mathematically challenged to some
>extent and need some help in assessing particular results. It is
>unfortunate that Stahl selected a lawyer to interview about the
>subject of what DNA testing doesn't tell us. It created an
>unwarranted implication of possible fraud.
>
> Jerry Lobdill


This thread: