why_nutt
New Member
LovelyPigeon said:
Again, though, if the testing requires 2,000 markers to work with, how can the Ramsey DNA be reasonably expected to be of sufficient quality to work with, when investigators can barely eke out 10 markers for the FBI?
As a tangent, note this story and the comments within:
http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-12/29/content_294229.htm
Wayne Joseph, the principal of a big suburban high school in southern California, had an unequivocal sense of his black heritage, having written extensively about race in America.
But after seeing a TV story last April about a Florida company, DNA Print Genomics, which marketed an ancestry-by-DNA test, he began to wonder exactly how much of him was African, how much wasn't, and what else there might be in his genes.
"I sent away for their kit and received the kit, happened to swab both sides of my cheek and sent the swabs in," Joseph said.
A few weeks later, the results arrived at his comfortable Claremont, Calif., home.
"I just glanced at it, just a cursory glance initially didn't really notice it much," Joseph said. "Then, I went back to it, because all of a sudden it hit me exactly what I had read. And it read, 57 percent Indo-European, 39 percent Native American, 4 percent East Asian and 0 percent African.
After a lifetime as a black man, Wayne Joseph discovered he probably isn't black at all. '
...
We are very dichotomous in the United States," said Mark Shriver, the DNA test co-inventor. "You're either black or white. And understandably, less than 200 years ago, that meant life or death, basically who was master, who was slave."
Shriver cautions the test does not always provide exact results always. Still, about 7,000 people have taken it, including Joseph.
