DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[frogdreaming]

Ifida, Fair enough, it's an understandable mistake.

In light of recent events I have been reconsidering my stance on the hair color issue.

As you no doubt recall, my argument was based on the fact that although the underlying relationship of genetics to hair color was fairly obvious. (Just like eye color) There is however, an additional variable related to age, as anyone who has watched childrens hair change as they grow up will attest. Since we inherit our DNA from our parents at conception and pass along those same genes to our children and die with the same unchanged set we were born with, there is no way to determine age directly from the genome. Given this, I am sceptical of any claims that run counter to these facts.

However, the recent release of Ancestry 2.5 has forced me to rethink my objections. It appears that Ancestry can now (for an additional $60.00) get a much more accurate assay of your genomic heredity determining the individual contribution of a single great grandparent.

This is an eyeopener.

It means that the market for the previous version (Ancestry 2.0)willingly accepted heredity results that had an accuracy range of plus or minus one great grandparent. (plus or minus one eighth) or about 25% accurate.

Given these standards, I think it is highly likely that a hair color assessment with an accuracy rate of 25% would be accepted by the police departments around the country.

"The perpetrator has medium brown hair although it might be a blondish or perhaps very dark brown, but not light blonde or black. Does that help?"

What do you think?

regards,
frog