DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[frogdreaming]

mingwan0, A lot has been made of the apparent validations by the various groups. Is there any detailed information available regarding them?

We know that the San Diego stuff, for instance, was done some time ago on the previous version of the product. The latest version is apparently much more accurate and less prone to significant mistakes. (plus or minus one great grandparent. lol)

Given that there are significant accuracy issues with the first version, how viable can the validations have been?

Were the products measured to be accurate to a specific degree, or were they deemed merely usable in some instances?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that given the significant innacuracies of the first version, innacuracies that needed to be addressed by a new version, what is the credibility of the reported validations? Do they have any intrinsic scientific value or are they merely PR fodder that can be used ad infinitum?

regards,
frog