DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[mingwan0]

Who's watching who?

http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2004-05/1084036457

It may seem odd that I am going to leap to the defense of DNAPrint on the issue of releasing allele information and their algorithm(s).

Correct me if I am wrong Charles, but what you and I and others have requested is that they tell us which version of the algorithm they are using as part of the results they send us - otherwise we will be comparing apples to oranges. I suspect that since they began with 2.0 there have been in the order of 10 or more algorithms used as they continued to try and fine tune the test. This tinkering plays havoc with what people such as myself are doing - comparing family members from different lines down from a known Native American ancestor to assess percentage and compare with the genealogy as a cross validation.

DNAPrint either has, or is in the process of, patenting the test. The information they use is proprietary and it would be counter productive on their part to release the data that people are requesting. Don't forget that they are a commercial, for profit (although they have not yet shown one), operation - not a scientific endeavor. They are attempting to tap the forensic and recreational market - their prime focus is not in publishing peer reviewed articles in scientific journals.

As I understand it things have changed dramatically since the days when Tony "joined" the List and allowed us to hammer him with questions. I don't even know who is steering the ship at this point. There was a massive shake up when the venture capitalists from San Diego bought in and bailed out the operation after the Louisiana serial killer success story. I spoke to one of these investors, who resides in the Orient, who had somehow found out that I was interested in bringing a competitive product to the marketplace. I think we might be very surprised to learn who is lurking on the List and monitoring posts like this one.

Lets just say that DNAPrint, "Witness" version, did not make a big splash at the recent peace officer's convention here in LA. I am worried that the health of the company may be in question. Personally I would like to see them stay in business since they may be on to something. Unfortunately to date I don't see any reason to put much faith in any racial - geographic percentage under 25%. That being said, even if perchance I do succeed in bringing an alternative to market, I would like to see another product there that will help to fuel the engine of competition.

However, for the moment, lets face it, whether the information comes from 2.0, 2.5 or whatever, there is no way to know whether your minority results are meaningful or misleading. We will never know this until they increase their sample size and the representativeness of the sample - this is what we all hope will be accomplished in Version 3.0. Until then we can argue till the cows come home with respect to results from the other versions - but it will be a lot of wasted energy.

It may seem unusual, considering the (skeptical) source, but I may upgrade myself and other family members to 2.5 to see how the results differ with the two versions of the product (not ascribing any meaning to minority results unless there is genealogical support). It is in our best interest that the company remain afloat so that ultimately our wish for a truly reliable and valid test of biogeographical ancestry will eventually be fulfilled.

David.

End of post



OK, I was the "investor from the Orient" who spoke to the good Doctor. I found out that he was thinking of bringing a competitive product to the market because he himself posted this on RootsWeb. My original mail to Dr Faux was in fact to advise him of the patent situation. Incidentally, Tony Frudakis has made reference to this initiative on RootsWeb. I don't agree with all of David's assertions, but you can detect that even one of our "critics" wants the company to succeed and for version 3.0 of the product to be more (ahem) "reliable and valid". We all await version 3.0 with much interest. Until then here's watching you David, watching us, watching you...