Thank you Sam. But I do also notice that there is this sentence just preceding the section that you pasted from this document, the part you put in bold letters where DNAPrint is mentioned. It might have been helpful if you had included this sentence, and saved me the trouble.
"These tests are termed “recreational” in deference to and in contrast with genetic tests performed for health or forensic purposes."
The research I had already done led me to the conclusion that the DNAWitness product does not qualify as a forensic tool. Hence it was a little bit of a stretch to have trumpeted the case of that poor Arkansas woman as somehow being news for DNAG shareholders.
I'm still looking for some kind of current information that would indicate this company continues to engage in activities that generate revenue. (Besides share dilution).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
