These papers are on small parts of the methodology. They have not yet published findings on ethnic admixture. I would assume they would not be able to leave out portions of the "materials and methods" with a "it's proprietary" excuse.
I have never criticized their methodology per se; i.e., their concept, their algorithms, etc.
I do critique their parental populations and their secrecy.
If I rememeber correctly, in Shriver's paper on Puerto Rico, European there used a Spanish parental. Given Puerto Rico's history, that is correct.
But, hey, if parental identification is not important, why not choose Swedish as the parental there?
Ah..the answer is that the parental population needs to be representative of the ancestry that is being measured.
DNAP says that "Indo-European" includes all Caucasian peoples from Portugal to Bangladesh, from Sweden to the Middle East.
Very well. Then the IE parentals should have been picked from representatives of peoples from throughout that broad region.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
