DNA home testing

[doctork]

I have seen ads and discussion about 2 different products for home DNA testing, though I am sure there are more. 23andme is one and the other is a DNA test from Ancestry.com which offers to integrate your test results with your family tree on Ancestry.com (if you have one, which I do).

Each is around $100. I am intrigued and considering doing one or possibly both. 23andme seems more scientific and robust, while the Ancestry.com one would potentially offer more information about my family tree.

BTW, next year's cruise will take me to England, Sweden, Germany, and Finland - where many of my ancestors originated.

These are private companies. I am not sure if that is better or worse as far as confidentiality.

I am not worried about learning about my propensity for diseases. At my age, I already have a bunch and my kids know about them, so I am doubtful I'll have an ugly surprise there.

What do you all think?

[Jane]

I saw an ad for 23 and me that offered one test for $99 and a second test for 20 percent off. I'd like to do it, but since the cheap one Bill did told him he was Saudi Arabian, he is unmoved by the offer.

[doctork]

I thought the test results gave approximate percentages of general areas - like 27% middle eastern, 60% European, etc. Did it actually say Saudi? And then did he find a bunch of third cousins in Riyadh?

23and me includes a lot of medical genetics - "you have a two-fold increased risk of psoriasis" and the like. Then they have a locked section that you don't have to look at if you don't choose to - maybe that says "you have a 50-50 risk of Lou Gehrigs" or the like. Ancestry has some of that and then more of the geneology, though I think 23and me has that too - just not the link to your family tree, if you have one on Ancestry.

[Jane]

Nope, Bill was ALL ARAB, all the time. Mostly Saudi Arabia, also some Yeman. I really don't think so, although the thought of a relative who is a gazillionaire sheik in Dubai is hopeful.

We have done enough of his family tree to know that he is German, English with a smidge of Chickasaw back there in the 1800's. Maybe a little African-American back in the dim past, but no one in his family would admit to that.

I'm Irish, Danish, German, English and Scot. If I took the same test Bill did, it would probably come back that I am Chinese.

[Jane]

Nope, Bill was ALL ARAB, all the time. Mostly Saudi Arabia, also some Yeman. I really don't think so, although the thought of a relative who is a gazillionaire sheik in Dubai is hopeful.

We have done enough of his family tree to know that he is German, English with a smidge of Chickasaw back there in the 1800's. Maybe a little African-American back in the dim past, but no one in his family would admit to that.

I'm Irish, Danish, German, English and Scot. If I took the same test Bill did, it would probably come back that I am Chinese.

[Jane]

Sorry; didn't mean to be redundant. Us Chinese are funny like that.

[gailkate]

I don't understand. I watch more TV than I used to, but haven't seen these ads and don't know where they'd have gotten my family's DNA. Do they go around digging people up - literally - and testing them? How do they know what the dead peeps died of, so they might warn you of something dire or flat feet or early baldness?
Please elaborate.

Also, I'm sure I have no Chinese or Arab. My Irish, English, Welsh, Dutch and German are predictable and boring. Rumor had it we, too, had some Indian - I think Chippewa - so perhaps all those Anglo-Europeans hinted at an Indian connection because they were so lamentably unromantic. In Michigan, I remember little about Indians and little prejudice, so maybe it was all right to imply some dalliance (no doubt with a Warrior Chief or a beautiful Princess Nokomis who was wooed by a dashing blue-eyed Irishman. Nope, the Catholic side wouldn't have had any truck with romance of any kind, so it must have been a dashing Welshman.)

K, when you say one outfit is more scientifically robust, what are you basing that on? I'm still stuck on the image of grave robbers with little petri dishes and agar- agar.

[gailkate]

Just Googled and was led to this page of reviews on Amazon.
www.amazon.com/23andMe-Personal-Genome-Service-Information/product-reviews/B002QPR852

I am even more bewildered but unwilling to read all the stuff that came up on that first search.

[doctork]

I studied both websites - 23 and me as well as Ancestry's DNA site - and I am too lazy to go back over them right now.

But in essence, 23and me arises from Silicon Valley, with venture capital funding from the founder's husband who is the originator of one of the biggies there, FaceBook, Google, whatever. Genentech and several other well-known and reputable medical firms are also backers. That is what I mean by "scientifically more sound." They have real medical people behind them (full disclosure, I have worked with some of the medical managers/leadership there).

That said, with the human genome now mapped, the technology is widely available to other companies also. Probably 23and me being one of the first, they have a very large database of (privately obtained) samples, which is how they get their comparative figures. They compare your results to those of hundreds of thousands of others' "known" results.

There is already a large global database (or databases) demonstrating what races and locations have which characteristic genetic patterns. For example, UCSF and UNC have large genetic studies of familial MS going on; their purpose is the study of inheritance of MS, but they possess the entire mapped genomes of all the individuals in their studies. And generally when you agree to participate in such a study, there is a paragraph about future use of data for other purposes beyond the scope of the original study, should it meet the ethical boundaries set by the IRB.

Ancestry.com already has a lot of voluntarily rendered personal identifying information about the geneology/family history of many people, myself included, so there is the potential to match up the people and the genetic patterns. My family tree is public, which is how I have learned about distant relatives I did not know I had. I am glad for that. I can see utility in knowing more medical/genetic risk, but the information needs to e interpreted with the "patient" by a qualified individual - likely a geneticist. I know that if I have a patient request BRCA testing (the "breast cancer test" Angelina Jolie had), I will start with a giving them a print out of general information, then they need to go to Tucson (U of A) for more counseling before they can have the test done.

The privacy issue is thorny, though the commenters are correct - there is a federal law prohibiting genetic discrimination. But since we now know that NSA knows and records everything, and is storing it (or preparing to do so) in that gigantic facility in Utah, I am not sure we can protect ourselves. Privacy is a major reason I am not on Facebook.

Still as we find out on 9/11, the secret agencies have so much information that they cannot possibly find that needle in a million haystacks. Still I have clipped/bookmarked several articles in my reading this weekend that have to do with encrypting my online identity and IP address. I'll finish that up before I send any genetic material to any of those companies.

I'd be dubious of any test that gave such truly disparate results as "all Arab" when one is known to be of mostly European heritage. Lab error? Incorrect collection or handling? That said, there can be surprises in doing genetic and geneology research. I've found quite a few unexpected family history items.

And if you Google "DNA testing" you will come up with tons of commercial paternity tests, aimed at those dads who don't want to pay child support I'd suspect. There are a number of medical journal articles proving 2% - 10% "non-paternity" - that is, when testing is done, usually for other purposes, it is discovered that the father named by mom and in the delivery room with her as "the dad" is not actually the biological father.