OT: 23andMe

[Bill Sloman]

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction.

They report on some 199 chromosome segments - since we all have 46 chromosomes that's about four segments per chromosome.

About 46 of the segments are labelled European, two more are labelled "broadly European", another 47 are labelled Northwest European and 38 more are labelled "broadly Northwest European".

48 are labelled "British and Irish" though the location map showed them centered on London and the home countries with some spread up to Manchester and Merseyside.


Eight segments are labelled French and German, though the location map shows them primarily centered on the Netherlands and Belgium, with some spread into southwest Germany centered on Frankfurt am Main.

That's probably from my maternal great-grandmother who was born in Manchester in 1857 into a family who moved there from Strasbourg around 1850, where they had been rich iron-founders. She had a lot more money than anybody else in that generation of my family.

Three segments are labelled as Scandinavian and seem to come from Denmark.

One is labelled "broadly East Asian and native American" and two more are labelled "East Asian and native American". That sort of odd, but seems to come from my English ancestry - it's at the 0.1% level which could be one individual ten generations back

I also got a huge file - 5.7 Mb zipped - which seems to list some 600,000 single nuclear polymorphisms. My wife got me to dig out the one that predisposes you to
Alzheimer's, if you've got the wrong version. I don't.

Sort of interesting. It was nice to get it documented. One of my nephews seems to have done the same thing - he hasn't told me about it, but his name showed up on the 23andMe website, identified as my nephew.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 08 Sep 2019 07:07:40 -0700, Winfield Hill wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote...

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

TMI.

He got a discount because it wasn't all there.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Winfield Hill]

Bill Sloman wrote...

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

TMI.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[mpm]

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:18:08 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction. ....

Yes, and about 3% kangaroo, which the family long ago declined to explain.

Sorry Bill, just having a little fun at your expense. (You can laugh next time you jump!)

Does anyone else here believe DNA testing is (or will become) a privacy issue?
I mean, unless you're an orphan with no idea of your roots, then maybe the upside definitely wins.

But I can help thinking this DNA testing stuff is the new "last 4 digits" of your social security number. Because in that case, if you know where, and approximately when someone was born, then you can very easily derive their SSN. (They don't tell you that when asking, of course.)

So what are they not telling us about DNA testing? I wonder.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 08/09/19 23:29, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:18:08 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction. ....

Yes, and about 3% kangaroo, which the family long ago declined to explain.

Sorry Bill, just having a little fun at your expense. (You can laugh next time you jump!)

Does anyone else here believe DNA testing is (or will become) a privacy issue?
I mean, unless you're an orphan with no idea of your roots, then maybe the upside definitely wins.

But I can help thinking this DNA testing stuff is the new "last 4 digits" of your social security number. Because in that case, if you know where, and approximately when someone was born, then you can very easily derive their SSN. (They don't tell you that when asking, of course.)

So what are they not telling us about DNA testing? I wonder.

From https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/31/09#subj8.1
this, for example...

Who's making money from your DNA? (bbc.com)
Richard Stein <rmstein@ieee.org>
Sat, 2 Mar 2019 09:02:39 -0800

http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20190301-how-screening-companies-are-monetising-your-dna

"If you've ever sent off your DNA to an ancestry or health-screening company
for analysis, chances are your DNA data will be shared with third parties
for medical research or even for solving crime, unless you've specifically
asked the company not to do so.

"The point was brought home in late January when it emerged that genetic
genealogy company FamilyTreeDNA was working with the FBI to test DNA samples
provided by law enforcement to help identify perpetrators of violent
crime. Another DNA testing company, 23andMe, has signed a $300m deal with
pharmaceuticals giant GSK to help it develop new drugs.

"But are customers aware that third parties may have access to their DNA
data for medical research? And do these kinds of tie-ups bring benefits --
or should we be concerned?"

Risk: Insider—Phlebotomists might be enticed by genealogy services or
intelligence or law enforcement agencies to surreptitiously contribute an
extra blood sample from a routine wellness visit to a physician's office or
hospital trip. The metadata for tracing ownership is on the sample label,
and only a few drops of blood are necessary.


.... or this example from
https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/29/05#subj24.1

Cops are asking Ancestry.com and 23andMe for their customers' DNA (Kashmir Hill)
Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@warpspeed.com>
17 October 2015

Kashmir Hill, *Fusion*, 16 Oct 2015
http://fusion.net/story/215204/law-enforcement-agencies-are-asking-ancestry-com-and-23andme-for-their-customers-dna/

When companies like Ancestry.com and 23andMe first invited people to send in
their DNA for genealogy tracing and medical diagnostic tests, privacy
advocates warned about the creation of giant genetic databases that might
one day be used against participants by law enforcement. DNA, after all, can
be a key to solving crimes. It “has serious information about you and your
family,'' genetic privacy advocate Jeremy Gruber told me back in 2010 when
such services were just getting popular.

Now, five years later, when 23andMe and Ancestry Both have over a million
customers, those warnings are looking prescient. “Your relative's DNA
could turn you into a suspect,'' warns Wired, writing about a case from
earlier this year, in which New Orleans filmmaker Michael Usry became a
suspect in an unsolved murder case after cops did a familial genetic search
using semen collected in 1996. The cops searched an Ancestry.com database
and got a familial match to a saliva sample Usry's father had given years
earlier. Usry was ultimately determined to be innocent and the Electronic
Frontier Foundation called it a wild goose chase that demonstrated “the
very real threats to privacy and civil liberties posed by law enforcement
access to private genetic databases.''

The FBI maintains a national genetic database with samples from convicts and
arrestees, but this was the most public example of cops turning to private
genetic databases to find a suspect. But it's not the only time it's
happened, and it means that people who submitted genetic samples for reasons
of health, curiosity, or to advance science could now end up in a genetic
line-up of criminal suspects.

Both Ancestry.com and 23andMe stipulate in their privacy policies that they
will turn information over to law enforcement if served with a court
order. 23andMe says it's received a couple of requests from both state law
enforcement and the FBI, but that it has “successfully resisted them.''
[...]

[Lauren Weinstein added this comment on that article:
As Gomer Pyle would say, "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"
PGN]

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 9/9/19 8:29 am, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:18:08 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction. ....

Yes, and about 3% kangaroo, which the family long ago declined to explain.

Sorry Bill, just having a little fun at your expense. (You can laugh next time you jump!)

Does anyone else here believe DNA testing is (or will become) a privacy issue?
I mean, unless you're an orphan with no idea of your roots, then maybe the upside definitely wins.

But I can help thinking this DNA testing stuff is the new "last 4 digits" of your social security number. Because in that case, if you know where, and approximately when someone was born, then you can very easily derive their SSN. (They don't tell you that when asking, of course.)

So what are they not telling us about DNA testing? I wonder.

It is totally a privacy issue. If you get your DNA done with
Ancestry.com, they hold the *copyright* to your DNA sequence and have
the right to *sell* the data.

Think about that for a new seconds.

Nope. Nope, nope, nope. Not this little black duck, I'm not doing that.

 

[bitrex]

On 9/8/19 7:26 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:

Now, five years later, when 23andMe and Ancestry Both have over a million
customers, those warnings are looking prescient.  “Your relative's DNA
could turn you into a suspect,'' warns Wired, writing about a case from
earlier this year, in which New Orleans filmmaker Michael Usry became a
suspect in an unsolved murder case after cops did a familial genetic search
using semen collected in 1996. The cops searched an Ancestry.com database
and got a familial match to a saliva sample Usry's father had given years
earlier. Usry was ultimately determined to be innocent and the Electronic
Frontier Foundation called it a wild goose chase that demonstrated “the
very real threats to privacy and civil liberties posed by law enforcement
access to private genetic databases.''

The American people lately seem to in large part support police
unconditionally and want very much for them to have the authority to do
that whenever they wish.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, September 9, 2019 at 12:37:50 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 08 Sep 2019 07:07:40 -0700, Winfield Hill wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote...

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

TMI.

He got a discount because it wasn't all there.

Wrong. I logged onto their website and got the standard price.

https://www.23andme.com/en-int/

Cursitor Doom is remarkably dim.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[bitrex]

On 9/8/19 6:29 PM, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:18:08 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction. ....

Yes, and about 3% kangaroo, which the family long ago declined to explain.

Sorry Bill, just having a little fun at your expense. (You can laugh next time you jump!)

Does anyone else here believe DNA testing is (or will become) a privacy issue?
I mean, unless you're an orphan with no idea of your roots, then maybe the upside definitely wins.

But I can help thinking this DNA testing stuff is the new "last 4 digits" of your social security number. Because in that case, if you know where, and approximately when someone was born, then you can very easily derive their SSN. (They don't tell you that when asking, of course.)

So what are they not telling us about DNA testing? I wonder.

Perhaps industry and government figure that citizens with DNA sequences
unknown to them are a security issue.

That is to say unlike the American people who tend to be slow to pick up
on things, industry and government already understand that the only way
to ensure there is no home for illegal immigrants here, and only
mentally fit citizens with no markers for disorders, are allowed to own
firearms, is to have a record of everyone's genetic sequence on file.
Are you a legal citizen? Can you own a gun? Simply consult the file.

 

[Michael Terrell]

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 6:29:34 PM UTC-4, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, September 8, 2019 at 5:18:08 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

I'm mainly European and mostly of British and Irish extraction. ....

Yes, and about 3% kangaroo, which the family long ago declined to explain..

Sorry Bill, just having a little fun at your expense. (You can laugh next time you jump!)

Does anyone else here believe DNA testing is (or will become) a privacy issue?
I mean, unless you're an orphan with no idea of your roots, then maybe the upside definitely wins.

But I can help thinking this DNA testing stuff is the new "last 4 digits" of your social security number. Because in that case, if you know where, and approximately when someone was born, then you can very easily derive their SSN. (They don't tell you that when asking, of course.)

So what are they not telling us about DNA testing? I wonder.

I donated samples the VA's 'Million Veteran Program'. It is supposed to compare the DNA to the health issues to see if they can target some issues before they cause a lot of problems.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 09/09/19 01:27, bitrex wrote:

On 9/8/19 7:26 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:

Now, five years later, when 23andMe and Ancestry Both have over a million
customers, those warnings are looking prescient.  “Your relative's DNA
could turn you into a suspect,'' warns Wired, writing about a case from
earlier this year, in which New Orleans filmmaker Michael Usry became a
suspect in an unsolved murder case after cops did a familial genetic search
using semen collected in 1996. The cops searched an Ancestry.com database
and got a familial match to a saliva sample Usry's father had given years
earlier. Usry was ultimately determined to be innocent and the Electronic
Frontier Foundation called it a wild goose chase that demonstrated “the
very real threats to privacy and civil liberties posed by law enforcement
access to private genetic databases.''

The American people lately seem to in large part support police unconditionally
and want very much for them to have the authority to do that whenever they wish.

Same is true here.

The alternative is unpleasant.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, September 9, 2019 at 12:08:02 AM UTC+10, Winfield Hill wrote:

Bill Sloman wrote...

I paid about $100 to get my genome sequenced.

TMI.

There's certainly a lot of information there.

My nephew doesn't seem to have the 0.1% of East Asian/native American genetic material that I do. My bits were on two different chromosomes, which emphasises the lottery aspect.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[bitrex]

On 9/9/19 2:24 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 09/09/19 01:27, bitrex wrote:
On 9/8/19 7:26 PM, Tom Gardner wrote:

Now, five years later, when 23andMe and Ancestry Both have over a
million
customers, those warnings are looking prescient.  “Your relative's DNA
could turn you into a suspect,'' warns Wired, writing about a case from
earlier this year, in which New Orleans filmmaker Michael Usry became a
suspect in an unsolved murder case after cops did a familial genetic
search
using semen collected in 1996. The cops searched an Ancestry.com
database
and got a familial match to a saliva sample Usry's father had given
years
earlier. Usry was ultimately determined to be innocent and the
Electronic
Frontier Foundation called it a wild goose chase that demonstrated “the
very real threats to privacy and civil liberties posed by law
enforcement
access to private genetic databases.''

The American people lately seem to in large part support police
unconditionally and want very much for them to have the authority to
do that whenever they wish.


Same is true here.

The alternative is unpleasant.

I think a lot of right-wingers may be surprised when they find out a
lotta these Real American-populist types and jack-booted coppers and
military turn around and tell them "we were never your friends" and have
much different ideas about who _actually_ runs the country than "the
people."

'bout the most a left-libertarian can say is "you panicked over an
illegal-immigration panic cuz you thought white people were gonna go
extinct (lol!) and sold out your freedoms for pennies on the dollar.
told you so."