Today's NY Times has an article on 23andMe. D.

Thanks for your perspective, Ruth. Full disclosure -- I had a consulting contract in the curation department of 23andMe a couple of years ago, and I know how hard they work to retrieve and analyze the relevant literature for SNP associations. 23andMe does have a disclaimer on the page a visitor sees about the health reports: "The genotyping services of 23andMe are performed in LabCorp's CLIA-certified laboratory. The tests have not been cleared or approved by the FDA but have been analytically validated according to CLIA standards. The information on this page is intended for research and educational purposes only, and is not for diagnostic use." https://www.23andme.com/health/all/ This is not a hurried-up statement in response to the recent FDA letter. The earliest capture that I can retrieve is dated October 6th, 2010. http://web.archive.org/web/20101006025405/https://www.23andme.com/health/all/ Ann Turner On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Ruth Cattles Cottrell < ruthcottrell@verizon.net> wrote: > Full disclosure - I work for LabCorp, (parent company of NGI, CLIA approved > lab, who I believe provides the 23 raw data) - as a Quality Manager and > past > Compliance Officer and am a medical technologist. Not speaking for LCA, of > course, but personally, I see this in the same light as the situation with > patients being able to access their own lab test results. For many years, > CMS required that lab results only be given to authorized providers - > physicians who order the tests. Some states passed state laws and became > "right to know" states. In the past decade, CMS decreed that all states > were "right to know" so now we provide lab results directly to patients > including through patient portals such as the Beacon system. > > Also, beginning about 15 years ago, reference labs were faced with > "internet > testing." Clients would set up accounts with unsuspecting reference labs > and websites where anyone could go to the website, choose tests, place them > in their cart, pay by credit card and have a requisition printed to take to > a local draw station. Reference labs spent years working through this > federal compliance maze and finally it is pretty much settled with the > internet companies having CLIA approved lab directors. > > So, the real argument is whether this is a medical device OR simply > allowing > people to order and access their own results which is already occurring in > the situations I mention. Based on the open access for test results now > available, the FDA will be hard pressed to make the medical device argument > stick. > > Just my two cents worth, > Ruth Cottrell >

Full disclosure - I work for LabCorp, (parent company of NGI, CLIA approved lab, who I believe provides the 23 raw data) - as a Quality Manager and past Compliance Officer and am a medical technologist. Not speaking for LCA, of course, but personally, I see this in the same light as the situation with patients being able to access their own lab test results. For many years, CMS required that lab results only be given to authorized providers - physicians who order the tests. Some states passed state laws and became "right to know" states. In the past decade, CMS decreed that all states were "right to know" so now we provide lab results directly to patients including through patient portals such as the Beacon system. Also, beginning about 15 years ago, reference labs were faced with "internet testing." Clients would set up accounts with unsuspecting reference labs and websites where anyone could go to the website, choose tests, place them in their cart, pay by credit card and have a requisition printed to take to a local draw station. Reference labs spent years working through this federal compliance maze and finally it is pretty much settled with the internet companies having CLIA approved lab directors. So, the real argument is whether this is a medical device OR simply allowing people to order and access their own results which is already occurring in the situations I mention. Based on the open access for test results now available, the FDA will be hard pressed to make the medical device argument stick. Just my two cents worth, Ruth Cottrell -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Tim Janzen Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 12:19 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds Dear All, The letter doesn't say that 23andMe must discontinue testing or selling its product. In any case, the way I interpret this 23andMe will not be able to advertize on the internet, on TV, on radio, or in printed media until they have this situation resolved. Exactly what they will be able to say to promote their product on their web site remains to be seen. In any case, I would be very surprised if the FDA forces 23andMe to stop selling its kits. This situation will have a negative impact on autosomal DNA used for genetic genealogy purposes. Many of my matches at 23andMe tested initially for the health side of things and then got interested in the genealogical side after they had been tested. I think that this will also result in fewer transfers from 23andMe into the FTDNA Family Finder database, which is also not a good thing. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Roberta Estes Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:35 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds In 2010 the FDA sent warning letters. 23andMe has failed to comply. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/25/fda-orders-23andme-to-discontinue-testin g/ ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Well, consider what will happen if they decide to simply emulate FTDNA and Ancestry, and not report medically related SNPs: they will lose their real uniqueness, and order rates will drop. They of course could still continue to offer everything else. Doug McDonald sorry to toppost: I HATE OUTLOOK -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marilyn Bess Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds I read the letter and understand the reasoning behind it. What possible affects could this have on us who use this site for genealogy. Marilyn

WikiTree can now automatically display up to 7 generations of your ancestors who could have contributed to your X chromosome.  See: http://www.wikitree.com/treewidget/Roberts-7085/89 However I believe the description could be improved.  It currently reads: "Men inherit their X-chromosome from their mother. Women get half from each parent. The percentages below are rough guidelines for an average of how much of Peter's X-chromosome was inherited from each ancestor. These are adapted from Blaine Bettinger's X-DNA charts. " I believe it should read: "Males inherit one X-chromosome from their mother.  Females inherit one X-chromosome from their mother and one X-chromosome from their father.  The chart below shows up to 7 generations of known ancestors who could have contributed to Peter’s X-chromosome and their approximate average percentage of contribution." What do you recommend as a more accurate description? Soon WikiTree will also be able to automatically display about 7 generations of a person's descendants who could have inherited their ancestor's (that person's) X chromosome.  I asked for WikiTree to display at least 10 generations for the above but I've not been successful in that regard. Thanks and sincerely, Peter Peter J. Roberts WikiTree is a free single online collaborative family tree which can link direct paternal lines to Y-DNA results and direct maternal lines to mtDNA results, and comparison charts for each.  Registered members can connect their private family histories to the tree. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/04/wikitree-and-dna/

Hi Tim, I looked back at some of the press releases, and in June, Andy Page was added as their new President. This wasn't too long after 23andMe announced their drive to sell 1 million kits by the end of 2013, so his focus has probably been there. It kind of sounds like the FDA compliance issue might have gotten pushed aside and neglected in light of their new focus. http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/06/13/expect-to-see-23andme-a ds-as-the-company-tries-to-take-genetic-tests-mainstream/ But maybe this is a good thing in that it will force 23andMe to finish jumping through those hoops and then it will be done. Roberta -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Tim Janzen Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 1:19 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds Dear All, The letter doesn't say that 23andMe must discontinue testing or selling its product. In any case, the way I interpret this 23andMe will not be able to advertize on the internet, on TV, on radio, or in printed media until they have this situation resolved. Exactly what they will be able to say to promote their product on their web site remains to be seen. In any case, I would be very surprised if the FDA forces 23andMe to stop selling its kits. This situation will have a negative impact on autosomal DNA used for genetic genealogy purposes. Many of my matches at 23andMe tested initially for the health side of things and then got interested in the genealogical side after they had been tested. I think that this will also result in fewer transfers from 23andMe into the FTDNA Family Finder database, which is also not a good thing. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Roberta Estes Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:35 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds In 2010 the FDA sent warning letters. 23andMe has failed to comply. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/25/fda-orders-23andme-to-discontinue-testin g/ ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In 2010 the FDA sent warning letters. 23andMe has failed to comply. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/25/fda-orders-23andme-to-discontinue-testin g/ -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Greg Matthews Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:50 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds I thought we went through all this FDA stuff with all of the labs a few years ago? On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376 > 296.htm > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It could put 23andMe out of business. I got tested with them for medical reasons, not genealogy, and found I have Warfarin sensitivity. Knowing this could someday save my life. I don't want this kind of testing banned. Alternatively, nor do I want to need a prescription from my doctor to get tested, with my doctor in control of interpreting results, because this is where it appears we're headed if the FDA gets its way. Knowledge is a good thing, and just because there's a potential for some people to mis-use it shouldn't prevent the rest of us from getting it. If you want to protect people's health, ban cigarettes and alcohol, not genetic testing! Dina > From: Marilyn Bess > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 11:38 AM > To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from > the Feds > > I read the letter and understand the reasoning behind it. What possible > affects could this have on us who use this site for genealogy. Marilyn > > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm

I read the letter and understand the reasoning behind it. What possible affects could this have on us who use this site for genealogy. Marilyn On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I thought we went through all this FDA stuff with all of the labs a few years ago? On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm > > > ______________________________ > For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: > http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Marketing can mean two things. It can mean advertising and selling or it can mean just advertising. It appears to be the first, although I hope not. There is absolutely nothing good about this for the genetic genealogy community. It will hurt FTDNA profits as well due to the lack of transfers. CeCe Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Tim Janzen Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:19 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Reply To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds Dear All, The letter doesn't say that 23andMe must discontinue testing or selling its product. In any case, the way I interpret this 23andMe will not be able to advertize on the internet, on TV, on radio, or in printed media until they have this situation resolved. Exactly what they will be able to say to promote their product on their web site remains to be seen. In any case, I would be very surprised if the FDA forces 23andMe to stop selling its kits. This situation will have a negative impact on autosomal DNA used for genetic genealogy purposes. Many of my matches at 23andMe tested initially for the health side of things and then got interested in the genealogical side after they had been tested. I think that this will also result in fewer transfers from 23andMe into the FTDNA Family Finder database, which is also not a good thing. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Roberta Estes Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:35 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds In 2010 the FDA sent warning letters. 23andMe has failed to comply. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/25/fda-orders-23andme-to-discontinue-testin g/ ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm

Dear All, The letter doesn't say that 23andMe must discontinue testing or selling its product. In any case, the way I interpret this 23andMe will not be able to advertize on the internet, on TV, on radio, or in printed media until they have this situation resolved. Exactly what they will be able to say to promote their product on their web site remains to be seen. In any case, I would be very surprised if the FDA forces 23andMe to stop selling its kits. This situation will have a negative impact on autosomal DNA used for genetic genealogy purposes. Many of my matches at 23andMe tested initially for the health side of things and then got interested in the genealogical side after they had been tested. I think that this will also result in fewer transfers from 23andMe into the FTDNA Family Finder database, which is also not a good thing. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Roberta Estes Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 9:35 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds In 2010 the FDA sent warning letters. 23andMe has failed to comply. http://dna-explained.com/2013/11/25/fda-orders-23andme-to-discontinue-testin g/

That would not be related -- it probably means that they couldn't extract enough DNA on the first time around and they will try again. But where did you get that 800 number? AFAIK, 23andMe doesn't have one. Googling the number brings up something about kidney stones. Ann Turner On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:22 AM, bittle1@frontier.com <bittle1@frontier.com>wrote: > Called the 800-239-5230 , 23andMe and "all CR are busy taking other > calls, Your wait time is 30 minutes". > > > > > >________________________________ > > From: "bittle1@frontier.com" <bittle1@frontier.com> > >To: "autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com" <autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com> > >Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:55 AM > > >Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning > letter from the Feds > > > > > >I received an email from 23andMe, Sunday 11-24-13 telling me that I would > have to be retested at no charge. > >Wonder if the FDA letter had anything to do with testing being suspended > until compliance? I have tested with Ancestry and FTdna with no problems re > the saliva sample. >

Called the 800-239-5230 , 23andMe and "all CR are busy taking other calls, Your wait time is 30 minutes". >________________________________ > From: "bittle1@frontier.com" <bittle1@frontier.com> >To: "autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com" <autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:55 AM >Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds > > >I received an email from 23andMe, Sunday 11-24-13 telling me that I would have to be retested at no charge. >Wonder if the FDA letter had anything to do with testing being suspended until compliance? I have tested with Ancestry and FTdna with no problems re the saliva sample. > > > >>________________________________ >> From: Marilyn Bess <marilynbess1939@gmail.com> >>To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com >>Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:38 AM >>Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds >> >> >>I read the letter and understand the reasoning behind it.  What possible >>affects could this have on us who use this site for genealogy.  Marilyn >> >> >>On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm >>> >>> >>> ______________________________ >>> For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >>> http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> >>> >> >> >>______________________________ >>For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >>http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >> >> >>------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> > > >______________________________ >For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

I received an email from 23andMe, Sunday 11-24-13 telling me that I would have to be retested at no charge. Wonder if the FDA letter had anything to do with testing being suspended until compliance? I have tested with Ancestry and FTdna with no problems re the saliva sample. >________________________________ > From: Marilyn Bess <marilynbess1939@gmail.com> >To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com >Sent: Monday, November 25, 2013 10:38 AM >Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] 2013 > 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13 warning letter from the Feds > > >I read the letter and understand the reasoning behind it.  What possible >affects could this have on us who use this site for genealogy.  Marilyn > > >On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Mary Guler <mlmguler@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> >> http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm >> >> >> ______________________________ >> For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >> http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > >______________________________ >For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: >http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > >

Dear Connie, There is no easy answer to this question. The question should be answered based on how much time you have to investigate HIRs less than 10 cMs and the total quantity of HIRs you have less than 10 cMs. I personally attempt to get pedigree charts for all my Family Finder matches (threshold 7.7 cMs) and 23andMe matches (threshold 7 cMs). I retain all HIRs over 3.5 cMs from my Family Finder matches in my personal comprehensive match lists. You could consider increasing this threshold to 5 cMs, but you will be deleting a fair number of IBD HIRs if you set the threshold much higher than 5 cMs. Keep in mind that the point at which there is a 50/50 split between IBD HIRs and IBS HIRs is around 7 cMs. If there is a strong paper trail supporting a shared ancestor for HIRs as short as 2-3 cMs you should retain that information. In terms of HIRs on the same chromosome that are in close proximity to each other, I suggest caution. Many of these are secondary to crossovers that occurred at that location, particularly if the breaks are of any significant length (over 5 cMs or so). Some of the breaks are artificial and are secondary to genotyping errors. In such cases it is hard to be certain if there is a genotyping error, particularly if you don't have the raw data for your match. In any case, if there is a relatively short break in what would otherwise be a long HIR consider the possibility of a genotyping error as the cause for the break. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Rvsailor@aol.com Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 5:56 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Length of Segments of Shared cMs I am a project administrator of two atDNA projects. When dealing with a spread sheet of several ICW cousin matches downloaded from the GAP, should I discard all segments less than 10 cMs or should that number be closer to 7 cMs when the paperwork trail supports relationships? I initially went through the list and deleted everything below 10 but was concerned about discarding some of the 7, 8, and 9 matches as some had the same start or end points with others. Also, how should I handle matches on the same chromosome with breaks in the segments? Thanks. Connie Bradshaw

I have also not been overly impressed with Ancestry.com's phasing, particularly with their lowest confidence matches. I did an analysis on this topic in August. See http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/AUTOSOMAL-DNA/2013-08/13765547 77 for background. I found that about 59% of my lowest confidence matches did not appear in the match lists for either of my parents. However, for the moderate confidence and higher level matches, less than 10% of my matches did not appear in the match lists for either of my parents. I think it is reasonable for people who have tested at Ancestry.com to encourage their matches that Ancestry.com who are listed as moderate confidence or higher to transfer their data to GEDmatch so that you can review the matching HIR data there. It is clear that the optimum phasing is done with two-parent/one-child trios and data from other close relatives. Phasing using population data should be used only after all the phasing using close relatives has already been completed. Sincerely, Tim Janzen -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 5:17 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Finding shared atDNA ancestry without phasing Barbara As I understand it, they look at your DNA data in general and select some other persons data (called a reference sample) who might be a stand in for your parents and phase your data. The theory, as I get it, is that this pseudo-phasing is better than nothing and helps segregate out some IBS matches. I've looked at a lot of Ancestry matches who have uploaded to GEDmatch and match me there. I've tried to Triangulate them when several fall on overlapping segments - both among the Ancestry kits, and with kits from the other companies. Although a few do Triangulate (indicating IBD segments); a lot do not. Many (most) of my Ancestry matches at GEDmatch are in the bottom third of my list of matches there, with small segments which usually turn out to be IBS - I quit using them - even with Jeff's tool, I was usually unsuccessful in finding the Ancestry kits at GEDmatch who matched me, back on my Ancestry list. To say the least - I was not impressed with what they called phasing. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!

Dear Jim, My technique doesn't involve phasing. It simply involves using the results from a parent/child pair to segregate the matches in any particular region of the genome. The technique is incredibly simple to implement if one has data from a parent/child pair. If you use this technique you don't have to worry about doing all the extra comparisons that one has to do with people like match A and match B as in the example you provided. In any case, I still have to worry about some of the matches being IBS, particularly for HIRs under 10 cMs in length. I also have about 81% of my mom's atDNA now assigned to a parent. It will be really hard to get this to 100% unless I can in some way retrieve my mom's mother's sample from the SMGF. I don't think you need to call segments you have linked to a shared ancestor "pseudo-segments". Those are true segments of DNA even if you haven't yet phased them. You may not have figured out the ancestor that the segments came from yet, but they are valid DNA segments that came from either your father or your mother. Like you, I am constantly trying to triangulate on matches who share overlapping segments of DNA with my parents. Sincerely, Tim -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 4:55 AM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Finding shared atDNA ancestry without phasing Thanks, Tim, For those of us not using phasing techniques, and instead rely on various segment rules, I think the Triangulation technique is still an excellent tool. Using the utilities at 23andMe, GEDmatch and FTDNA, along with the closest cousins I can find (with known MRCAs), and working with every Match I can find with segment data, I now have about 80 percent of my atDNA segments assigned to a parent. When I say "my atDNA segments", I mean pseudo-segments which are a combination of segments from Matches. For example, if I can Triangulate A (21-34Mbp); B (22-45Mbp); C (25-36Mbp); D (27-52MBp) on one Chr, then I create a pseudo-segment (21-52Mbp) which is what I got from our Common Ancestor. In comparing A B C D to each other I usually find that their shared segments are cover more than the segment I got. This is OK - it just means our Common Ancestor started out with a segment that was, say (15-60Mbp) and different ones of us got different, but overlapping parts of it. Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime!

Thanks, Jim. That is exactly what I needed to understand. I appreciate your response and the clarity of it. -----Original Message----- From: autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:autosomal-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Jim Bartlett Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 2:12 PM To: autosomal-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [AUTOSOMAL-DNA] Question based on results Constance, No. There is a roughly 50/50 chance that the Common Ancestor is through either parent of your Match. You know that your daughter's match is through you and your mother, because she has the same segment with you two. You know that your match is through your mother, because you both have the same segment with your Match. The Common Ancestor, however, could be through either of your mother's parents - you just have no clues at this point as to which of your mother's parents passed this segment down. You also have no clues about how your Match got this segment - which of her parents passed this segment down. If you or your mother have any other known relative who also matches on this segment, then that will tell you more information, depending on how you are related to the relative. The same is true with a Match - if he/she has a known relative who also match you on this segment, then that will tell the Match where the Common Ancestor is on his/her ancestry. atDNA lets us match cousins with any path (male/female mix) from the Common Ancestor, but this is a two edged sword... just because you know part of the path on your side, doesn't tell you anything about the path on the Matches side. Jim Bartlett On 11/21/13, Constance Shotts<ccts2013@carolina.rr.com> wrote: I have been reading all the discussions and trying to follow the threads, but this is a steep learning curve for me. I have a situation that I think I understand, but I want to see if I am on the right track if you will indulge me. My granddaugther, my daughter and myself have all been tested at 23andMe and have our results. There is an individual who is predicted as a 3rd to 5th cousin with all of us (but not yet proven genealogically). We all match on chromosome 1. The results show this person's matches to the three of us as follows: 29.3 cM (Genetic distance) 3846 (#SNPS) 27.6 cM (Genetic distance) 3580 (#SNPS) 10.6 cM (Genetic distance) 1429 (#SNPS) With the person matching all three generations on the same chromosome, we are sharing a common ancestor and likely on the maternal side for her as well as us. Is that correct? ______________________________ For answers to Frequently Asked Questions about mailing lists, please see: http://dgmweb.net/MailingListFAQs.html ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to AUTOSOMAL-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message