Listers At the risk of looking foolish, I think that this situation is something that should be brought up. I have submitted my DNA sample for testing, as part of a group surname project, to the Family Tree DNA people. As a result of what I have found out, I would strongly suggest that anyone who has not already paid the fee seriously reconsider. There is a major problem that should cause one and all to consider whether the project, and the fee, are worth it. On the 23d, I went to my FamilyTreeDNA.com file and determined the following: I have two exact 12 marker Y DNA matches. I also have 152 one step mutation 12 marker matches. I also have 334 two mutation matches. Thus,a total of 488 samples closely match my DNA sample on the 12 marker level. I also have, on the 25 marker level, with one mutation, 1 match. I am going to be told how to contact only 1 (yes only 1) of these 489 individuals who closely match my DNA. The other 488 simply do not exist. The reason? I have copied the reason given by a Cheryl Crane of Family Tree DNA. "The reason you do not see your two exact matches is that they are members of other group projects, and their status is Private, which restricts seeing/being seen by matches in other groups. The REO page is an anonymous database meant to give you an idea of where people you match or nearly match have more recently lived. Your Haplogroup gives a deep origin of your line, and so this information is meant to tell where your type of DNA has been found more recently. These results are from actual people who have tested, or have been part of scientific studies. You do not see who they are because this an anonymous database - ..." The company runing this program has clearly made no provision for telling people who have a match about the other persons. It should be very simply to simply inform someone that there is a match (or a apparently a large number of matches) but that they are "private". Then, at least give the person the choice of waiving the privacy status. Given this refusal to exchange information, I cannot see any reason to become part of this program. Under the current situation, I have simply wasted a bunch of my money. Unless the conditions are changed, and the option of waiving privacy limitations is granted, I would advise no one to waste any time or money on this. I would suggest that this message be forwarded to all genealogical sites that you are members of. Unless changes are made, this is simply a "rip off". Bill Dalton Gig Harbor, WA, USA

Thanks, Bill, for the warning on this DNA thing. However, this is *much* more than a rip-off. Once you provide your DNA info to someone, you have *NO* control over how it is used or shared. No matter what the site or organization tells you. Many of the organizations providing DNA testing have addresses in Salt Lake City or other cities in Utah. This *may* mean that these are LDS people adding to the info on you and your ancestors that members of that church use for religious purposes (i.e., converting your dead relatives to Mormonism). That's the primary reason the LDS church has microfilmed all those vital records from all over the world. In addition, once you submit it to an organization like this one, your DNA sample and its analysis are now at least theoretically available to anyone wiling to pay a price. What happens if insurance companies -- or your employer -- learn that you may be more likely to get a certain genetically transmitted disease? Or what if that information gets added to a database somewhere that's even further from your control. DNA is definitely a way to learn about your heritage. But trusting some organization just because it has a nifty web site or promises online to protect your privacy is something I'm not prepared to do. Am I paranoid? Perhaps. But I prefer to think of it as cautious. Once information exists electronically on a computer somewhere out there it is impossible to control how it is used or shared. There must be legitimate labs that will test you and your presumed relatives and keep your information confidential, but I don't think googling "dna testing" is the best way to find them. Be careful, folks! -- --- Richard A. Danca, Newton, MA mailto:rdanca@ix.netcom.com ----