Hello Liz and All - I am sure some of you will be whistling a different tune if you had the whole / "rest of the story" at hand :) it is legal and NOT done improperly and/or deceitfully ... read beyond the whimsical antics of those interviewed in that entertaining article :) In order to appreciate this semi new DNA tool "genetic genealogy" one has to know how to use it and how it works :) Eventually we ALL run into that proverbial block wall in our genealogical research, no matter which lineage you are trying to document ... the paper trail eventually runs dry due to nature, wars and other man made disasters ... it's just a fact :( your eventually not going to find enough [if any] proof to prove a connection some where along the line from one generation to the next ... The NY Times article [due to print space and the copy editors attempt to make the story sensational and SELL more papers] didn't tell the whole story and cut key info out ... which was not entirely the reporters fault alone "/ There is a newspaper in central California that ran the same story with a different caption, along with additional info that the NYTimes left out :) Several of the people who were interviewed for this article, HAVE posted rebuttals on Dick Eastman's blog ... if anyone cares to check them out before passing further condemnation on the reported actions portrayed in that article :) http://blog.eogn.com/eastmans_online_genealogy/2007/04/extreme_genealo.html note that I am not posting this reply here to change anyone's mind ... but more for the benefit of those who might be interested in this NEW avenue of research / a companion tool to add to ones genealogical toolbox :) it falls into that same category for those who love to use a soundex and those stuck on one specific spelling .... each tailors / shortens their families heritage according to what they want to present to the next generation :) ----------------------------------------------------------------- what follows is a brief over view of DNA testing for those interested ... ----------------------------------------------------------------- With DNA testing, the test results of two individuals when compared, will tell if they are related ... the test and results will NOT identify a specific individual, but rather a whole group of people who are related ... for instance the Y-DNA which "only" males have, is pass from father to son, generation after generation with slight mutations every so often ... so knowing that [I will use myself in this example] ... me, my son, my brother, his sons, my father, his brothers, their sons, my paternal grandfather, his brothers, their sons, and so on back up the "direct" male lineage ... we will all "most likely" have the exact same Y-DNA test results :) I say most likely, as I had mentioned the "slight mutations" above ... once a mutation occurs, all descendants on down from where it occurred [and each time it occurs], will carry that same mutation, which is an excellent indication of separate branch(es) of that family :) Another reason for test results to not match exactly [not referring to just "slight mutations" here] ... when the test results of two individuals that normally would have assumed would have matched ... this is an indication of one of several events that are referred to as NPE's [non-paternal-experiences] of those there might have been an adoption [known or not / recorded or not] or maybe an out of wedlock birth [he's not your daddy] ... none of these have to be something that happened recently, and doesn't imply that great great granny was a hussy ... it could have been recent or several generations ago, and we might never learn what the situation was, just that something occurred some where along the li! ne :) Note: if you know of and/or suspect there could be a NPE situation and you would rather not know, or not have it known, this sort of testing IS NOT for you ... what I refer to as "duct-tape genealogy" mistakenly latching your documented lineage onto the wrong individual some where along the line, it will show up when your test results don't come close to matching others who claim to be descendants of a same common ancestor as you claim also ... or visa versa :) The Y-DNA is the more popular testing being used in genetic genealogy as it is easier to follow, and follows the direct male line [typically represented by a specific surname usually] ... for a picture example of this, look at your pedigree chart ... if number one is a male, numbers 2, 4, 8, 16 and so forth on that direct unbroken male lineage, will all have the exact same Y-DNA ... all male cousin's and uncles branching off of any of those generations on back, will also have the exact same Y-DNA :) The other DNA testing that's being used in genetic genealogy, is the mtDNA, "both" males and females have this ... we get it from our mother, BUT only the female children pass it onto the next generation ... it's a bit harder to use in finding connections with other people, as the female's surname usually changes with each subsequent generation coming down through the generations ... for a visual of this, again looking at ones pedigree chart, number one [no matter if male or female] along with numbers 3, 7, 15, 31 and so on back up the "direct" female lineage will all have the exact same mtDNA ... and as will any Aunt's and their children branching off of those generations on back :) also note that the mutations that might occur in the mtDNA happen less frequently than they do in the Y-DNA ... This DNA testing will not work alone by it's self ... as it will not tell you exactly how your related to another matching genetic cousin ... we still need to pursue the old fashion research methods :) but through this type of testing one will be able to tell "IF" they are researching the correct lineage ... those that you have a match with, ARE going to have a common ancestor somewhere back up the family tree with you :) Once those matches are discovered, you can began to compare research notes with those new cousins ... you or they just may have more info, enabling the other to get beyond their road block :) and possibly your ticket getting back across the pond too ! Now note in the two examples I used, to show the path the Y-DNA / mtDNA took to get down to you ... your wondering what about those ancestors in the middle of the pedigree chart ? ? ? for those, you will need to find / locate a specific person who falls into the right "chain of command" to be tested :) say you were interested in DNA results of number 12, your mothers paternal grandfather [Y-DNA] ... any one of these likely candidates can be tested, your mothers father, one of your mothers brothers, one of their sons, a brother of your mothers father or one of their sons and so on ... a direct unbroken "male" line back to the individual who you are interested in :) Now say it was the wife of that maternal great grandfather number 13, that you were interested in ... likely candidates would be your mothers father, any one of "his" siblings, any one of your mothers fathers "sisters children" ... males have the mtDNA of their mother, but do not pass it on to any of their children ... it would need to be a direct unbroken female lineage down to the person who is being tested [no hop-scotching back and forth between the male and female ancestors] ... Those who want to use this DNA testing to prove/ verify Native American ancestry ... this sort of DNA testing used for genetic genealogy, will only indicate "IF" it is on the DIRECT line ... i.e. if your a male, and it's your fathers mothers father, who is the purported NA ... this great grandfathers Y-DNA did not get passed onto your fathers mother :( like wise if it was your mothers fathers mother who was the NA ... her mtDNA "did" get passed onto your mothers "father" BUT your mother did NOT get the mtDNA from her father, but rather from her own mother ... There is a test called Autosomal DNA testing [not typically used for genetic genealogy], that might indicate if you have Native American ancestry and what the percentage might be, but it will not tell you from which ancestor it came from ... and it has been noted, that this type of test is NOT very reliable ... as two biological siblings [with exact same parents] can both be tested and not come up with the exact same percentages of Native American / African / Asian and/or European .... as each other :( Now why is the autosomal DNA test not very reliable ? and the Y-DNA and mtDNA is reliable :) the YDNA and mtDNA material does not recombine ... they are what they are when passed on and basically if the Y is present, the child is going to be a boy, if the Y is not present then the child is going to be a girl ... the rest of the gene material does recombine, half coming from each parent and with each subsequent generation as new gene material is added to the mixture, the gene material from previous generations get's watered down ... I hope this answered some of the basic questions some of you might have had :) Ken - hdpth-DNA a co-founder of ISOGG www.isogg.org the International Society of Genetic Genealogy with over 3,500 members from 44 countries in just about 2 years!

The opinions given on this list a few days ago regarding using DNA for genealogy, prompted by the NYT article, was interesting to say the least. Just last week I received the results from FTDNA that gave me the answer to a question regarding a relationship that could not be answered in any exsisting records after 16 years of searching. Previously, DNA testing had also elimated about 70 lines of Stewart/Stuart families in VA and NC which would have probably taken me several lifetimes to research. DNA to me is the best thing since sliced bread to separate out common surnames as long as it is used in conjunction with a well researched paper trail. The sentence about the hair interested me, can one of you tell me if FTDNA accepts a piece of hair to run the test and if so, do you use the vials in their kit or just how does that work? You know, for really old folks, that would be easier than asking them to swab their cheeks. ---- of course, I would ask their permission : -) Thanks to anyone who knows the answer.