Police have long had access to fingerprint and DNA data bases … usually ‘populated’ by criminals and suspects.
On occasion, crime scene DNA samples have been matched to genealogical traits directly or indirectly — by honing in on family member DNA profiles.
Increasingly, facial recognition is being used to track down suspects and potential witnesses.
There have 2 recently revealed advances on the facial recognition front that have moved the technology to a higher and more controversial level.
Instead of submitting SAT scores, take an ancestry-DNA test.
=============
Call it the “Elizabeth Warren Method”.
The Senator used DMA testing to “prove” that she is at least 1/10th of 1% Native American and she stands behind the legitimacy of her claiming minority status for academic standing ….
Tech note: The DNA testers inferred from Warren’s lab sample that she has some Native American DNA tracing back 6 to 10 generations (i.e. hundreds of years). “Inferred” because they don’t have enough certified Indian DNA in their data base to ascertain Indian ancestry. So, they “project” off of South American DNA that they assume mimics Native Americans. Said differently, 1/10th of 1% is probably overstated … with a very wide margin of error. In mathspeak, the result is not statistically different from zero.
Math note: 6 to 10 generations ago translates to between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Indian blood … 1/1,024 = .0009765 ~.001 ~ 1/10th of 1%. That’s about a big toe nail’s worth of Indian blood
A veritable Pandora’s has been opened.…
As previously reported, some colleges are no longer requiring (or accepting) SAT & ACT scores
See University of Chicago drops SAT / ACT scores … say, what?
The action is a thinly veiled move to “diversify” the student body by throttling the number of high scoring Asian-American admissions.
==============
I’m not a big fan of the commercial DNA testing done by ancestry sites.
But, they may be a tool for getting kids into better colleges.
Ancestry DNA tests are delivering some shockers.
=============
Yesterday, we wrote about a relatively common situation: ancestry DNA results that don’t jive with a person’s prior beliefs regarding their race or heritage.
Let’s open another of Pandora’s DNA boxes today…
==============
The NY Post ran an article titled “My ancestry test revealed a genetic bombshell”.
Instead of submitting SAT scores, take an ancestry-DNA test.
=============
Let’s open Pandora’s box today…
As previously reported, some colleges are no longer requiring (or accepting) SAT & ACT scores
See University of Chicago drops SAT / ACT scores … say, what?
The action is a thinly veiled move to “diversify” the student body by throttling the number of high scoring Asian-American admissions.
==============
I’m not a big fan of the commercial DNA testing done by ancestry sites.
But, they may be a tool for getting kids into better colleges.
Maybe privacy just doesn’t matter any more.
============
I was a bit surprised when a group of friends were chatting about DNA testing thru 23andMe, Ancestry.com and other sites.
As usual, I was an outlier since I’m skeptical of the science and worry about the privacy implications…
Let’s end our DNA series on a statistical note…
As I’m sure you know, President Trump often calls Senator Elizabeth Warren “Pocahontas” … a reference to her claim of Native American ancestry.
Nobody seems to deny the fact that she self-classified herself as a Native American and “person of color” on her academics records.
Skeptics say that was to secure minority preferences.
Supporters say “so what?” … she might be and there’s no evidence of preferential treatment.
================
So, how to resolve this thorny issue?
You know the drill …
CSI techs find some DNA at the crime scene … they run it through the criminal database … and BAM … they got a match and the perp is arrested.
Only problem: the police database of DNA profiles is relatively limited to criminals.
What about bad guys who don’t have a criminal record?
===========
Well, it seems the police have come up with a clever way to to expand their DNA files … by a lot.
NPR says …
“Getting the results of a genetic test can be a bit like opening Pandora’s box … you might learn that you’re likely to develop an incurable disease later on in life.”
There’s a federal law that’s supposed to protect people from having their own genes used against them, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA.
Under GINA, it’s illegal for health insurers to raise rates or to deny coverage because of someone’s genetic code.
But the law has a loophole: It only applies to health insurance.
Some insurance can be denied or priced high because of a person’s DNA.
Here’s an example … and a prediction.
NPR says …
“Getting the results of a genetic test can be a bit like opening Pandora’s box … you might learn that you’re likely to develop an incurable disease later on in life.”
There’s a federal law that’s supposed to protect people from having their own genes used against them, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA.
Under GINA, it’s illegal for health insurers to raise rates or to deny coverage because of someone’s genetic code.
But the law has a loophole: It only applies to health insurance.
Some insurance can be denied or priced high because of a person’s DNA.
Here’s an example … and a prediction.
NPR says …
“Getting the results of a genetic test can be a bit like opening Pandora’s box … you might learn that you’re likely to develop an incurable disease later on in life.”
There’s a federal law that’s supposed to protect people from having their own genes used against them, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA.
Under GINA, it’s illegal for health insurers to raise rates or to deny coverage because of someone’s genetic code.
But the law has a loophole: It only applies to health insurance.
Some insurance can be denied or priced high because of a person’s DNA.
Here’s an example … and a prediction.
NPR says …
“Getting the results of a genetic test can be a bit like opening Pandora’s box … you might learn that you’re likely to develop an incurable disease later on in life.”
There’s a federal law that’s supposed to protect people from having their own genes used against them, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA.
Under GINA, it’s illegal for health insurers to raise rates or to deny coverage because of someone’s genetic code.
But the law has a loophole: It only applies to health insurance.
Some insurance can be denied or priced high because of a person’s DNA.
Here’s an example … and a prediction.
NPR says …
“Getting the results of a genetic test can be a bit like opening Pandora’s box … you might learn that you’re likely to develop an incurable disease later on in life.”
There’s a federal law that’s supposed to protect people from having their own genes used against them, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA.
Under GINA, it’s illegal for health insurers to raise rates or to deny coverage because of someone’s genetic code.
But the law has a loophole: It only applies to health insurance.
Some insurance can be denied or priced high because of a person’s DNA.
Here’s an example … and a prediction.
The Homa Files 