I work in genomics. My lab, many of my friends and acquaintances work in genomics or had to dabble with it for at least one of their projects. You would think we would all be fascinated by this stuff, getting to know your own DNA and everything. Yet I don't know a single person who would even consider using 23andMe's service.<p>To me this is all an elaborate scam. Why on earth would <i>you pay them</i> to <i>give</i> them <i>your data</i>?! At least with Google et al. we know that if you are not paying for the product, you <i>are</i> the product. With this company you end up $100 (or whatever) short <i>and</i> you surrender your data for it to be sold to advertisers, insurance companies and whatnot. And not just stupid things like your Amazon shopping history or your latest Tinder conversations (which are in themselves pretty <i>damn</i> intimate if you ask me) but the most intimate thing of all. I actually disagree with behavioral genetics/sociobiology fundamentalists who think there's little more to the self than one's DNA, but just because one cannot make much out of it doesn't mean it can't be misused. If Gattaca implications sound scary, imagine what would happen if the decision makers had no idea what they were doing in the first place.<p>Because that's where we are at this point: just because X variant is associated with Y% more incidence of whatever disease does <i>not</i> mean extra care should be taken regarding risk factors, insurance policies, etc. The correlations are interesting when combined with other data but most of the time we have no idea what's going on and what it is that makes variant X cause disease Y, if it does at all. Doesn't mean it won't be misused.<p>Please people, don't pay to get your data swindled out of you. Stop with this weird fascination with your DNA, and stop trying to look for an answer when are barely asking the questions.
According to "An Association Between the Kinship and Fertility of Human Couple" (<a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5864/813.long" rel="nofollow">http://science.sciencemag.org/content/319/5864/813.long</a>), third (or fourth) cousins have optimal reproductive success. Reproductive success is not just the number of children (because 1st or 2nd cousins couples tend to have more children but with associated health and/or reproductive problems), but the whole descendance.
This is not a big deal. In fact likely better fertility for them: a 2008 deCODE study results show that couples related at the level of third cousins have the greatest number of offspring, with the greatest reproductive success observed for couples related at the level of third and fourth cousins. [1]<p>[1] <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258915?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum" rel="nofollow">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18258915?ordinalpos=1&it...</a>
The sociological effects of DNA matching sites are going to be interesting to watch. I personally found out a year or so ago that my dad wasn't my biological father. At the age of 45, that's an, um, <i>interesting</i> secret to suddenly discover.<p>Now, imagine what happens in a society with strict laws/rules/mores about this sort of thing? Well, we won't have to imagine for long. I'm quite sure my experience is a lot more common than most people realize, and I think much of the world isn't ready for it.
It's touched upon in the article, but in reality they're probably not third cousins.<p>23andme gives relationship estimates for people based on percentage of dna shared, these estimates are based general population data. However they're not accurate for endogamous
population like Ashkenazi Jews.<p>Any two Ashkenazi Jews who get married are likely to show up as cousins to each other, simply because there's so much shared DNA within that community. This isn't an exceptional case, but rather the norm for such populations.
You share (about) 1/128 of your genes with a third cousin. The chance of any (particular) recessive trait being passed on from both parents as a result of the inbreeding is a whopping 1 in 65,536.
A relative of mine who is a doctor mentioned to me that the opposite is a common problem when children volunteer to donate an organ to a parent. They must test for DNA compatibility which often yields bad surprises. Apparently it is gradual. The DNA of the first child almost always matches, the second a little less, the third is where the odds reduce significantly.<p>Granted that was in France...
I'm curious of the legitimacy of this story, given one of the comments at the bottom:<p>> Don’t believe the results. I’m retired FDA and investigated this company since its inception. 23and me swabs go to labcorp in NC. They aren’t a lab. They take the results and issue what is tantamount to a horoscope based on your demographic information. Save your $100 or whatever they are charging now.
Third cousins sounds like a non-issue to me, and it sounds like the author and spouse generally agree. I've never knowingly met any <i>second</i> cousins or any other descendants of my great-grandparents (who are not also in my grandparents' lineage).<p>I wonder if there are any estimates on how common unaware third-cousin marriages are.
Here is the transcript of a recent, interesting audio podcast with Anne Wojcicki, CEO of 23andMe. <a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/10/20/18002614/anne-wojcicki-23andme-dna-fake-science-goop-gwyneth-paltrow-kara-swisher-podcast-recode-decode" rel="nofollow">https://www.recode.net/2018/10/20/18002614/anne-wojcicki-23a...</a> I think what she argues in the podcast is quite reasonable.<p>Asked about the biggest mistake her startup made in the founding phase, she answered that " I think that we were overly optimistic about the state of scientific literacy in this country. "<p>And that is true in general. I live in Germany, I am a 23andMe customer, and from my results I learned quite a bit about myself. Locally, whenever I tried to talk about this genetic testing service, I have never had a deeper conversation about this subject matter, even with highly educated folks. It's similar to non-conversations about email encryption and IT security many of you readers might have had.
The author alluded to the link that her second child is autistic and the relatedness with her spouse.<p>But what's more glaring is that her second conception occurred when she was 37 and her husband 39. There are studies that showed the increased incidence of child autism conceived from older fathers.
Two thoughts came rushing to my mind after reading this.<p>Disclaimer: I have not researched the scientific background of these thoughts. They are mere thoughts.<p>It made me uncomfortable to read about the autistic child at the end of the story. Was Autism more probable because of the closer genetic relationship of parents?<p>I was raised in southern India, and some of our families have a fascinating astrological tradition about not marrying someone from same "Gothram".<p><a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotra" rel="nofollow">https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotra</a><p>Is it possible that our ancestors knew that certain genetic combinations were unhealthy/undesirable even without a scientific background and adopted these rules for the society?
Several commenters in this discussion have taken as read that the couple are third cousins. Reading the <i>whole</i> article, one finds buried at the bottom the fact that this turned out to be unproven, because the genetic tests are based upon general assumptions that are not true for their segment of the population.
We're all related, really. It just depends to what degree you want to consider "related". I'm related to my cat, to you, and even to the tree outside my office if I go back enough generations.