DNA Consultants Home of the DNA Fingerprint

CARLSBAD, Calif., April 1, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- As the global market leader in human identification, Life Technologies Corporation (NASDAQ: LIFE) announced today it signed a global exclusive agreement with LGC Forensics for the right to distribute ParaDNA®, a portable rapid DNA system that determines the quality of human DNA faster and more economically than any existing method.  This announcement is the second in a series of new Rapid DNA products the company will introduce to expand the landscape beyond traditional Rapid DNA systems.


Watch video on how the ParaDNA works

http://paradna.lgcforensics.com/demonstration/

Researchers at the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, Germany last week announced they have completed the first high-quality sequencing of a Neanderthal genome based on a hundredth of a gram of DNA extracted from a 100,000 year-old toe bone in a Russian cave and are making it freely available online for other scientists to study. Advantageously, Neanderthal and Denisovan remains were found in the same cave, making for breakthrough comparisons in hominid history. 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/03/19/researchers-publish-full-neanderthal-genome

In a press release on March 19, 2013, Dr. Svante Pääbo, the head of the team that released the draft genome of Neanderthal man three years ago, said:  “We are in the process of comparing this Neandertal genome to the Denisovan genome as well as to the draft genomes of other Neandertals. We will gain insights into many aspects of the history of both Neandertals and Denisovans and refine our knowledge about the genetic changes that occurred in the genomes of modern humans after they parted ways with the ancestors of Neandertals and Denisovans.” 

The group plans to publish a major paper later this year. 

Maybe If It's First Generation Sex-Linked Testing, Not Autosomal 

Dust off the crystal ball. Scientists consider DNA ancestry services “genetic astrology,” according to a recent BBC article by Pallab Ghosh. In “Some DNA Ancestry Services Akin to ‘Genetic Astrology’,” Ghosh quotes Professor David Balding as maintaining that ‘“such histories are either so general as to be personally meaningless or they are just speculation from thin evidence.’” One article, “Don’t Believe the Guy Who Claims He’s Descended From Vikings,” quotes evolutionary geneticist Mark Thomas, as saying “these tests have so little rigor that they are better thought of as genetic astrology.”  That may be right about some tests. But the key word is “some.”

Not all DNA ancestry tests or companies are created equal.  It is as much an oversimplification to suggest they are as it would be to claim that all lab tests are the same or all pharmaceutical drugs are the same. Do you get a shot for epilepsy when you have diabetes? Hardly. There are DNA tests and there are DNA tests. Customers are generally careful to get  the right medicine from a reputable doctor. A customer needs to be just as careful choosing a DNA test and a DNA ancestry company. Not all DNA ancestry companies, even some of the larger companies, have an ISO certified lab, for instance. This not only guarantees the reliability of results, it is also the highest standard in the genomics industry. A few have this laboratory benchmark, but it is, unfortunately, not required, in direct- to-the-consumer DNA testing. Would you want to entrust your genetic identity with anything less? The buyer needs to be aware that with non-certified labs there is a stronger possibility of contamination or lost or swapped samples. I know someone who was the unknown victim of a sample swapped. He thought he was someone else for two years.

Secondly, there are a variety of tests to choose from. There are sex-linked tests (Y chromosome, X chromosome- mitochondrial) and non-sex linked tests called autosomal. The sex-linked tests are haplotype tests based on genetic markers handed down by the male (Y chromosome, received only by other males) or female (mitochondrial). The industry started out with sex-linked testing, but its limitations dictated a move increasingly to autosomal or non-sex linked testing. There are weaknesses with sex-linked tests.

The mitochondrial genome is small compared with the nuclear genome according to the article “Mitochondrial Genome Analysis with Haplotyping” which means there cannot be that much variation with mitochondrial DNA analysis. For instance, some have expressed doubts that the recently found Leicester skeleton could be Richard III because of the mitochondrial DNA analysis that was done. Live Science writer, Stephanie Pappas, quoted Maria Avila, a computational biologist at the Center for GeoGenetics at the [British] Natural History Museum as saying “people could share mitochondrial DNA even if they don’t share a family tree” (Pappas).  

How is this possible? Mitochondrial DNA is ancient DNA and mutates slowly.  In the article, “Doubts Remain that the Leicester Body is Richard III,” a Mark Thomas at University College London is quoted as saying that “people can have matching mitochondrial DNA by chance and not be related.” So, it might not be Richard III after all. Male line haplotype testing has different limitations. “The Male Y- linked tests have very rapid mutation rates and are very fragile, so you can get a lot of errors with that type of testing,” according to Dr. Donald N.Yates, head of Research and Development for DNA Spectrum.

According to a recent New Scientist article by Colin Baras, “The Father of All Men Is 340,000 Years Old,” the Y chromosome seems more ancient than previously thought. If so, it is also less stable than we thought. Brian Sykes, Professor of Genetics at Oxford University and the author of The Seven Daughters of Eve, makes a strong argument that the Y chromosome is weakening and in trouble in his book, Adam’s Curse. He says it is “doomed to a slow and humiliating decline” (279) because of its instability and rapid genetic mutation and is thus headed toward extinction. Before the 1990’s paternity testing was based on Y chromosome comparisons and limited to fathers and sons. Sometimes, an uncle would be mistaken as the father. Today, it relies on autosomal DNA comparisons, can be applied to females, and is 99.99% accurate.

But then there are non-sex-linked Autosomal DNA tests which are based on a different science altogether. Anyone can take this traditional type of Autosomal DNA test because it does not rely on X or Y chromosomes (women are unable to take the Male Y- linked test and must entice a male in her line, if one is available, to take this test). This test is not testing ancient DNA but  goes back only some four or five generations, so it does not have these limitations. And it provides a complete analysis of all ancestral lines. Not just one line at a time as in haplotype testing. This is next generation ancestry DNA testing and the wave of the future. Moreover, this type of testing is more stable and has more scientific validity as it uses the same science that is used in the legal court system, by the government, and on CSI comparing loci markers to population databases. And two research teams independently reached the same groundbreaking results that the DNA mutation rate is slower than previously thought:  James X Sun et al., in the article, "A Direct Characterization of Human Mutation Based on Microsatellites," in Nature Genetics 44/10 (October 2012):1161-65, and A. Kong et al., in the article "Rate of de novoMutations and the importance of Father's Age to Disease Risk," in Nature 488 (2012):471-75. All done by the magic of math and laws of large numbers.

What does this mean concerning autosomal DNA ancestry tests? They have even more scientific validity. This second-generation type of DNA ancestry testing is based on these same genetic markers, and that is confirmation that the alleles on your DNA that are examined using a statistical basis have been relatively unchanged for the past 20,000 years. That’s about twice the length of what we call world history, hence a meaningful enough time frame for valid inferences about population patterns and ancestry of individuals. These are markers that everyone has (and why anyone can take an autosomal ancestry test).  These genetic markers change at a much slower rate than the Y chromosome which seems to be highly changeable, depending on the father’s age (Kong 201). (The Y chromosome is a marker only males have. It is used for other types of tests: male, haplotype, sex-linked DNA tests. Only males can take these tests, and it only provides information about that one male line).

Of course, anything can be over-interpreted. DNA testing is not magic. Maybe you should put that crystal ball up after all.

Behind the Numbers:  Jim Bentley

Jim Bentley, DNA Frontiersman

(Part Three of a Series)

We interviewed  one of Chromosomal Labs Bode Technology’s senior staff members, Director of Sales and Marketing Jim Bentley, to get his perspective on industry changes over the past thirty-five-plus years.

Jim Bentley.

When did you first get interested in DNA?

JB: I’ll have to preface my answer with a few remarks on “the early days.” When I graduated from Arizona State University in the 1970s, DNA testing as we know it, was not really a field that was in existence. There was not a lot going on. The little work I did with chromosomes was using electron microscopy. I worked in the biochemistry department, however and performed hundreds of assays using poly-acrylamide gel electrophoresis, mainly for separation of proteins. This technique, although improved and streamlined remains in use today for DNA-STR separation. The field we’re in today where we can determine a person’s profile and compare it with others for forensics  for relationships, ancestry, missing persons, adoptions and the like, that technology hadn’t been developed yet. It wasn’t quite as easy as it is today.

Tell us more about the evolution of DNA testing.

JB: It basically began with blood groups and types. The first paternity test was done in a court case with Charlie Chaplin in the 1940s. He was excluded as the father, but the court said he could go ahead and pay child support anyway—probably, because he could afford it. Since that time, scientists started moving past groups and types into some other techniques. Human Leukocyte Testing (HLA), DQ-Alpha, and Restriction Enzyme STR testing (RFLP) are examples of the evolution of DNA testing.

The big breakthrough came when Dr. Alec Jeffreys at the University of Leicester discovered STR testing in England the late 1980s. He used STR profiling on the Colin Pitchfork case. Colin Pitchfork became the first criminal convicted on the basis of DNA evidence and as a result of a mass DNA screening operation. He was charged with raping and murdering two teenage girls. Since that time the forensic community has really refined the techniques to perform STR testing. They’ve made it simpler and more accurate. It’s really moved exponentially in the last twenty years. Today competent biologists and chemists can produce excellent results, every time.  Dr. Jeffreys has been knighted for his contributions.

So what got you involved?

JB:  I came out of college as a chemist, one interested in the medical field. I started out working in clinical chemistry and toxicology. The work we did with DNA was extremely limited and very costly. But I did stick with a career in clinical chemistry. Within four years after graduating from school I was managing a clinical laboratory in Houston, Texas called National Health Laboratories. It was a laboratory of about one hundred scientists and support staff. After mergers, acquisitions and such, that company remains as Lab Corp. (It performs more than 1 million tests on more than 370,000 specimens each day.)

What opportunities for professional growth did you have over the years?

JB: Through taking a lot of continuing education coursework, I became proficient and qualified as a general supervisor in clinical chemistry, toxicology, hematology, parasitology, microbiology, serology—everything except for tissue work like histology and cytology, which was done by certified medical experts in those specialties. My interests kept me in touch with the staff pathologists, however, as well as all the rest of the laboratory. Though my present-day field did not exist at the time I graduated, by staying current I was able to benefit from the changes and be part of an emerging valuable service provided not only to the medical community but also to the forensic one, and the general population at large.

What are some famous cases you’ve been involved with . . . that you can talk about?

JB:  Actually, that’s my problem. We’ve been involved in a number of high-profile cases, but we’re not allowed to talk about any of them. Most have been on the forensic side, serial killer trials in Arizona, also in California, some that made the news in Florida . . Texas . . .Georgia.

Were you involved in catching the Grim Sleeper?

JB:  Actually, that’s an ongoing case in Los Angeles we are familiar with, but we didn’t do the work on it, so we can talk about that one. The importance of the Grim Sleeper case has to do with familial testing and autosomal DNA. It was termed the Grim Sleeper case because there were a number of homicides that took place beginning in the mid-1980s, all with the same basic MO [modus operandi], and then the murderer went underground for fourteen years. The victims were typically prostitutes shot with a firearm. In 2010, a suspect, Lonnie David Franklin Jr., 57, was arrested and charged with multiple counts of murder. He has not yet been convicted, nor the evidence against him tested in court.

How was DNA used to catch him?

JB: So here were a number of cold cases, but they were being tracked, and the law enforcement authorities in Los Angeles continued to monitor progress. The sole survivor of one of the Grim Sleeper’s attacks furnished a description of him as a black man in his 30s, along with other details. According to her story in the press, he lured her into an orange Ford Pinto, shot her in the chest with a pistol, took Polaroid’s and raped her, leaving her for dead. In 2008, the body count was thirteen, and a $500,000 reward was put out for “America’s Most Wanted.”

It became the first use in California, and one of the first three cases in the United States, of the use of familial DNA searching, that is, using the FBI’s CODIS database to match one family member’s profile with a suspect’s profile. The LA police were able to provide a close partial match to  Franklin’s crime scene profile with that of his son, whose CODIS markers were on file for a minor crime. They then set up a kind of mini-sting operation at a pizza parlor in Buena Park, where they knew the family liked to eat. Undercover detectives masqueraded as waiters and busboys. When the family left, they whisked away an unfinished pizza slice. The crust yielded DNA which police linked on a more solid basis to Lonnie Franklin. It was the first high-profile case in which a family member’s DNA had been used to catch a criminal. The ACLU and others had been critical of familial searching on grounds of privacy, and there is still a lot of debate over familiar searching because it might open up the search and include those who hadn’t committed any crime.

Did this help produce new commercial products like the “cousin finders”?

Only a few states are doing familial searching, and they are pretty guarded about it. It’s hard for me to make a connection. Certainly, these developments have been concentrated in the past three or four years, but the use of this technique is spreading.

Are people legitimately suspicious about DNA databases?

JB: Fears surface from time to time. There have been claims that keep popping up that someone’s going to take everything that’s in the database and use it to determine genetic deficiencies that could lead to medical issues down the road. Once it was speculated that if such  information was released, insurance companies would begin denying people coverage based on their profiles.

This is the mother of conspiracy theories, isn’t it?

JB:  It really is. For the most part—not for everyone—the vast majority of the markers we are using are in the “junk DNA” area. That is, they don’t by themselves “do” anything or give you genetic information on the face of things. There may be one or two markers that possibly could be construed as yielding some medical information—such as a trisomy at vWA or TPOX [a CODIS locus]. But by and large, you are not going to be able to do any medical diagnostics with the markers we run. Usually trisomies such as Down’s syndrome would be physically expressed and not hidden. It’s a little different with SNP panels [single nucleotide polymorphisms] such as those run by 23&me. With a high number of those, it’s entirely possible to predict medical predisposition. That’s what they base their business on.

Let’s talk some more about the CODIS database.

JB:  It’s important to realize that even law enforcement doesn’t provide much access to the CODIS [Combined DNA Identification System] databank. That’s something I have to give the FBI credit for. They have developed a system that is secure. It’s the DNA administrator at each facility who has undergone FBI training and uploads the data under very strict rules, and they are notified of any “hits” that involve them, but otherwise there is very little access, and the use of the database is very even across the country. There are not a large number of portals that can be used to access the CODIS database. There are several hundred law enforcement laboratories that are running profiles across the country, and the database is best thought about on three different levels:  LDIS, SDIS and NDIS, local, state and national versions. Between our labs in Phoenix and Virginia, we’ve tested over a million profiles for entry into CODIS. That’s about one-tenth of the entire number. I can tell you there is tight security. Hundreds of thousands of investigations have been aided by a DNA hit (we don’t like to say “match” so much, because statistically nothing is 100%) generating a lead.

How did you get bitten by the genealogy bug?

JB: I’ve always been fascinated with ancestry. I think it came about because my father took an interest in discovering our family’s roots and had to do so at the time by traveling to Salt Lake City, Utah, and poring over whatever records he could find there about our fathers, and great-grandfathers, and great-great-grandfathers, and so forth. He had tintypes of some of the relatives. We had various pieces of the puzzle. My father pretty much consolidated everything back to William Bentley, who settled in Rhode Island in the early 1700s and had come from Bedfordshire, England. He put together a book for family use. He glorified a few of them and left a few out that weren’t ready for glorification. For the sensitivity of some of the relatives, he left a few details out, but it was a pretty solid piece of work. For me, it kind of fostered this interest in ancestry and its importance. Certainly, when I started at Chromosomal Labs • Bode Technology, we started looking at the various tools that could be used. Our history, to be sure, is passed down from generation to generation. Initially, we were using mitochondrial DNA, Y-SNP’s and Y-STRs and then autosomal STRs to determine how we’re connected to general and specific individuals back to the Revolutionary War days and how you are linked with the world population, what your roots were. I have a particular Y haplogroup of G2a, which is not one of the more common ones.

Hmm . . . you and Joseph Stalin.

JB:  [Laughs]. Is that what his haplogroup was? Uh-oh! He was one of the worst. Well, I got interested in G2a and hooked up with about 50 other Bentleys and we identified our founder  patriarch haplotype. I get emails from them on a regular basis. The other thing we tried to find out was what in the world were all these G2a’s doing in England. I don’t know. But one of the things I find in the literature most often was that the Sarmatians were horsemen that gave the Romans a pretty rough time. Eventually, they were decimated. The Romans took their remaining cavalry and pressed them into service for 12 to 13 years or longer. Some were dispatched to Hadrian’s Wall. Now do I know for a hundred percent certainty that’s where I came from? No, but its fun to regard that as a hypothetical personal history.

You have a Scythian gene, don’t you?

JB:  Yes, I do according to the analysis DNA Consultants did for my autosomal ancestry. The work Dr. Yates has done on the rare alleles supports a lot of the stuff the family has been putting together for years and years.  I was very pleased to get my Rare Genes from History report back showing I had the Scythian gene. That seems to go along with the Sarmatian theory about the Bentleys.

How do you see the industry changing over the next few years?

JB:  I can speak best about changes I am seeing in the field. They’re getting closer to having rapid DNA testing on a chip. This gives flexibility to those who want to use DNA as “point of use” testing. The FBI this past year came out at the Promega conference and said that within the next two years they would like to see wide adoption of “point of use” testing. The IntegenX prototype allows you to put your swab into a cartridge, insert it into the instrument on the fly and get your STR results in a few hours. Previously, Rapid DNA testing was not only time-consuming and lab-bound but it was very expensive. It cost several hundred dollars in reagents alone. As the technology improves to allow 2 hour testing in our lab or on a chip, reagent and personnel time continue to drop,  Now, the FBI would like to see point of use testing in every booking station in the country. At the last show, I also saw an instrument from Illumina that would run Y-STRs, mtDNA and autosomal DNA profiles simultaneously on one sample. Another change that is coming is we will see an expanded profile becoming the standard, perhaps something similar to the GlobalFiler kit from Life Technologies with its 24 loci. With the new technology you can increase the speed for amplifying the specimen by five times and achieve nine times the discriminating power or resolution.

Any final remarks?

JB: The DNA testing field is on the threshold of even greater accolades of appreciation both from the scientific community and the public. If DNA wasn’t even in anyone’s mind twenty years ago, soon it will be part of everyone’s daily lives.

 
























Sir Alec Jeffreys, inventor of DNA fingerprinting, and Jim Bentley at forensics meeting.

New Center is Hiring

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill dedicated its new Genome Sciences Building on University Day, Oct. 12, 2012, a major event in the increasingly interdisciplinary world of genome science. Located at the geographical center of campus, the Genome Sciences Building has an overarching goal: to foster collaborations at the intersection of different disciplines – and in every way, it is designed to do just that, according to the university.

“Proximity is really important in a busy world,” says Jeff Dangl, Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator and John N. Couch Professor of Biology. “The explicit concept of this building is let’s hire new people at the interface of all of our traditional disciplines. Let’s give them a home – or at least a foothold – here in this building and see what comes of it in terms of generating new synergistic science.”

Symbolically, the building's footprint lies on the border between the College of Arts and Sciences and the five health affairs schools, where basic research meets clinical applications. Researchers from departments as diverse as biology, chemistry, computer science and statistics have opportunities to interact with each other in the building and are very closely located to colleagues in the schools of medicine, pharmacy, nursing, dentistry, public health, and information and library science.

DNA Consultants' founder and chief research officer, Donald Yates, has a Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. We applaud the new center's interdisciplinary mission and bridging of sciences including the campus' traditional strengths in statistics, computer and library science.

In 2012, UNC rose to 9th in the nation for federal funding devoted to research and development. The current level of $546 million during fiscal 2010 is spread among all fields and puts the university fourth among public campuses in the country. 

One of the projects supported by such research was the Cancer Genome Atlas program led by Carolina's Charles Perou, professor of molecular oncology. Perou's team published their work in the journal Nature and opened the way to personalized treatment of breast cancer, as widely reported in the media, including the front page of the New York Times. 

Lorton, VA – February 13, 2012 – Bode Technology (Bode), a leading provider of forensic DNA services, announced today the acquisition of Chromosomal Laboratories, Inc., a leading provider of DNA testing for immigration and private paternity.

By adding this expertise to its portfolio of service offerings, Bode will utilize its vast international and domestic presence to provide best inclass immigration paternity and private paternity testing to clients worldwide. Bode is a whollyowned subsidiary of SolutionPoint International, Inc.

“Chromosomal Laboratories has established an excellent reputation through its focus on clientservice, fast turnaround and high quality,” said Barry Watson, CEO & President of Bode. “Their focus on immigration and paternity testing complements Bode’s strengths in forensic casework and databasing, and enables us to expand our domestic and international offerings. With the increased use of DNA for immigration purposes and recent changes in the marketplace, we see opportunities for significant growth.”

“Having admired and respected Bode Technology as a competitor in forensics for years, I am extremely excited and proud that Chromosomal has this opportunity to join their team,” said Vladimir Bolin, CEO and co-founder of Chromosomal Laboratories, Inc. “The ethics, vision,resources and leadership of the Bode team is beyond reproach, and sets a solid foundation for Chromosomal’s technical and market leadership in the coming years.”

Chromosomal Laboratories, founded in 2004, maintains AABB accreditation for relationship testing activities and ISO 17025 accreditation in forensics. It provides relationship and forensic services both in the United States and internationally. Operating out of its state-of-the-art facility in Phoenix, AZ, Chromosomal Laboratories has provided services for samples from every state in the United States and approximately one hundred countries.

DNA Analysis from Fingerprints

Fingerprints are routinely used in crime scene investigations to characterize individuals associated with forensic evidence. However, fingerprints are sometimes smeared or incomplete and cannot be interpreted or used for further analysis. The use of mtDNA for the identification of fingerprints would be valuable in forensic investigations. The research department at The Bode Technology Group has developed a method to obtain mtDNA from processed fingerprints on both non-porous and porous substrates.

The research department at The Bode Technology Group is currently developing methods to obtain STRs from processed latent fingerprints. Many of the same substrates and chemical processes used for mtDNA recovery will be tested for STRs. Updates on our research will be posted periodically on the company's website.

Well, not completely. According to Larry Moran, a Professor in the Department of Biochemistry at the University of Toronto, "We can say that only 90% of the human genome has been sequenced and the remaining 10% falls into 357 gaps scattered throughout the genome." Read all the numbers at Sandwalk - Strolling with a Biochemist.

At a time when it seemed that American science had bitten off more than it could chew with the Human Genome Project, Craig Venter and his innovative company published "A New Strategy for Genome Sequencing." Appearing in the journal Nature in 1996, the Venter multi-center approach bypassed laborious gene mapping and allowed the HGP to meet its goal of full sequence information on the human genome in 2000.

"In the race to sequence the human genome," write the editors of Nature's DNA Technologies Milestones, "research groups had to choose between the random whole genome shotgun sequencing approach or the more ordered map-based sequencing approach." The choice of randomness versus order was present from 1982, but the Venter strategy was resisted for many years. Finally, in 1996 it was accepted and given an equal emphasis with the more orthodox approach.

After a standoff between the two groups of scientists, "a showdown ensued, with the biotechnology firm Celera Genomics wielding whole-genome shotgun sequencing and the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium wielding map-based sequencing. Yet when the dust settled, it was a draw -- both groups published their initial drafts of the human genome concurrently in 2001."

The maverick technology helped make high throughput genomic sequencing at commercial labs an economy reality and gave birth to a range of new DNA tests within the reach of ordinary consumers like you and me. Today, fifteen years later, those interested in autosomal ancestry testing and personal genomics have biologist and entrepreneur Craig Venter and his irascible persistence as a scientific pioneer to thank.

Discussion is accelerating in the United States and European Union to regulate private genomic testing that provides consumers medical information, according to Science magazine and the European Journal of Human Genetics. No mention is made in the reams of white papers about ancestry testing, but some of the pitfalls and bureaucratic morasses in the thinking about true genetic/medical testing are fairly ominous, if not silly.

"Although there has been speculation about the potential psychosocial harms of testing [that is, genomic medical testing], such as an increase in anxiety or encouragement of fatalistic behavior, there are, to date, few studies addressing these concerns," writes the reporters for Policy Forum in the Oct. 8 issue of Science. "The limited evidence tends to be reassuring, even for risk information associated with relatively serious ailments...however, the scope for potential harm from unnecessary or unproven treatment after genetic risk assessment is an important unstudied question" (pp. 181f.).

We commend scientists and physicians for finding a new field of study divorced from reality but have to wonder what they will do about ancestry testing once they have conquered and tamed Frankenstein's elder monster. We suggest the following guidelines:

• Labeling on Internet sites and Zen Shopping Carts that explicitly states, "The claims for this ancestry product have not been evaluated by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), House Energy and Commerce Committee, Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes for Health or Department of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA 98195 USA."
• Predictive ancestry information may be hazardous to your progeny.
• No animal has been harmed in the production or clinical evaluation of this ancestry test.
• If you discover you have ancestry you did not expect, take a deep breath. Then take a healthy dose of skepticism, followed by two aspirins and a glass of water.