Post by leonidis on Jul 10, 2016 23:42:28 GMT
![Any of N Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/5367898/avatar/oGkio4WwU0bMEnyxwcrX.png)
- Ethnicity testing merely identifies various haplotypes that are associated with -- but not exclusive to -- various ethnicities. Test results may not match someone's actual heritage. In other words, it's not nearly as accurate as commonly believed.
- Genetic facial reconstruction is still in it's infancy. Strike that, it's still in an embryonic stage. Technological advances in DNA specification are not the same as knowledge advancement in gene functioning. More powerful computers and cleverer algorithms can only take you so far. In other words, we're talking decades before it becomes a useful thing.
- Standard DNA testing is so-called "genetic fingerprinting" and is deigned to identify people. It's what populates the databases. You can try to use it for other things, such as familial testing, but it's not the right tool for the job. (Other parts of the genome work better for that.) Each type of forensic DNA test requires an additional DNA sample to work with. One sample for fingerprinting, one for ethnicity, one for advanced familial testing, if that's even available yet, etc. Only so much genetic material from the EAR-ONS is extant in the files. Law enforcement is presumably hanging on to what they have left as they wait for technology to advance.
I agree with Mitchell about not releasing the ethnicity results. A surname may not match the ethnicity profile, and the ethnicity profile may not match the haplotype profile. Why add to the confusion?
But Mitchell, there wasn't anything wrong with Rob Tanner's "laws protect the innocent" formulation.
As far as only so much DNA. All of the samples link him to all the crimes. This guy must have ejaculated over 50 times, and I am sure most of it was recovered plus public hairs and possibly saliva on the cans and forks and whatever else he touched. Todays DNA tests only require a very minute quantity and then it is just replicated over and over.
www.actforlibraries.org/dna-replication-in-the-lab/
Also, if this technology is not being utilized, then shame on them. I cannot believe anyone would say, "It won't work" or "It can't work." I say do it, then see what comes about. She had the most high tech way of producing a likenes. I can say her likeness would be a better shot because if you make him 5'10 and 180 with shoulder length blond is brown hair, then her facial features could knock it out of the park. Who knows anything about the 3D process she uses? She has done it with people she has never seen before, and the closeness to the real person is amazing. So, until the FBI tries it and sees what they get, I do not believe anything about it can't work or it is not legal. They have a sample and she has a data base of genetic traits- it's legal!
www.livescience.com/50146-art-genetic-data-privacy.html