4

A New Meme: How Many of Your Ancestors Are In The SSDI?

The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) is a searchable database created from the U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File, which contains the name and social security number of deceased persons reported to the Social Security Administration since roughly 1962.  In addition to being used by genealogists, the Death Master File and SSDI are used by financial firms and government agencies for various reasons such as preventing identity fraud.

A Genealogy Meme Using the SSDI

Michael Neill at RootDig has two posts – “Have You Searched for All Your Ancestors in the SSDI?” and “My in-laws in the SSDI” – that list his and his wife’s ancestors in the SSDI.  Michael has 7 ancestors, while his wife has 6.

This led me to wonder how many ancestors I have in the SSDI, and a very brief search led me to conclude that I … Click to read more!

5

What’s In A Name? Genetic Genealogy Article From Trends in Genetics

DNA stockTrends in Genetics has an article by Turi E. King and Mark A. Jobling from the University of Leicester highlighting Y-DNA genetic genealogy.  Specifically, the article – “What’s in a name? Y chromosomes, surnames and the genetic genealogy revolution” – looks at the relationship between surnames and Y-DNA genetics.  Dr. King and Dr. Jobling have previously conducted a great deal of research in this area (see here and here, for example).

The article is a review of this area and contains some interesting information, including a section regarding “Genetic genealogy and the rise of recreational genetics.”

Genetic genealogists recognized as making genuine contributions to the field:

In the article, the authors note that genetic genealogists are making discoveries in this field:

“Genetic genealogy … Click to read more!

1

Australian Research Study on Consumer Genomics‏

As part of her doctoral research, Sudeepa Abeysinghe is asking people who have purchased genomic tests to complete the “User Experiences of Direct-to-Consumer Genomic Testing Survey”.  According to Sudeepa, the survey focuses on the consumer experience and is completely independent of any testing company.

Although I’m late on reporting this (it was already covered by GenomeWeb, for example), I thought I would mention it in case anyone has missed the previous coverage and might be interested in completing the survey.

This is an opportunity for genetic genealogists to share their experiences and voice their thoughts regarding DTC genomic … Click to read more!

1

The Genomics Law Report Addresses the ACCP’s Call for Regulation of DTC Genetic Tests

Another great article from the Genomics Law Report (if you aren’t already reading this new blog, you should be) – “Is the ACCP’s Call for Greater Governmental Regulation of DTC Genetics Premature?”

Barbara Ameer and Norberto Krivoy of the American College of Clinical Pharmacology (ACCP) have an article (pdf) in The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology that promotes regulation of DTC genetic tests (which could conceivably include genetic genealogy tests).  The Genomics Law Report analyzes the paper’s arguments and concludes with the following:

“Without convincing evidence of the harms of DTC genetic testing, it remains difficult to fully justify more rigorous governmental regulation, or to anticipate its content, structure or ultimate effect, which perhaps explains why such regulation continues to remain just over the horizon.”

If you’re interested in this area, click over to the Genomics Law Report and read this article (as well as the original ACCP … Click to read more!

1

Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation First to Adopt Genetic Genealogy’s New Industry Standard for Reporting Y-DNA Profiles

Today, the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF) reported that they are adopting a standardized Y-STR reporting system proposed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce and supported by the International Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG).

The standardized system was first published in the Fall 2008 issue (pdf) of the Journal of Genetic Genealogy (JoGG).

First, let me add a note of caution – this change ONLY represents a change in how results are REPORTED.  Even though companies report results differently, this does not mean that the actual DNA testing results are wrong or different!  This shift is NOT to correct errors in testing results; it is only to standardize reporting.

From the Press Release:

SALT LAKE CITY (Aug. 17, 2009)-The Sorenson Molecular … Click to read more!