This morning’s Keynote at Rootstech 2012, was from Ancestry.com and was entitled “Making the Most of Technology to Further the Family History Industry.”  Although I was unable to attend Rootstech in person this year, I was able to view the keynote online.

During the panel discussion, we heard from Ken Chahine (LinkedIn profile), the Senior Vice President and General Manager, DNA at Ancestry.com.  From his profile at Ancestry.com:

Ken Chahine has served as Senior Vice President and General Manager for Ancestry DNA, LLC since 2011. Prior to joining us he held several positions, including as Chief Executive Officer of Avigen, a biotechnology company, in the Department of Human Genetics at the University of Utah, and at Parke-Davis Pharmaceuticals (currently Pfizer). Mr. Chahine also teaches a course focused on new venture development, intellectual property, and licensing at the University of Utah’s College of Law. He earned a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Michigan, a J.D. from the University of Utah College of Law, and a B.A. in Chemistry from Florida State University.

During the keynote Dr. Chahine discussed the “revolution in the science of genomics” that many people really don’t appreciate yet.  He noted that this revolution is driving all sorts of new products and development.

Dr. Chahine stated that genealogists have been doing a good job so far of using DNA for family history, but so far it’s been pretty modest, typically turning to DNA when there is a problem.  With the revolution, however, “DNA is going turn into content.”  We can now look at millions and millions of markers throughout the genome regardless of male or female.  There are about 100 errors per generation, which are “breadcrumbs” or clues left by our ancestors about where they were in the past.  We will be able to get to the point where we can analyze and use that DNA content to tell us things like:

“what town did they live in in the past, and when did they live there, and things like that that are really going to revolutionize, I think, the way we think about DNA.”

In response to a question from the panel leader about the computational and analytical challenges to autosomal DNA products, Dr. Chahine noted that he has been building a team of computational biologists knowledgeable about DNA that have been creating and refining algorithms to analyze the date and present it in meaningful ways to users.

The panelists were also asked what would be one of the biggest changes to genealogy over the next 10 years.  Dr. Chahine offered the following:

“We’re also going to integrate DNA into records in a way that people may not think is immediately obvious, but the DNA is also going to help pick out who the right John Doe that you’re looking for in the future, and we’re working on things like that.”

Hearing from Dr. Chahine was extremely interesting, educational, and entertaining.

Why Autosomal DNA Testing?

It is clear that Ancestry.com is spending considerable amounts of time and money into their new autosomal DNA offerings.  Why would Ancestry.com spend so much time and money getting into the autosomal DNA business?  There are at least several important reasons, not the least of which is access to an enormous genealogy-minded consumer database (~1.7 million current subscribers to Ancestry.com, I believe).

However, perhaps the single most important reason for Ancestry.com to get into the autosomal DNA business is their almost-unrivaled ability to combine the results of DNA testing with an enormous database of traditional records.  Combining the results of autosomal DNA with family trees and paper records is, of course, the future of genetic genealogy.  Ancestry.com users have already been combining paper records with their family trees.  I, for example, have digitally connected numerous census and other records to individuals within my uploaded family tree.  In 2012 we will be able to add autosomal DNA as yet another layer to our family trees. For example, if John Doe and I both have family trees uploaded to Ancestry.com, and our testing reveals that we have shared DNA, we can connect that shared DNA to our shared ancestors.

In the not-so-distant future, once we have this massive combination of trees, records, and DNA, we might even be able to ask very advanced questions that we can currently only dream of:

• What DNA/genes found today traveled to North America on the Mayflower?

• Given my known family tree and my autosomal test results, from what ancestral individual in the Ancestry.com database might I have inherited this portion of DNA?

• Based on the shared DNA of his ancestors, please recreate the genome my great-great-great-great-great grandfather John Doe.

It is important to understand that while the amount of both information and computing power necessary for these types of questions is enormous, it will likely be within the ability of the field over the next 5-20 years.

Are there any [currently outrageous] questions you can only dream of asking today but think might be answerable in the future using DNA?

A Preview?

In anticipation of the NBC series Who Do You Think You are, Ancestry.com released several video promos.  One of these promos (HERE) includes video at 1:02 of one of the celebrities reviewing what appears to be an ethnicity analysis (entitled “Genetic Ethnicity”) of his autosomal DNA, as well as the identification of a distant cousin (thanks to Cece Moore for pointing to the video (who in turn thanks Shannon!)).  The interface states that “Ancestry.com’s DNA analysis looks at your recent ethnicity, going back about 10 generations.”

According to the interface shown in the video, which is likely to be an early version, the test breaks down biogeographical ancestry not only into broad continental categories such as “European” and “African,” but also into regions within those categories.  For example, the results shown in the video are 74% African and 20% European.  Under the “African” tab, the results show 27% Bamoun, 22% Brong, 13% Yoruba, and 12% Igbo (a total of 74%!).

The interface also shows the locations of these groups superimposed on a map of Africa, as well as nodes which appear to represent connections (possibly genetic cousins) in those populations.  Clicking on a node, for example, brings up what appears to be a genetic cousin and shows the predicted relationship (here, a 10th cousin), various biographical information (including date of birth), a link to view the individual’s tree, and a contact link.

For More Information

Cece Moore at Your Genetic Genealogist also has a great series of posts about Ancestry.com’s new Autosomal DNA product:

• “Ancestry.com Venturing into Autosomal DNA Testing?”

• “More Details on Ancestry.com’s New Autosomal DNA Test Offering”

• “Update on the New Autosomal DNA Test from Ancestry.com”

Be sure to following The Genetic Genealogist, and I’ll be sure to share the latest information about Ancestry.com’s Autosomal DNA product with you.

The Case

In December 1991, 16-year-old Sarah Yarborough was tragically murdered in Federal Way, Washington.  Despite an extensive investigation, no suspect has ever been named.  Investigators have sketches of a man they believe might have been involved, but there is no name to put to the pictures.

Investigators did find some important evidence however: DNA left at the scene, possibly by Yarborough’s attacker.

The DNA

Late last year, investigators gave the DNA profile (apparently the Y-DNA profile) to California-based forensic consultant Colleen Fitzpatrick (who I’ve written about before here on TGG).  Fitzpatrick, it appears, compared the Y-DNA profile to publicly-available Y-DNA databases, such as Ysearch, in an attempt to identify a potential match for the profile.  After identifying potential matches, Fitzpatrick could then potentially identify the surname of the Y-DNA’s donor.  For example, if all Bettingers have a particular Y-DNA profile and a sample Y-DNA profile closely matches that particular Y-DNA profile, then it is likely that the parties are either closely or distantly related (on a scale of 10s or 1000s of years), and they could potentially have the same surname.

Therefore, by comparing an unknown’s Y-DNA profile to public databases, it is possible to find matches and potentially identify a surname for the owner of that Y-DNA (but see “The Caveats,” below).

The Search

Fitzpatrick’s research determined that the suspect’s Y-DNA profile appears to match the Y-DNA profiles of individuals with the surname “Fuller.”  Although unclear without more information, it further appears that the suspect’s Y-DNA profile specifically matches the Y-DNA profiles of purported descendants of Robert Fuller, who settled in Salem, Mass. in 1630.

Accordingly, Fitzpatrick’s research has merely suggested that the suspect MIGHT have the surname Fuller.  Nothing more, nothing less.  It is merely a lead, something that investigators will have to devote countless hours to following up on.  The lead has not provided investigators with a magical solution to their mystery, and following this discovery they are likely not all that much closer to identifying a suspect that they were before.

The Caveats

It is important to note that there are some serious caveats to this process.  Just because an unknown Y-DNA profile matches a group of surnames in a database does not automatically mean that the unknown Y-DNA donor had the same surname.  Non-paternal events such as infidelity, adoption, name change, and others can – and have – resulted in surnames being jumbled throughout history.  Thus, simply matching the unique Bettinger profile does not mean that your last name might be Bettinger; it could be Samuels as a result of great-grandpa’s roving eye, Smith as a result of your step-great-great-grandmother’s love for orphans, or Johnson because your father was tired of people spelling “Bettinger” wrong.  For all these reasons surnames have changed over time.

It is even more vital to note, however, that Fitzpatrick’s research process is absolutely neither a new nor a groundbreaking technique! It is a familiar technique that has been done MANY times before, and continues to be done.  People – including non-genealogists – have used public databases to attempt to identify their surname and/or family.  Indeed, Family Tree DNA itself has noted that male adoptees have a 30-40% chance of identifying a likely surname by comparing their Y-DNA profile to FTDNA’s database (see here: “During the introduction Max [Blankfeld] stated that 30%-40% of male adoptees find their likely surname in FTDNA’s database”).

The Concern

Some, including both experienced genetic genealogists and people who have never had a DNA test, have expressed concern that their DNA was or could be used for this purpose, a purpose that it “wasn’t intended to be used for.”  Some have stated that the search constituted an “illegal seizure” of their property, or that their DNA should not be used by “big brother.”

Further, as the ISOGG mailing list for project adminstrators has demonstrated, many project administrators are concerned that this hullabaloo will scare away potential test-takers.

The Past

Despite the concerns of the public, genetic genealogists, and project administrators, Fitzpatrick’s process is neither a new technique nor a frightening one.  It has been done before.  Further, Fitzpatrick’s process is simply a new twist on an old method.  How is Fitzpatrick’s DNA search different, for example, from any of the following (and please don’t throw any genetic exceptionalism arguments my way!):

• Using a public reverse-phone lookup to identify the owner of a phone number?  I didn’t authorize my phone number for that use;
• Searching through a public phone book to identify all the Bettingers in New York state? I didn’t authorize my phone book listing for that purpose;
• Using the census to identify my ancestors? I guarantee that NONE of my ancestors authorized the use of the census for genealogical research (indeed, just think of ALL the secrets that have been revealed in the census that our ancestors would have wanted buried forever!).

Interestingly, genealogists happen to be the biggest offenders of using public databases for purposes other than the one they were intended.

My Thoughts

One of the most interesting points to me is where some genealogists have decided to draw their line in the sand.  Comparing a person’s Y-DNA profile to public databases is fine if the person is an adoptee searching for his last name, but not if the person is a criminal that investigators need to identify.

I also believe that project administrators are overly concerned.  These types of stories come and go, and this one will fade away just as all the others have.  We are (I sincerely hope) heading into an era of genetic openness, not one of genetic fear.

Lastly, the answer to this dilemma is, as always, education.  We have to educate the public and potential test-takers that if they decide to make their Y-DNA public, it will be public for any purpose any person sees fit.  They should understand this when they send in their cheek swab.  The danger to test-takers, however, is almost nil; a public Y-DNA profile is either incomprehensible or useless for 99.99% of the world.  And keep in mind that if a criminal is identified using this method, it is the criminal activity that endangered him, NOT the public Y-DNA databases!

Your Comments

What I’m really looking for here is a conversation about the pluses and minuses of Fitzpatrick’s method and the use of public DNA databases.  Are there valid concerns, or only concerns due to the lack of education?  Why do you believe these methods are different from non-traditional uses of other public databases such as the examples I listed above?  Why do you think people might be afraid of this use of their public DNA?  And how can we better education test-takers and the public to avoid these types of concerns?

[Note: I will immediately delete any comment that is aimed at Fitzpatrick herself.  She did not invent these search methods, and should not be held responsible for their use.  I'm looking for comments about the method, not the investigator].

Your exome is the 50 million DNA bases of your genome containing the information necessary to encode all your proteins. Informally, you can think of the exome as the DNA sequence of your genes.

Your entire genome is made up of your exome plus other DNA, consisting of three billion bases with repetitive sequences, sequences of unknown function, and DNA that does not code for proteins.

Note that the Exome 80x test is only available to current customers, and is determined on a “first come, first served” basis.  Further, test-takers will initially only receive their raw data of 50 million DNA bases at 80x coverage, but 23andMe plans to develop new tools to take advantage of exome sequencing.

The Exome?

Many non-geneticists will no doubt be wondering what the “exome” really is.  The exome is the protein-coding portion of your genome, and comprises roughly 1.5% of the total genome.

For insight into what type of information might be gleaned from exome data, Daniel MacArthur has an article entitled “Venter’s exome, and the challenge of rare variants for personal genomics” from August, 2008.  In the article, he discusses some of the findings from the analysis of J. Craig Venter’s exome.

The Genealogist’s Exome

As a genetic genealogist, I was of course interested in the ramifications of exome testing on testing for genetic ancestry purposes.  23andMe states the following on their Exome 80x page:

Exome data are less suitable for ancestry or genealogical research, since they will not provide mitochrondrial sequence or much information on the Y chromosome.

This is a strange sentence, and one I believe wasn’t properly screened.  In my experience few genealogists decide to pursue 23andMe testing for the mtDNA or Y-DNA results.  It’s autosomal DNA testing and tools like Ancestry Painting and Relative Finder for which most genealogists use 23andme testing, and it’s far too early to tell whether genealogists will be able to make use of exome sequencing (of course we will!).

I hope this sentiment does not discourage genetic genealogists from pursuing the Exome 80x product.  Genealogists have been – and continue to be – among the very first adopters of new DTC DNA testing (including 23andMe’s very first product back in the 2007 to 2009 time frame).  Indeed, genealogists having been driving the DTC genetic testing market since 2000 with the launch of Family Tree DNA!

The Possibilities

One of most exciting uses of the Exome 80x product might be in self-directed discovery of rare variants in genetic disorders.  Numerous rare genetic diseases, many of which likely result from unidentified rare variants, have not been exhaustively studied.  At least one group has estimated that 85% of disease-causing mutations are found in the exome.

I can envision 23andMe Community Projects for rare genetic disorders, similar to its Parkinson’s Community but much smaller in size, where several members of a family purchase the Exome 80x sequencing in an attempt to identify variants that might be involved in the disease.  These projects may be sponsored and supported by 23andme, or might simply be a family attempting to analyze their genomes themselves.

Other Viewpoints:

• Daniel MacArthur points out over at Google+ (“A few initial thoughts on 23andMe’s new $999 exome product“), 23andMe is not the first company to offer DTC exome sequencing, as Knome has been offering their services for some time.  23andMe is, however, the first to offer such a product under the $1,000 price point.

• Matthew Herper has an article at Forbes.com discussing 23andMe’s launch (“The Future Is Now: 23andMe Now Offers All Your Genes For $999”).

Will you be signing up for 23andMe’s Exome 80x product?

Frank describes her book thusly: “This book is my very personal take on personal genomics. It chronicles my meetings and interviews with leading scientists and lays out the – somtimes [sic] disquieting – discoveries I make in my own genome.”

The book is described as follows at Amazon:

“Internationally acclaimed science writer Lone Frank swabs up her DNA to provide the first truly intimate account of the new science of consumer-led genomics. She challenges the scientists and business mavericks intent on mapping every baby’s genome, ponders the consequences of biological fortune-telling, and prods the psychologists who hope to uncover just how important our environment really is – a quest made all the more gripping as Frank considers her family’s and her own struggles with depression.”

I haven’t read the book myself, although I will soon be receiving a review copy.  Once I’ve finished it, I’ll write more about the book here at the blog. There is a recent write-up of Frank’s experiences at the Daily Mail entitled “If the blues genes fit…”

I’m most interested to see what Frank finds in her genome, and how she interprets and uses her data beyond the interpretation provided by the testing companies.

Featured speakers at the meeting include the following:

• Doron Behar, PhD
• Michael Hammer, PhD
• Steve Morse
• Spencer Wells, PhD

Another interesting speaker at the meeting will be Jessica L. Roberts, J.D., an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center (recent C.V. here (pdf)).  Although it’s not clear what Roberts will be speaking about, her recent publications (pdf) focus on genetics and the law, including the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act.  Kudos to Family Tree DNA for again bringing together a wide array of viewpoints and opinions at the conference.

——————————————————-

Unfortunately I will be unable to attend the conference this year, although I made it last year and hope to make it to the next conference.  I look forward to live-tweeting of the conference, which is the next best thing to being there.  Are you attending the conference?

Users load their raw data files, and then can use that information to explore their genome.  There are a number of different exercises that a user can run through with their data, including health issues (diabetes, warfarin sensitivity, many other diseases, etc.), ancestry analyses, and determination of “Neanderthal SNPs,” which are SNPs that have been suggested to derive from Neanderthal ancestry (note that this science is still VERY early stage and subject to change OFTEN!).

There are two very features that I find very interesting.  First, there is an “Advanced Settings” tab where users can make several important adjustments to their analysis.  Second, the site allows for “imputation” when looking up a SNP, which means that “If the SNP is not found in your file, the utility attempts to impute the SNP using Hapmap data.“  I haven’t tried this yet, but it will be interesting to see how well it works.

Ancestry Information

Interpretome allows users to create, among other things, an “Ancestry Painting” using either HapMap2 or HapMap3 data.  For example, using the HapMap2 data, my Interpretome ancestry painting is very similar to my 23andMe ancestry painting.  For those who aren’t familiar, here are the HapMap2 populations (HapMap3 can be found here):

YRI (Ibadan, Nigeria)

CEU (Northern/western Europe)

CHB+JPT (Beijing, China and Tokyo, Japan)

Medically-Relevant Information and Privacy Issues

The creators of Interpretome do address several issues, including the medical information controversy:

No information should be considered diagnostic and as with any genetic testing service, the interpretation is not regulated by the FDA.

And the important privacy issue:

Your genome will not be sent to any server, it remains on your computer. This website will make requests to a database that only contain “rsid” (without genotypes) and “population” (self-reported in the top-right) information. At no point will any genotypes be sent across the wires (all computation will be done in the browser).

However, the creators do go on to note that some exercises have the option of submitting personal information, which “will be anonymously stored on a secure server.”  So be cautious if you’re worried about privacy, as with any testing or analysis service.  As my genome is public domain, I’m not concerned.

Family Tree DNA Results?

For fun, I also tried my Family Tree DNA results.  Since FTDNA raw data results do not contain most, if any, medically-relevant SNPs, most of the “exercises” were fruitless.  I did have some luck with the ancestry sections, although I have yet to compare my 23andMe analysis with my FTNDA analysis to determine if there is consistency.

Helen Marley Johnson, my great-grandmother, was born to unidentified parents on March 3, 1889, in Oswego County, New York.  Although I didn’t really know Marley, I remember meeting her when I was very, very young, just before she died in 1983.

Marley lived in Oswego and Jefferson counties for all her long life.  She was married twice, had two children, and today has numerous descendants located throughout the United States and the world.  However, by the time Marley was 13 years old, she had been adopted by at least three different families, eventually marrying into the last family that adopted her.

Since I began my genealogical research more than 20 years ago, I’ve worked to find the parents of Marley Johnson, without much success.  I have a plethora of data about the entire remainder of her life, but almost nothing about her ancestry.  For example, although I’ve found her birth certificate, it lists her mother as Minerva Johnson (a name that may or may not be real, and which I’ve found nothing on) and lists her father as “unknown.”

Autosomal DNA

Autosomal DNA testing presents the most promising new avenue of researching into Marley’s ancestry.  Unfortunately, both of Marley’s children have been dead for more than 30 years.  However, Marley has several living grandchildren, including my father and a first cousin named Edgar (name changed for privacy reasons).  By comparing autosomal results my father with his first cousin, it is possible to identify stretches of their DNA that they inherited from Marley and her husband Frank Bettinger.  Here’s why:

Both my father and Edgar are grandchildren of Marley and Frank, or children of Marley’s children. My father is the son of Marley & Frank’s son, and Edgar is the son of Marley & Frank’s daughter.  Approximately 25% of my father’s DNA comes from Marley, and approximately 25% of Edgar’s DNA comes from Marley.  Although it is not the same 25% in both cousins (because the children inherited random pieces of Marley’s DNA and then passed on random pieces of that DNA to their children), it is statistically nearly certain that they will share some of Marley’s DNA.  Indeed, first cousins are predicted to share 12.5% of their DNA, with about half each from the shared grandparents (6.25% of their shared DNA from Marley, and 6.25% of their shared DNA from Frank).  Both will have much more DNA from these ancestors, but it won’t be shared between them.

By comparing the autosomal DNA testing results of my father with Edgar, it will be possible to identify the DNA that they have in common.  Because they only share Marley and her husband Frank as ancestors (an important assumption here), then any DNA they have in common must be DNA that they inherited from Frank and Marley.

Of course, this is dependent upon Edgar and me not sharing any DNA from other ancestors, for example on my maternal side.  If we shared other ancestors, it would be much more difficult (but not impossible) to identify which DNA came from which ancestors.  However, given Edgar’s paternal ancestry – the side which does not involve Frank and Marley – this is exceedingly unlikely (but will be kept in mind during future analysis).

Results

I now have autosomal DNA results for Edgar and myself using Family Tree DNA’s Family Finder, and more specifically using their new Illumina OmniExpress chip.  The figure below highlights the regions of our genomes where we share at least 3cM stretches of DNA.

Note that I’ve used my DNA for this test, rather than my father, simply because have yet to test my father.  The numbers change slightly, as I’m predicted to share 6.25% of my DNA with Edgar, my first cousin once removed.  We share about 333 cMs (268 million base pairs), which I’ve calculated to be about 4.4% of our genomes (please chime in if you think this estimate is incorrect, as I haven’t had sufficient time to explore it).

With this map and the data that comes from it, I’ve identified portions of my genome (and Edgar’s) that come from Marley and Frank.  Although I don’t know which portions came from who, I have a wealth of information I can now use to explore our shared ancestry.

Now What?

So now what?  Now, I wait for matches shared by Edgar and I, people who share one or more of these stretches of DNA.  Currently, we do not share any individuals.  If another individual shares a piece of the identified DNA, it is likely that they are related through Frank and Marley.  As I have a great deal of information about Frank’s ancestry, I can try to narrow down the matches to Marley’s ancestry.  This, of course, presents one of the biggest challenges of this approach.

Further, identifying relatives is only the very first – and the easiest – step.  Once I have identified someone who might be Marley’s biological relative, I have to obtain as much of their genealogical tree as they are willing to share in order to mine it for information.  I will be looking for families that lived in or migrated through the Upstate New York area in the early 1880’s.  Of course, I must consider all the descendants of any potential relatives as well.

Yes, it’s a great deal of work, and there is no guarantee that I will ever identify a link.  For example, what if John Doe, Marley’s father, took an undocumented vacation in Upstate New York to visit his best friend and had a fling with Marley’s mother?  I may not be able to uncover that connection either in paper records or in DNA, at least for now.

My best bet is to accumulate as much information as possible – paper records, DNA, gedcoms, family trees, etc. – and slowly create a web of paper and DNA.  This web will undoubtedly slowly reveal overlapping information that hints at Marley’s ancestry.  For example, there may only be one potential male individual who possesses DNA from family X, DNA from family Y, and DNA from family Z, all of which Marley inherited and of which Edgar and I share.  A needle in a haystack, but an exciting possibility nonetheless.

The Future

In the future, I can attempt to mine existing genomes for more data.  For example, by comparing my father’s siblings with Edgar’s DNA.  Statistically, they will share different portions of their genome with Edgar, allowing me to more completely identify the DNA in Edgar’s genome that came from Frank and Marley.  Since Edgar is the extent of the other line, and Marley’s children are dead, this is the best I can currently do (until I can sequence Marley’s DNA directly from the stamps and letters she licked and I’ve saved).

Conclusion

Essentially, using autosomal DNA testing and the approach described above, I have re-created portions of my great-grandparent’s genomes by identifying bits and pieces of their DNA in living individuals. What an exciting time to be a genealogist.

Now let me know, do you have any tips or suggestions for me as I continue my hunt for Marley’s parents?  If so, please share them below.

Family Tree DNA, meanwhile, has announced that it records in the DNA Heritage database will only be placed into FTDNA’s database if the owner agrees to opt-in.  FTDNA has a series of FAQs related to the transfer available here.

The full text of the announcement is below:

As of April 19 2011, DNA Heritage has ceased its operations and is in the process of transferring the domains DNAHeritage.com and Ybase.org to Family Tree DNA.

All the tests in progress will be processed by our current lab and the results will be delivered to our customers.

In order to ensure the continuity of the existing surname projects Family Tree DNA will study the best options to integrate our customers’ results into their database. Once Family Tree DNA decides on the option(s), our customers will be given the opportunity to opt-in to their database.

If you have questions about the transition or need to place an order please check: http://www.familytreedna.com/landing/dna-heritage.aspx

From the paper:

“For the past decade, since the advent of genetic genealogy, it has been accepted that subgroups of haplogroup C and Q were indicative of Native American ancestry. Specifically, subgroups C3b and Q1a3a, alone, are found among the Native peoples of North and South America. Other subgroups of haplogroup C and Q are found elsewhere in the world, not in North or South American, and conversely, C3b and Q1a3a are not found in other locations in the world. This makes it very easy to determine if your direct paternal ancestor was, or was not, Native American. Or so it seemed.”

Estes is a scientist and business owner in the information technology arena.  She is the Administrator of the Lost Colony DNA Project, and more than 20 surname projects.  Her contact information can be found in the paper.

“Interest in personal DNA analysis is growing, as the number of genomic retailers multiply. Navigenics is the first to obtain a license in New York state, last December, and other companies are going through the approval process now. A course at Syracuse’s Upstate Medical University prepares doctors for the new medical world, where patients arrive for appointments not just with symptoms and complaints, but with a list of personal genetic variants — and concerns about what it means.”

The Personalized Medicine 101 course (see #pm101 at Twitter) is a course designed to educate medical students about the tools and the challenges involved with personalized medicine and affordable genomic sequencing.  I was a guest-lecturer for the course this year, speaking about “Ancestry & Genealogy: Foundations for Clinical Practice.”  This is a groundbreaking course, one of the first of its kind, and it has the potential to educate 100s of future physicians about this vitally important field.

I was quoted briefly in the article about how I perceive the future of medicine:

“Ten years from now, I imagine the practice of medicine where an individual will always have their own genome. Ideally you would go in to see your doctor with your genome sequenced, and all of that available to the physician for analysis.”

If you’re interested in learning more about genetic genealogy or personalized medicine, you can check out the blog’s archives, or a list of some of my favorite articles.