RootsChat.Com
General => Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing => Topic started by: davidft on Monday 04 June 18 19:49 BST (UK)
-
I wonder how many who have done the Ancestry DNA test have read this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5803771/Would-trust-Ancestry-DNA-Investigation-reveals-security-concerns-inside-DNA-company.html
and in particular the bit about
According to Winston, Ancestry’s terms and conditions are long, and somewhat boring, but people should read them.
‘They make a big deal of stating that you own your DNA. But they are taking a worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free license to do what they want with your DNA and your actual genetic sample that they keep in storage.’
-
Interesting article, davidft. :)
I enjoy reading the comments at the Daily Mail, wouldn't trust their stories though!
Regards Margaret
-
I gather Wikipedia of all websites won't allow the Daily Mail to be quoted as a source. Says everything about them really. ::)
And as sugarfizzle says, its always entertaining reading the comments on their articles. ;D
-
I gather Wikipedia of all websites won't allow the Daily Mail to be quoted as a source. Says everything about them really. ::)
Not really. That's what happens when a politically motivated cabal gains control as they have done with Wikipedia.
-
To smudwhisk
And no acclaimed university or even 6th Form college will allow quotes from Wikipedia as a source.
Seriously though, it is food for thought what these companies can legally do with your DNA. As someone in my late 60s, rightly or wrongly I had little hesitation in having my DNA tested, and encouraging my husband to do the same - whatever a company does with our DNA it is unlikely hopefully to affect us.
My daughter in her 30s is understandably more hesitant, as her DNA would be around for many years to come, and perhaps more available to those with an ulterior motive.She is unwilling to have hers tested and I can understand why.
Regards Margaret
-
To smudwhisk
And no acclaimed university or even 6th Form college will allow quotes from Wikipedia as a source.
Exactly, which is why its amusing that Wikipedia don't allow DM as Wikipedia isn't exactly reliable.
I can't totally understand your daughter's viewpoint. I've always been sceptical about privacy and security with DNA testing and as someone with an autoimmune condition the fact that some of the companies also provide health testing worries me. I know Ancestry's T&Cs allow you to opt out but I'm just sceptical about how reliable that is. Its not that I don't declare it when required but I can just see some insurance companies raising premiums whatever if they knew. I don't have to declare to the DVLA as it doesn't impact on my ability to drive (its always been easier to drive than walk since it developed) so I don't see why any insurance company needs to know.
-
I gather Wikipedia of all websites won't allow the Daily Mail to be quoted as a source. Says everything about them really. ::)
Not really. That's what happens when a politically motivated cabal gains control as they have done with Wikipedia.
Depends on your point of view on the reliability of certain newspapers. :-X But I'm not getting into a political discussion on that point.
-
Interesting article, davidft. :)
I enjoy reading the comments at the Daily Mail, wouldn't trust their stories though!
Regards Margaret
I totally agree. I select DM articles to read purely on the basis of whether they are likely to have good comments. I often contribute myself.
Martin
-
Whenever there is an article in a newspaper concerning a subject or event of which I have first-hand knowledge, I always see many inaccuracies.
What fills me with wonder is our ability to forget this experience when reading something where we don't have a personal insight. Our initial reaction is to accept it as "fact".
-
What disappoints me is that this has become a slag off the Daily Mail thread rather than a discussion of the pitfalls of taking a DNA test with Ancestry.
-
David, the issues with Ancestry DNA and privacy came up the other month and got discussed then. The DM article is a bit late so to speak.
-
Fair enough, guess I missed that then.
Still no reason to turn the thread into a Daily Mail bashing thread though, IMO
-
I apologize for derailing your thread, davidft, but I have commented on the contents of the article as well.
There are indeed pitfalls with DNA testing of any sort with any company, witness the Golden State Killer story for one.
Contrary to most people I presume, I did read the t and c's and I don't consider them to be a horror story though the article makes them appear to be so.
The news article has some inaccuracies in it, as might be expected, so it is perhaps also worth commenting on the paper itself.
No offence meant, I do accept that there are risks in testing, but risks which I personally am willing to take, I certainly have no regrets in testing with ancestry. :)