this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
101 points (98.1% liked)

And Finally...

1070 readers
155 users here now

A place for odd or quirky world news stories.

Elsewhere in the Fediverse:

Rules:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Emperor
101
Pet DNA testing company in doghouse after identifying human as canine (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 8 months ago by Emperor to c/andfinally
29 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://kbin.social/m/news@lemmy.world/t/895673

DNA My Dog received human genetic sample and identified it as a malamute, shar-pei and labrador, according to news station

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 27 points 8 months ago (2 children)

This may be easy to explain in case their system doesn't account for the possibility that whatever DNA they get is not from a dog. Then whatever they answered is just the dog race with DNA closest to human, according to their metrics.

They very likely have a set of possible target DNA references, and look at how close whatever they get is to each of these.

And there are different metrics with which one can measure DNA similarity. Hence it also is to be expected that a different company would return different results. Albeit not super different.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They also don't report the confidence of their results. DNA tests, even the kind used for forensics in criminal investigations, don't give perfect results, there's always some uncertainty. I think there are probably a lot of instances where they have a very low confidence in the results but send them out anyway.

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 7 points 8 months ago

As of today, it is impossible to report an accurate confidence value for these kinds of analyses. The required theoretical work has not been done yet, and of course may turn out impossible. However, there are tons of ways to estimate confidence.

One of the other companies cited in the article seems to be a bit better about this. They seem to filter out non-dog DNA, and if there is not enough dog DNA left after this, then they report that the sample was bad.

[–] JoBo 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Dogs have 38 pairs of chromosomes, humans only 23. It should not be possible for this to happen.

In the article they claim they got results from one of the human cheek swabs and not the other. It is possible that they just don't keep their equipment clean enough and some actual dog DNA got into the mix.

Either way, the other companies receiving similar samples just said there was no dog DNA there. This company has repeatedly provided dog results for human DNA samples. Whatever happened they're doing something very wrong.

[–] n3m37h@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago

They have 1 job and failed at that

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz -4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[–] JoBo 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If I'm wrong, I don't know how I went wrong so please, do me a favour and explain.

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The number of chromosomes is not relevant for distinguishing dog breeds based on sequenced DNA. It is not even relevant to distinguish between dog and human.

Here is some more academic teaching material about genome sequencing: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9291972/

Here is the wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_sequencing

[–] JoBo 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not sure what an article about whole genome sequencing has to do with anything? These companies are looking at a handful of SNPS.

Can you explain how it is possible to look at an SNP without knowing which chromosome it is located on?

And how the other companies were confident there was no dog DNA in the sample and this company said it found dog DNA in only one of the two samples sent?

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 2 points 8 months ago

The article is about sequencing technology. This is what is needed to get from physical DNA to its textual representation. The assignment to chromosomes is lost in the process. It can either be reconstructed after sequencing, by e.g. whole genome assembly or k-mer based methods.

But there are other methods of identifying races than looking at correctly identified SNPs. Often, k-mer content is enough. And it is likely more efficient, because it does not require any computationally heavy assembly.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

All these companies are fronts for scams preying on people's love for their pets...

Don't be a victim

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It’s really a shame. You’d think an established DNA company like 23andMe would enter this market.

[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Wolo@lemmy.wtf 1 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Because their users are stupid and reuse passwords? Not really 23andmes fault

[–] smeg 8 points 8 months ago

As far as I know they're completely unregulated in who they can sell your genetic info to, and they're pretty lazy in terms of information security. So maybe your siblings both send of their info to them, they identify that your family is at a high risk for heart disease, and suddenly your private health insurance company wants to double their fees. Or, with my tinfoil hat on, maybe your family is identified as being a particular ethnic minority, and an authoritarian government gets voted in in a couple of decades who uses that info to round up people they don't like. A bit far-fetched, but hopefully you get my point!

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Well that and they happily provide DNA info to police whenever asked. To the point where they can find people through relatives. Like, if you have a shithead cousin who commits a crime, they can use your DNA to match his. And then the police have your DNA on file.

[–] Monument@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 8 months ago

As I’m sure you know, the accounts that got credential stuffed also exposed the information of anyone that had shared data with them.

What’s more is these hacked accounts were used to friend and solicit other 23&Me users to share their data, expanding the amount of data collected well beyond the scope of just the accounts that got hacked.

I’m sure the nearly 7 million people who had their info stolen through the breach of just 14k accounts weren’t all stupid.

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 4 points 8 months ago

They completely underrepresented the scope of the breach.... That is what puts them in the sketchy category

https://www.wired.com/story/23andme-breach-sec-update/

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Well 23&me business is not actually DNA testing, it's collecting and selling people's DNA data. The market for this on pets does not exist

Also, the way they handled their data breach (or the fact they had any) definitely stains their reputation

Finally, because they were doing the DNA testing at a loss and selling the DNA data has proven to be harder than expected, they are actually on the bring of bankruptcy

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Just goes to show you, these days, even if you pay, you're still the product

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 3 points 8 months ago

Oh certainly... We pay a lot for cars and the manufacturers are also selling your data

[–] Emperor 12 points 8 months ago

My friend had his dogs DNA tested and the results made no sense whatsoever. This might go some way to explaining why.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Turns out she had that dog in her.

[–] Tronn4@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Sounds like her mother had quite a few hounds in her

[–] Hossenfeffer 7 points 8 months ago

I'd always suspected I was a mean sonovabitch and now DNA My Dog has confirmed it.

[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago

TIL I may be part Basset Hound after all.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Thats pretty ruff.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

"You're a white girl, and I know it sounds crazy but our tests say you might be a dog."

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

According to the results from the Toronto-based company, WBZ News reporter Christina Hager is 40% Alaskan malamute, 35% shar-pei and 25% labrador.

The Melbourne, Australia- and Florida-based company Orivet reported that the sample “failed to provide the data necessary to perform the breed ID analysis”.

Meanwhile, Washington-based company Wisdom Panel said that the sample “didn’t provide … enough DNA to produce a reliable result”.

WBZ News’ latest report comes after its investigations team sent in a sample from New Hampshire pet owner Michelle Leininger’s own cheek to DNA My Dog last year.

The industry’s main players include DNA My Dog, Orivet and Wisdom Panel, among others.

In response to WBZ News’ latest reporting, people aired their doubts on social media.

The original article contains 456 words, the summary contains 120 words. Saved 74%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!