[HN Gopher] People in a genetic database have segments of DNA in...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       People in a genetic database have segments of DNA in common
       unexpectedly often
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 50 points
       Date   : 2023-08-22 22:58 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | NoZebra120vClip wrote:
       | As was my father, and my father's father, and his father's father
       | before him. My people come from the Land of Those Who Enroll in
       | Genetic Studies. Our motto is "Doing Nations A Solid". Our flag
       | has 23 stars. Do not call us "inbred"; we are simply family-
       | friendly. Every February 3 (or 2 March if we are European) we
       | gather for a family reunion where we spend 23 hours enrolling in
       | every possible genetic study, and then the parents retire to
       | their rooms where they joyously exchange genetic data with each
       | other. (A lot of us are born around November 3!)
        
         | Obscurity4340 wrote:
         | Family2
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | alexfromapex wrote:
       | A great example of self-selection bias
        
       | lo_zamoyski wrote:
       | It may be the gene that controls for credulity, as those with the
       | gene for paranoia are unlikely to cede their genetic information
       | to some shady company.
        
         | astrange wrote:
         | There is more or less nothing useful someone can do with your
         | genetic information, and there's no way you can prevent anyone
         | from having it, since you leave it everywhere you go.
        
         | kevinwuhoo wrote:
         | This study was done using data from the UK Biobank [1] which is
         | registered as a non-profit. Participants were also volunteers
         | only.
         | 
         | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Biobank
        
           | beaker52 wrote:
           | It's quite a fun thought experiment to think about how you
           | might avoid this bias.
           | 
           | Send Blackhawk helicopters to collect samples by force? Was
           | there bias in the selection technique? What about the people
           | genetically predisposed to avoid the Blackhawk helicopters?
           | We'd need multiple collection methods, and still need to
           | retain an unbiased distribution. You can continue until you
           | get to "we should set up global search patterns so that no
           | human can escape our dystopian DNA collection". And even then
           | you're still biased by population effects owing to the
           | probability that there is a genetic population who have been
           | predisposed to suppress their own genetic population at this
           | point in time.
           | 
           | Gosh, it sounds like a fever dream.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | bookofjoe wrote:
       | >Studying the genetics of participation using footprints left on
       | the ascertained genotypes
       | 
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-023-01439-2
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | Did they control for culture? No? Then we explain this
       | coincidence with "Children do as their parents did"
       | 
       | Similarly, we can claim genetic basis for wanting an education,
       | investing in the stock market, choosing a Chevy over a Ford,
       | going to Gramma Ethyl's at Christmas.
        
         | consilient wrote:
         | It's right there in the article.
         | 
         | > The analysis done by Kong and his student relies on the key
         | idea that a genetic sequence that occurs more frequently in
         | participants than in nonparticipants will also occur more
         | frequently in the genetic regions that are shared by two
         | related participants.
         | 
         | > Put differently, a bit of DNA that is common in the
         | population will show up frequently in the study. But it will
         | still only have a 50/50 chance of showing up in the child of
         | someone who carried a copy. If a bit of DNA makes people more
         | likely to enroll in genetic studies, it will be more common
         | both in the overall data and among closely related family
         | members.
         | 
         | > So they checked the genetic sequences shared between first-
         | degree relatives--either parents and children or siblings (but
         | not twins)--in the UK Biobank.
        
       | vagab0nd wrote:
       | Yes. All surveys are biased towards people who are willing to
       | take the survey.
       | 
       | In the most extreme case, if your survey only has one question,
       | "are you willing to take this survey?" you would get 100% "yes".
        
         | science4sail wrote:
         | Would it be possible to remove that survey bias using coercion?
         | For example, we could hire a gang to break into a supermarket
         | and hold everyone there as hostages until they fill out a
         | consumer preferences and brand visibility survey.
        
           | dalmo3 wrote:
           | Yes, that's how they do the GDP survey.
        
         | kfichter wrote:
         | Not if I force someone to unwillingly take your survey!
        
           | beaker52 wrote:
           | but then what if I force them to unwillingly punch you in the
           | face and shout "NO!"?
           | 
           | I'm sure we can factor all this into the p-value somehow.
        
         | lmkg wrote:
         | More likely around 96%. Don't neglect the Lizardman Constant.
        
         | rootw0rm wrote:
         | give it to enough people and there will likely be that one
         | person who just wants to see the world burn...their answer will
         | be something like "hotdog juice"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-23 23:01 UTC)