from Hacker News

Analyzing my DNA

by richardburton on 3/18/13, 9:39 PM with 42 comments

• by tstactplsignore on 3/19/13, 12:08 AM

  >"What's interesting is that the older the species, the more the chromosomes, or at least this is the trend. "

  This isn't true: there's no such trend (Fruit flies have 8 chromosomes), and the sentence belies an important misunderstanding of taxonomy. Also, plants tend to have high chromosome counts because of [polyploidy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyploid).

  Additionally, the author seems to be latching onto some odd victorian-era esque ideas about biology here. There are several fern species which are younger than humans, and several salamander species, and thousands of other extant species. Modern fern species aren't "older" than humans simply because they had distant cousins in the fossil record who were, on the face, morphologically similar.

  Evolution is a bush, not a ladder, and it doesn't make sense to say that any one of the end nodes (extant species) is "older" than any other unless you are talking about the very fuzzy barrier of speciation at which the majority of the pre-species' population could not breed with the population it was diverging from.

• by karpathy on 3/18/13, 11:41 PM

  For anyone interested, 23andme is also starting to sequence exomes (the important parts of the protein coding regions) for $999, which can potentially provide much more interesting information than simply looking at SNPs. But from the website, it looks like they are still in closed beta: https://www.23andme.com/exome/

  However, there are several blog posts describing the types of results and analysis the exome enables. For example, http://jchoigt.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/a-first-look-at-my-e... and http://blog.goldenhelix.com/?p=1282 but more can be found on Google.

• by tokenadult on 3/18/13, 10:28 PM

  One of the most interesting things I've learned about human genetics by joining a local "journal club" including several researchers who are members of the Behavior Genetics Association is just how little is certain about genetic influences on any human trait of interest. The review article Johnson, W. (2010). Understanding the Genetics of Intelligence: Can Height Help? Can Corn Oil?. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(3), 177-182

  http://apsychoserver.psych.arizona.edu/JJBAReprints/PSYC621/...

  looks at some famous genetic experiments to show how little is explained by gene frequencies even in thoroughly studied populations defined by artificial selection.

  "Together, however, the developmental natures of GCA and height, the likely influences of gene-environment correlations and interactions on their developmental processes, and the potential for genetic background and environmental circumstances to release previously unexpressed genetic variation suggest that very different combinations of genes may produce identical IQs or heights or levels of any other psychological trait. And the same genes may produce very different IQs and heights against different genetic backgrounds and in different environmental circumstances. This would be especially the case if height and GCA and other psychological traits are only single facets of multifaceted traits actually under more systematic genetic regulation, such as overall body size and balance between processing capacity and stimulus reactivity. Genetic influences on individual differences in psychological characteristics are real and important but are unlikely to be straightforward and deterministic. We will understand them best through investigation of their manifestation in biological and social developmental processes."

• by brenfrow on 3/19/13, 3:54 AM

  It should be called Y-chromosomal Noah, since he and his sons would all trace through one mans genetics. And well there was genetics from four different women on the Arc... So the Eve makes sense.

• by hingisundhorsa on 3/19/13, 3:17 AM

  "certain European populations have a mutation that causes lactase to be produced throughout their lives". Lactase persistence is interesting. There has been selection pressure for persistence in Northern European (eg: about 98% of Irish people have lactase persistence) populations but not in Southern Europe (under 40% in Italy) and one might even say "almost selection against" in Asia (under 10% in China). Apparently, the gene first evolved in the Near East, possibly tied to first domestication of the auroch and then spread radially from there into Europe. Convergent evolution, ie: lactase persistence using different genes, also came about in the Bantu population in Sub-saharan Africa which enabled this population to spread further south and overtake San populations (bushmen). Perhaps this is the same selection pressure in action.

• by Gmo on 3/19/13, 10:32 AM

  Well, that's a bit late, but if you want an easy tool to have extra information about your 23andMe analysis, you can also use this : http://my.promethease.com

  More info about what it can do here : http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Promethease

  SNPedia can also be of interest to anyone here, it is a wiki centralizing information about all known human SNPs (including literature references)

  Disclaimer: One of the person running this is my colleague.

• by hfsktr on 3/19/13, 2:38 AM

  Are insurance companies doing this yet? I imagine a Gattaca-like future when I hear of this kind of stuff. Not that I fear it but I don't trust any company or government to do the right thing with the information...

  I am curious how accurate it all turns out to be (it is noted that percentages play a role). I have only basic understanding of the math and biology so I am probably making tons of assumptions but from the post:

  "One way of investigating this, is by studying identical twins. Since they have the exact same DNA, any differences between the two can be attributed to environmental factors."

  I have identical twin sisters (from a fraternal twin father even, born on the same birthday...the odds). To me they look nothing alike but to outsiders sure maybe.

  The points I am curious about:

  1a. Doesn't DNA mutate? Even if twins start with identical DNA it could mutate from any number of environmental variables couldn't it?

  1b. Couldn't it only mutate in just one, making them have different DNA in the end?

  Like I said basic understanding. Does 23andme give a 'layman' introduction to any of this stuff? One of the other comments says it makes you read some stuff before getting certain results but is it the kind of stuff that 'normal' people can understand without having to read another book of references?

  Sorry about the long post; stopping now.

• by Semaphor on 3/18/13, 10:53 PM

  Always wanted to try that, but with $80 shipping costs for Germany that's just a little bit too much.

• by ecolak on 3/19/13, 5:25 AM

  23AndMe doesn't tell you much about your DNA actually, they can only tell you some things about already known variations. If you really wanna know everything about your DNA, you should look at whole genome sequencing (WGS). WGS is usually done by companies like Illumina and analysis can be done by a company like Bina Technologies. The whole field is getting more and more data and analytics driven so there's lots of opportunities for software engineers and data scientists. Check out http://www.binatechnologies.com/vision to get a better idea of the field.

• by bjornsing on 3/19/13, 1:33 AM

  > A single change in a base pair can dramatically alter the protein created, and easily account for the differences between our two species [human and chimpanzee that is].

  Not to be picky, but I seriously doubt that. ;)

• by inovator on 3/19/13, 12:21 AM

  23andme also has upgraded their website but still in beta mode. You guys can opt in for it here https://www.23andme.com/you/beta_optin/

• by malay on 3/19/13, 6:39 AM

  If you want to dig into the million SNP raw data from 23andMe any further than what is presented on the website, Jeff Hammerbacher and Konrad Karczewsk taught a Skillshare on doing your own personal genome analysis with Python and various other tools.

  Slides here: http://www.slideshare.net/jhammerb/20130206skillshare

  Github repo here: https://github.com/hammer/personal-genome-analysis

• by pagliara on 3/18/13, 10:53 PM

  I'm awaiting my 23andme results right now. I'm very excited for my results and this post has inspired me to learn more about the science and research that has enabled us to learn so much about ourselves from our genes.

  My friend recently got their results back and I was really impressed with how well 23andMe presents the data to you. They do a really good job explaining what the data means. In fact, in some sections, 23andme will only tell you your results after reading through the informational material they provide.

• by 2321sdadas on 3/19/13, 9:58 AM

  Hmm, I imagine that this is a complete scam. Or am I too skeptic? Where is the proof that this is 100% legit and not some mumbo-jumbo psyche stuff?

• by inovator on 3/18/13, 11:27 PM

  For $99 you can get DNA analyzing; that is a cheapest price you can find anywhere imo. However, their service is extremely slow. You are looking at about 6-8 weeks until you get to see your result. I guess they are trying to offset the expenses. Nevertheless, it's a great service to find out your roots and health problems.

• by deanje on 3/19/13, 12:36 AM

  I recently did this also, heres the process in pictures: http://deanjerkovich.com/2013/01/20/getting-my-genome-sequen...

  please excuse the technical inaccuracies - this was prior to me going on an adventure of learning exactly what this involved.

• by kkwok on 3/19/13, 2:16 AM

  Having studied the techniques used to analyze DNA, I wish 23andme would send you your raw data. Nevertheless still awesome and crazy to see your own DNA being analyzed.

• by anonfunction on 3/18/13, 11:35 PM

  "My DNA is 2.9% neanderthal, which puts me in the top 91% of 23andme's members (not sure what conclusions to draw from that!)."

  Checkmate, evolution deniers.

• by CleanedStar on 3/19/13, 5:53 AM

  "Studies have shown that identical twins who grow up in separate families have an IQ correlation of 0.74, while adoptive siblings have no more similar IQ than strangers."

  First off the bat, such studies are obviously social science, not science.

  Secondly - there is this idea that one can boil entire brains down to one number like a CRC or checksum - the IQ number. Then you can rank them in order I suppose. It is obviously a ludicrous endeavor on reflection. It's like the Douglas Adams joke that the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42. When science actually makes progress on the brain, I'm sure biologists of the future will look on IQ like we look on phrenology.

  Thirdly, these social science studies of twins mentioned were done by Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr. He's someone who writes op-eds for the Wall Street Journal - I guess Nature and Science are too full and his work crowded into there.

  The second edition of the Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould is a good book on this topic.

  There was a hysterical conservative reaction to Gould's book just as there was a hysterical progressive reaction to the Bell Curve. Which shows this is really a political debate, not a scientific one. This is a political debate going back about 10,000 years, really. I am skeptical of any social scientific study that proposes it has found all the answers.