just had one of those obscure thoughts, as the police are keeping dna records of anyone who is arrested ,is it possible for them to trace a family member who may have commited a crime in the past through the dna of the person they have in custody at the present time ?

i know that members of the same family are conected by their dna,what i thought was if they ,the police,where to run a suspects dna through a national data base of dna,would it register and pick up some one elses dna that they have on file ?

and no...i have nothing to worry about......it was just a random thought..

honest :confused:

just had one of those obscure thoughts, as the police are keeping dna records of anyone who is arrested ,is it possible for them to trace a family member who may have commited a crime in the past through the dna of the person they have in custody at the present time ?

i know that members of the same family are conected by their dna,what i thought was if they ,the police,where to run a suspects dna through a national data base of dna,would it register and pick up some one elses dna that they have on file ?

and no...i have nothing to worry about......it was just a random thought..

honest :confused:

It wouldn't specifically pick up someone else as having the same DNA but you can track down someone on the database who is likely to be a family member of the person from the unknown sample.

Here's a thought for you as well - if you've ever donated bone marrow and the person you donated it to commits a crime there's a good chance your DNA will be left at the scene because that person will display both their own DNA profile and yours in different cells.

The answer is yes and has been done recently.

I'll have a look for any news articles...........

..........
............

Here is one:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3640199.stm

It wouldn't specifically pick up someone else as having the same DNA but you can track down someone on the database who is likely to be a family member of the person from the unknown sample.

Here's a thought for you as well - if you've ever donated bone marrow and the person you donated it to commits a crime there's a good chance your DNA will be left at the scene because that person will display both their own DNA profile and yours in different cells.has that really happened ? if so its not as reliable as the authorities would have us believe

has that really happened ? if so its not as reliable as the authorities would have us believe

It has been proved that people who have had a bone marrow transplant express both their own and the donor's DNA. I can't reference it as they're restricted reports but I'm certain New Scientist did an article on it some time back.

I keep saying in other threads that DNA is NOT as infallible as they would like us to believe. The chances of two people in a population expressing the same profile has also been found to be much higher than originally thought. There are also some new concerns about MtDNA. I seriously believe we are heading for a time where many convictions will be overturned because of the recent findings surrounding DNA evidence. It is a relatively new science and we are finding more out all the time.

It has been proved that people who have had a bone marrow transplant express both their own and the donor's DNA. I can't reference it as they're restricted reports but I'm certain New Scientist did an article on it some time back.

I keep saying in other threads that DNA is NOT as infallible as they would like us to believe. The chances of two people in a population expressing the same profile has also been found to be much higher than originally thought. There are also some new concerns about MtDNA. I seriously believe we are heading for a time where many convictions will be overturned because of the recent findings surrounding DNA evidence. It is a relatively new science and we are finding more out all the time.twiglet could you please explain what mtdna is ? ive not heard of it

twiglet could you please explain what mtdna is ? ive not heard of it

Sorry depoix, its Mitochondrial DNA which is found in the mitochondria of cells as opposed to the nucleus (which contains nuclear DNA). Eggs have lots of mitochondria and sperm have fewer, but it is thought that after fertilisation these few are destroyed, so while nuclear DNA is a mixture from both parents, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down the maternal line. This means that mitochondrial DNA is less 'contaminated' from generation to generation, although it does mutate more frequently then nuclear DNA. It's very useful in determining maternal lineages and can trace ancestors much further back than nuclear DNA can.

The problem is, that recently a case was found where mitochondrial DNA WAS passed down the paternal side, which could have many implications but I haven't heard much about it since reading the original article.

Sorry depoix, its Mitochondrial DNA which is found in the mitochondria of cells as opposed to the nucleus (which contains nuclear DNA). Eggs have lots of mitochondria and sperm have fewer, but it is thought that after fertilisation these few are destroyed, so while nuclear DNA is a mixture from both parents, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down the maternal line. This means that mitochondrial DNA is less 'contaminated' from generation to generation, although it does mutate more frequently then nuclear DNA. It's very useful in determining maternal lineages and can trace ancestors much further back than nuclear DNA can.

The problem is, that recently a case was found where mitochondrial DNA WAS passed down the paternal side, which could have many implications but I haven't heard much about it since reading the original article.many thanks for the reply twiglet,its not something i come accross every day so it was very interesting readind :thumbsup:

Hope it made sense :thumbsup: I'm not used to people being interested, just lecture theatres full of very bored students who are more often than not catching up on their missed sleep from the weekend :D