DNA samples will be destroyed
Last week, Ancestry announced that it was discontinuing two types of DNA tests — the YDNA test (the male line testing of the DNA passed from father to son to son and so on) and the mitochondrial DNA test (the female line testing of the type of DNA passed from a mother to her children that only her daughters pass on to their children and so on).
This past Sunday, The Legal Genealogist asked Ancestry, publicly, to explain its decision.
Not the decision to discontinue these tests — these are small potatoes to Ancestry and not part of its core DNA testing business — but the decision to destroy any remaining DNA samples in its possession from these tests.1
Yesterday, Ken Chahine, Senior Vice President and General Manager for Ancestry.com DNA, LLC, commented on the Ancestry.com blog:
As many of you know, we announced last week that we’re retiring our Y-DNA and mtDNA tests.
Unfortunately, we didn’t explain clearly our rationale for our decision, which has led to confusion. We’d like to take this opportunity to share the thinking that went into our decision making process.First, we’d like to clarify that we are not retiring our autosomal AncestryDNA test that we launched in May 2012. We are only retiring the Y-DNA and mtDNA tests* that we launched in 2007. While the Y-DNA and mtDNA tests launched genetic genealogy and led to many great discoveries, the autosomal test has opened even more possibilities for family history research. Therefore, our decision to retire the Y-DNA and mtDNA tests is a deliberate attempt to focus our resources on providing powerful family history research tools that use autosomal testing.
Second, as part of the decision to retire Y-DNA and mtDNA tests we were faced with another difficult decision of what to do with the customer samples. On the one hand, we understand the value of these samples to many of you. On the other hand, we take customer privacy seriously and, regrettably, the legal framework used to collect these samples does not allow us to retest or transfer those samples. Practically speaking, many of these samples are also no longer useable. For example, many of the swabs were exhausted of genetic material during our testing or the sample may be past its shelf life. In the end we made the difficult decision to destroy the samples and are committed to trying to find solutions to these roadblocks for future products.
We understand that many of you have spent years using the Y-DNA and mtDNA products for genealogy and no amount of justification will offer you comfort in our decision. It is our hope that our future products will convince you that the autosomal test is a powerful and useful tool for family history.
* The genetic results from these tests are available for customers to download until September 5, 2014.2
Frankly, I don’t buy the argument that this is a decision driven by “the legal framework.” It’s a decision driven by the very great difficulties involved in returning so much as a single sample, for sure.
But in those few circumstances where (a) someone wants the sample returned, (b) there’s sample that can be returned, (c) the person who wants the sample is either the person who provided the sample or has clear legal authority to act on behalf of the person who provided it, and (d) the person who wants the sample is willing to pay what are likely to be very substantial costs, I doubt that there’s any law anywhere that would stand in the way.
So this remains — for those few people who convinced a family member who was the last available person to be tested for a male or female line to test with Ancestry — a deeply regrettable (and, I suspect, avoidable) disaster.
For the rest of us, it’s a wake-up call and a big one. Folks, the bottom line here is that DNA is a finite resource.
For many of us, there may only be one male relative (brother, cousin, uncle) or one female relative (cousin, aunt) who still carries the DNA of one of our family lines. And for all of us who are interested in autosomal (cousin) testing, the loss of each passing generation means a lower and lower chance of ever finding the DNA match we may need to prove our cases.
And if we’re going to test, and we’re going to want to access the data from those tests over the years, we need to pay close attention to who does — and who does not — store samples, care for samples and caretake our data over the years.
Ancestry never promised it would keep the samples. And it isn’t promising to do it now for its continuing autosomal DNA tests. If having samples available is important to you — and it’s darned important to me and my family research — there are other companies out there that do things differently — and better.3
Caveat emptor. Let the buyer beware.
SOURCES
Image: Adapted from OpenClipArt.org, user zindyi
- Judy G. Russell, “Why, Ancestry? Why?,” The Legal Genealogist, posted 8 June 2014 (https://www.legalgenealogist.com/blog : accessed 12 June 2014). ↩
- Ken Chahine, “Comments on Y-DNA and mtDNA Tests,” Ancestry.com blog, posted 12 June 2014 (http://blogs.ancestry.com/ : accessed 12 June 2014). ↩
- As an example, Family Tree DNA provides free storage of unused DNA samples for all kinds of DNA tests for a period of at least 20 years. See ISOGG Wiki (http://www.isogg.org/wiki), “Y-DNA STR testing chart,” rev. 7 June 2014. And see Competitive Chart, Family Tree DNA (https://www.familytreedna.com/ : accessed 12 June 2014). ↩
after viewing the Competitive Chart it’s a no brainer where to have the tests done. I hope they’re ready for a boom in business.
Well *they* definitely got my business in the last few days. I’m sure the Father’s Day $79 sale price was already planned but coming on the back of a horrible week for Ancestry’s public relations, it’s a master stroke!
THANK YOU!!!!!!
I corresponded directly with Bennett Greenspan about these issues, because I was concerned about their perspective at the receiving end of any DNA transfers. I asked how would the customer confirm he has the legal right to obtain and later test the sample at FTDNA? And would FTDNA encounter a lot of expense in trying to extract DNA from samples that might not even be viable after the transfer process? Bennett responded that it would be a “logistics nightmare” at their end.
No company can absolutely guarantee DNA storage that will be of sufficient quantity and quality to run future tests. FTDNA has already encountered situations where the stored sample wasn’t adequate. Some number of years ago I packaged DNA preservation kits using FTA cards, which can be stored at room temperature indefinitely. The quantity and quality of the DNA was quite adequate for running numerous tests of the type that were available then. I’m not at all certain that the quantity would be sufficient for whole genome sequencing nowadays, though. Also, any storage method results in fragmented DNA. If intact chromosomes are necessary for future use, the only way to do that is to create immortal cell lines, like the Personal Genome Project does.
There’s no question that this would be difficult, Ann, and that there are no guarantees ever. As I know you agree, that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth trying.
Why don’t they donate these samples to family tree DNA with customer approval assuming family tree would accept them with a reduced fee?
All I know is what Ancestry says, Cheryl.
In this context we shouldn’t forget to mention that FTDNA only stores the samples for their own benefit. Russian FTDNA customers have tried to transfer their samples to YSEQ because they were concerned to legally get a new sample out of their country to the US. Max Blankfeld has delayed their request for weeks and then finally he asked for a prohibitive high transfer fee.
Here is the original answer from FTDNA:
We will forward stored DNA samples to a third party after due authorization by the sample owner. There is a service charge for sample transfers to cover for labor and materials. It is:
$25 US for un-extracted stored vials, per sample
$50 US for extracted DNA samples stored in our freezer, per sample
Please note that we make no warranty of the usability or viability of any customer vial or extracted DNA sample that is removed from our laboratory environment. The DNA samples are not available for pick up at the office. They will be shipped to the requesting party by courier with signature receipt required. Shipping costs will vary with urgency, packaging method, and distance.
I would be happy if Ancestry adopted that same policy with respect to the YDNA and mtDNA samples it plans to destroy (if not already destroyed). I’d be happy to pay the service charge and the shipping charge if those were the only samples that might possibly exist and be viable for my family members.
Ultimately FTDNA did NOT transfer the sample even after the customer agreed to pay. They just didn’t take his order. He finally took a new sample and sent it to YSEQ, but he was really mad at FTDNA for being so stubborn. In either case, the question is if it’s justified to ask $50 plus whatever shipping from someone who is in an urgent situation to get his sample transfered. Maybe Max has forgotten that DNA Fingerprint has transferred hundreds of samples to FTDNA for free?
I’m sorry the customer encountered the problem, Thomas. But that’s not the issue today — and this blog isn’t the place to fight that out.
Yes, this is about the customer only, and FTDNA. This could have been any other research or medical diagnoetic laboratory. Do you think this is a great move of FTDNA? I’m not sure if you have been around in genetic genealogy for that long, but who do you think has pushed for FTDNA’s excellent DNA storage system? Who has written all the software that makes it possible that the correct sample is tested with the right assay?
Thomas, I know who you are and all you’ve done for genetic genealogy. I also know that there’s a time and a place for a discussion of your — and others’ — disagreements with FTDNA. A thread dealing with AncestryDNA and its decision to destroy samples entirely is not the right time or place.
DNA storage is precisely the reason I use and recommend others use FTDNA for their testing needs. Price should only be one part of the equation.
We all have to consider all factors, Dawn.
It’s interesting that:
“Practically speaking, many of these samples are also no longer useable. For example, many of the swabs were exhausted of genetic material during our testing or the sample may be past its shelf life.”
I picture the poor exhausted swabs sitting on the shelf in the back closet at Ancestry World Headquarters. “shelf life”? How come they never mentioned this before? I assume there’s no DNA lab at Ancestry and that they contract out their processing (and storage) to a professional lab. If so, is it the same lab that FTDNA uses? That 23andMe uses? Are our samples at those companies past their shelf life? Did Ancestry use the Acme DNA & Aluminum Siding Corporation Lab?
Bob Kirk
I can’t speak for any of the companies, and don’t have any specific knowledge of the storage systems at Ancestry or 23andMe, but have had friends who’ve toured the FTDNA lab, and it’s a facility it owns.
I believe what Ken is clearly saying is that the legal framework prevents retests and transfers, which is what most people would want. Returns would be a small percentage of that. What would most people do with returned DNA? What could you do with it? Besides complain to Ancestry about not being able to do anything with it, or about the quality of the old DNA that once returned could be mishandled any number of ways?
I don’t see any practical alternative in this scenario and I think you are perhaps twisting Ken’s words out of context. Personally I think cutting those products is a smart move for Ancestry: companies need to focus on what is core, not on what is peripheral.
If I’m missing some obvious way to effectively make use of the returned DNA please let me know.
And just what law — what “legal framework” — exactly is it that bars transfers and retests, pray tell? Cite me a statute or a regulation or even a city ordinance. No hurry. I’ll wait.
I’d assume the T&C, privacy policy, and related contracts. If you can post yours from your test submission we could see; I did my tests of these DNA types at FTDNA. Without the contracts we are both speculating, I suspect.
How would Ancestry determine which heir would be entitled to the returned sample? Is Ancestry expected to work with estate attorneys for each deceased customer?
I agree it is a sad situation but given the situation I don’t see a practical alternative.
None of those issues are insurmountable in the very few cases where (a) someone wants to attempt to retrieve a sample (because the person can’t be retested for any reason), (b) there is sample left to be retrieved, (c) the legal entitlement to the sample is clear (the person has clear legal authority, such as written consent or a court order) AND (d) the person is willing to pay what I imagine are not insignificant costs.
I suspect the company would have a great deal of cost to determine if customers indeed mees all 4 criteria, which would be hard to recover if not. Insurmountable, no; unaffordable in practice, most likely.
I suspect nobody wanted to even try.
Judy,
I am interested in buying DNA testing kits for my 88 year old father and myself (female). I have pretty well documented family history on him (maternal side) and adequately on (paternal side).
1) Should I purchase the YDNA for him or autosomal?
My mother (an only child) is deceased and her maternal and paternal lineage is very sketchy all the way around. However, there is a surname group online that is gathering DNA information with her surname.
2) Should I test using autosomal for female information?
3) I have an older brother and a younger brother. The younger brother is willing to test. Would it be beneficial for him to do so or is it enough for my father to test? I am new to all of this and not sure of the best approach.
Thank you for your article and for the comparison chart you provided ~ it was very helpful.
For your father, the priority should be autosomal (because that changes with every generation so testing your father is more important than testing you or your brother for this one type of DNA). Since you’re going to have him tested anyway, go ahead and do the YDNA test for him. Then do autosomal and mtDNA for yourself (that gives you as much info as you can get on your mother’s line as well). Unfortunately, the last Big Y coupon I had has been claimed, so you might want to do a more basic YDNA test to start with.
One of the things about competition is a provider’s ability to supply something the competition cannot or will not — the ability to distinguish yourself from others in the field or market. And price is not always the primary means of doing so. Ancestry has just handed a means of market distinction to its competition and has done so on a silver platter. Caveat emptor indeed . . . and the best way to avoid getting burned is to learn from past practices of a provider. Ancestry has ceded the invaluable qualities of reliability and trust to its competition in the DNA testing business. I expect to see the competition ride this all the way to total dominance of the field/market and Ancestry will rue the day they destroyed the basis for DNA testing customers to trust them! Seller beware!!!
In Latin, caveat venditor (let the seller beware)… and were it not for the size of AncestryDNA’s database, this would be a real wake-up call. As it is, it will simply be recommended as one of several options and NOT the primary one.
Time will tell if that database will expand or stagnate.
I for one could not be happier now with the choice I made a few years ago to use Family Tree DNA! 😉
Family Tree DNA is also my company of choice, John… but I’ll take advantage of the AncestryDNA matches too.
I just attained swab samples of very elderly people (one is 102 years old) who represent each of my mother’s great grandparents lines. I intend to do Y and autosomal testing and save the remaining samples for future technology advancements…. 10 to 20 years from now.
Q1 Should I trust the storage of these samples with FTDNA… or is it practical to also personally store viles… say in one’s fridge? I got 5 swabs done for each participant.
Q2 From the above threads, there seems to be some ambiguity as to whether these samples will preserve properly… ie not fragment etc.
Can anyone shed some light on this matter? I want these viles available down the road.
You might want to pose this question directly to customer service at FTDNA, but I wouldn’t hesitate to store it with them — and better them than in your fridge.
thanks Judy. It’s not so much that I don’t like or have confidence in FTDNA…. but what happens 10 years from now if another organization has major technology breakthroughs not available to FTDNA? How will I be able to access the stored DNA samples for use at a competing organization??
In that case, Douglas, you may want to bank a sample with some independent laboratory where you would be able to direct the sample’s use for some other purpose down the road.
Great Idea Judy. Any Suggestions for an independent DNA Storage Provider??
I’m not familiar with any, no, but I’ll bet the lab folks at your local medical school could come up with some suggestions.