Surprise DNA Results Are Turning Customer-Service Reps into Therapists
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
Teloyears measures the length of telemeres that may be an indication of genetic aging(as opposed to chronological aging).
Before I had the test done I checked on Teloyears feedback and reviews and most negative reviews consistently included people upset that their Teloyears estimate of genetic aging coming in higher than their chronological age.
I’m guessing people just want to be told what they want to hear.
So these societies have to make compromises.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/search?q=Dna&restrict_sr=...
I got this reference indirectly from The Red Queen, an interesting book. It's packed away, so I can't give anything more specific.
Edit, some links:
Surname "Sykes": https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207/
Bone marrow: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22688803
The bone marrow study was 2012, and no class has a monopoly on Leukemia. I would not be surprised if there were a class gradient, but an average of under 2% doesn't leave room for a very big underclass to be scoring 20% or 30%.
These are England and Germany, things could be different elsewhere, I don't know whether there is good data.
> Evolutionary theory predicts that males will provide less parental investment for putative offspring who are unlikely to be their actual offspring. Crossculturally, paternity confidence (a mans assessment of the likelihood that he is the father of a putative child) is positively associated with mens involvement with children and with investment or inheritance from paternal kin. A survey of 67 studies reporting nonpaternity suggests that for men with high paternity confidence rates of nonpaternity are(excluding studies of unknown methodology) typically 1.9%, substantially less than the typical rates of 10% or higher cited by many researchers. Further crosscultural investigation of the relationship between paternity and paternity confidence is warranted.
>The most thorough analyses are from Canada, where data in a national archive of all homicides known to police indicate that children under 5 years of age were beaten to death by their putative genetic fathers at a rate of 2.6 deaths per million child-years at risk (residing with their fathers), while the corresponding rate for stepfathers was over 120 times higher at 321.6 (Daly&Wilson, 2001).
That is a very large odds ratio.
If you split these statistics through 10th percentile socioeconomic groups I'm sure it wouldn't be as significant as 120 times. This paper is 10 years old and references Sweden as having less than a 10x increase.
Thinking aloud: that's about 1/7 of Canada's murder rate, and if I guess that under-5 children are 7% of population, such things would make up 1% of all murders, which does not sound crazy to me.
If step-dads are 100x more dangerous, and 10% of kids have one (just a guess) then step-kid murders would be 10% of all murders. That sounds high but perhaps not crazy? 321.6 / million is about 20x the whole country's murder rate.
I could adopt children. I could become a stepdad. I could never raise a child that was born through my partner cheating on me. It's basically a partner saying "I want your resources but I don't want my kids to be like you".
I totally get last paragraph. If you venture into something it’s totally possible to love others’ children as your own. But to have it thrust upon you is horrid. You sacrifice not only your life - the money, the labor, the freedom, etc., but you inevitably sacrifice your ability to propagate. And that’s not an uncertainty any human should face. But of course women have 100% certainty a child is theirs (minus hospital switching schenanigans of course) so it’s really only an issue a man has to endure.
Guess this comment is a bit winding. I really don’t like to dwell on the subject I guess...
Not sure what this is talking about, but DNA Paternity tests are most certainly legal in Germany there is even a right to have one done: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/__1598a.html
edit: So I checked, what happened is that Germany banned genetic tests where there is no consent from the party a sample was taken from. In the case of a paternity test where the father, mother or child is unwilling, a court can instead force the test as knowing paternity has been decided to be a constitutional right.
Upon a right-of-clarification request, the family court may substitute for consent not given and order submission to a test sample.
But what does it really change
The rapport you built or didnt is the same, with the people you grew up with
Whatever they taught you about infidelity is still to make your life more convenient
Find out whatever diseases you are actually predisposed to, or dont
If you have a decent life already, probability is your “real” family lived in an overpopulated bottom rung of society. If not, its still unlikely you get to be part of anything now that the secret is out. Send a note for kicks, but why create the drama?
In education there is the issue of teaching mendelian genetics without causing a massive stink when some of the kids show traits they couldn't get from both parents.
This is often solved by intentionally avoiding real examples and using contrived examples that are not mendelian like eye color.
However, if both parents had blue eyes, then it's near impossible for the kids to have brown eyes if they're genetically related to both parents.
from random import random, randint
p_blue = 0.5
p_cheat = 0.1
def randbool(p): return random() < p
def randgenes(): return randbool(p_blue), randbool(p_blue)
def mate(mother, father): return mother[randint(0,1)], father[randint(0,1)]
def blueeyes(p): return p[0] and p[1]
n_cheat = 0
n_faithful = 0
for i in range(0,1000000):
mother = (True,False)
grandfather = randgenes()
grandmother = randgenes()
husband = mate(grandfather, grandmother)
lover = randgenes()
cheated = randbool(p_cheat)
if cheated:
kid1 = mate(mother, lover)
kid2 = mate(mother, lover)
else:
kid1 = mate(mother, husband)
kid2 = mate(mother, husband)
if blueeyes(grandmother) or blueeyes(grandfather) or blueeyes(husband) or not blueeyes(kid1) or not blueeyes(kid2): continue
if cheated: n_cheat += 1
else: n_faithful += 1
print(n_cheat)
print(n_faithful)
We get 4619 times cheated and 14226 times faithful. The probability of cheating went up substantially relative to the prior of 10%, but it's still below 30%. I'd say that the chaos wasn't justified.I think maybe it boils down to some people always wanting to know (me) and others who don't (whatever it is) - and you've probably self-selected when you clicked all the boxes as you spat into a tube.
Exactly the situation I'm in, with both a parent and a grandparent, and it's always boiled down to these people have had a significant impact on my life, and these people have not. I don't understand the obsession with genetics - the thought "he's not my real father" has never once crossed my mind.
“We don’t really play the role of therapist, but rather listen and try to be sympathetic and empathetic, getting them to process things,”
That’s... that’s basically therapy.
Of course that’s not the whole practice of psychology or psychiatry, but it is most of what “therapy” (i.e. talk therapy) is.
Journaling for example is a common technique that’s part of therapy and outside of what you’re describing. Talking without actions outside of therapy is mostly an expensive hobby. And those nudges are critical for people to actually have direction as to how to attempt to make change.
You do bring up the other issue I have with Hollywood therapy. Therapists don’t need deep incite into how you think to come up with some unique solution tailored to you. It’s more like a dentist convincing you that you really do need to both brush your teeth and floss. Rather than a doctor giving you some antibiotics for a week and everything is fine again.
PS: Though this is from the CBT side of things.