7 ms·

Surprise DNA Results Are Turning Customer-Service Reps into Therapists

100 points by laurex 8y ago

berbec 8y ago
This has to be a really tough call center job. People don't want to trust what you're telling them. Who is going to believe their father/brother/sister isn't?
- joaomacp 8y ago
  At the end of the day, what difference does it make? You can't change the past. Also I'm pretty sure knowledge like "he's not my real father" will stay in the back of your mind and pop up from time to time, making things awkward for a long time.
  - goldcd 8y ago
    Well it's always up to you if you consider your genetic parent, your "real father" - sperm donors, adoption, hospital mix-ups, affairs, early death, re-marriage blah blah. No shortage of reasons why you one of your 'parental figures' might not be 50% genetically related to you - and conversely I'm absolutely fine with anybody who rejects a genetic parent as they're an arsehole. Taking all of that in, you get to pick who cared for you and you choose to reciprocate with the parental nominative. Genetic stuff is just some nice to have information, along with what's more likely to kill you than average and how friendly your progenitors were with the local neanderthals. 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.
    - stordoff 8y ago
      > Well it's always up to you if you consider your genetic parent, your "real father" 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.
AchieveLife 8y ago
A somber example that life finds a way.
lostmsu 8y ago
Literal quote from that click-bait: "We don’t really play the role of therapist"
- toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
  Full quote “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.
  - Retric 8y ago
    It might be Hollywood therapy, but real world therapists are not limited to that.
    - toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
      My experience of Hollywood therapy is that it’s nothing like that, and in fact tends to be either highly confrontational, or involves magical insights from the therapist which have an almost immediate effect, and are invariably accepted with little resistance. The reality that therapy is mostly one person talking while another listens, nudging them make their own insights and helping people process difficult emotions and experiences. Of course that’s not the whole practice of psychology or psychiatry, but it is most of what “therapy” (i.e. talk therapy) is.
      - Retric 8y ago
        The Hollywood part is focusing on the conversation. 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.
technofiend 8y ago
If ask Reddit is anything to go by this is slowly becoming normal. You have to wonder if 20-30 years from now mores will have shifted to reflect the reality that there are often familial buried secrets of every kind out there. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/search?q=Dna&restrict_sr=on https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/search?q=Dna&restrict_sr=...
- lallysingh 8y ago
  There was a study in the UK some decades ago showing that roughly 30% of kids weren't from the father's they thought they were. I got this reference indirectly from The Red Queen, an interesting book. It's packed away, so I can't give anything more specific.
  - danieltillett 8y ago
    The non-paternatity rate is very class dependant. In the upper-middle the rate is quite low, but in the underclasses it can get up to around 20%.
    - iguy 8y ago
      No way, 1-2% is more like the range. For the western world, for serious studies e.g. tracking surnames vs Y chromosomes. Most much higher figures come from counting only disputed cases, which are obviously going to be skewed. Edit, some links: Surname "Sykes": https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207/ Bone marrow: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22688803 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22688803
      - danieltillett 8y ago
        Most people are not members of the underclass. Anyway you can't really use historical data like this to estimate the non-paternity rate today.
        8y ago
russley 8y ago
Obligatory: Don't take non-medical DNA tests.
c3534l 8y ago
I don't know if this is apocryphal or not, but I'd always heard the same thing happened in the 50s when blood typing became widely available. So I don't think anyone in that industry should be exactly surprised at this particular result.
- tvjoyfbhde 8y ago
  When a sick child needs a transplant, the parents are the first to be checked for compatibility. Sometimes the results are impossible. The policy in such cases simply to inform the putative father that he's not a match and leave it at that.
  - pl1234 8y ago
    what a disgusting policy
azinman2 8y ago
Saying “this is science” alone as an answer to the validity is really doing science a disfavor. Not only are these consumer grade tests, but there’s been a lot of evidence of the fallibility of DNA testing (particularly for crime scene analysis) in recent years, let alone the fact that everything they show is based on models that are constantly updated and effectively best guesses. I really wish they’d be more upfront but it’d probably be too big a challenge to sweeping in new customers.
- paulryanrogers 8y ago
  Is the science bad or are some labs just sloppy/malicious?
  - ethelward 8y ago
    On on hand, the science itself is a quickly moving field; on the other one, the more precise tests kits are far more expensive. So these societies have to make compromises.
- doublec 8y ago
  For ethnicity results, yes it's based on models and reference samples that are often updated. You should be taking them with a large grain of salt. For the matching with other people it's useful and accurate and is a great way for doing further genealogical research to back up the paper research.
- leaf_house 8y ago
  Relatedness testing is pretty trivial with modern chip/sequencing tech so this stuff does actually tend to be pretty cut and dry. The big worry is sample swaps but those should hopefully be the exception and not the rule.
chriselles 8y ago
Beyond issues of unexpected ancestry, I’ve also found anecdotal examples of negative feedback resulting from customers unhappy with the results they receive from companies like Teloyears. 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.
TomMckenny 8y ago
interesting aside: 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.
- prepend 8y ago
  A friend of mine caused a huge stink in her village when she pointed out how two siblings had blue eyes but all parents and grandparents had brown eyes. There was much chaos.
  - yareally 8y ago
    Blue eyes are recessive and brown eyes are extremely dominant though. With parents having brown eyes, there could still be up to theoretical 50% chance that the children could have them. 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.
  - jules 8y ago
    Let's analyse that. Suppose the frequency of the blue eye gene and the brown eye gene are the same in the general population, and suppose the prior probability of cheating is 10%. Then we can simulate this: 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.
lewispb 8y ago
This is a whole professional discipline and should be left as such. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_counseling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_counseling
anigbrowl 8y ago
I really wish this article provided some insight on how much these people are being paid. 95% of the job may be lightweight customer service but providing emotional labor ot people in distress if quite demanding on the provider, regardless of how much training they're given.
- toyg 8y ago
  It’s a puff piece for dna-testing companies, designed to put doubts in your mind so you’ll go and get tested. Nobody really cares about the workers.
malhotrag 8y ago
BBC's "The Documentary Podcast" covered the same subject in a recent episode. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06w68bs https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06w68bs
LinuxBender 8y ago
Somewhat off-topic: Instead of dealing with these companies, what equipment and software would I need to do my own DNA testing at home? Has anyone written any open source applications that can interpret this data?

100 points by laurex 8y ago

This has to be a really tough call center job. People don't want to trust what you're telling them. Who is going to believe their father/brother/sister isn't?

joaomacp 8y ago
At the end of the day, what difference does it make? You can't change the past. Also I'm pretty sure knowledge like "he's not my real father" will stay in the back of your mind and pop up from time to time, making things awkward for a long time.
- goldcd 8y ago
  Well it's always up to you if you consider your genetic parent, your "real father" - sperm donors, adoption, hospital mix-ups, affairs, early death, re-marriage blah blah. No shortage of reasons why you one of your 'parental figures' might not be 50% genetically related to you - and conversely I'm absolutely fine with anybody who rejects a genetic parent as they're an arsehole. Taking all of that in, you get to pick who cared for you and you choose to reciprocate with the parental nominative. Genetic stuff is just some nice to have information, along with what's more likely to kill you than average and how friendly your progenitors were with the local neanderthals. 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.
  - stordoff 8y ago
    > Well it's always up to you if you consider your genetic parent, your "real father" 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.

AchieveLife 8y ago

A somber example that life finds a way.

lostmsu 8y ago

Literal quote from that click-bait: "We don’t really play the role of therapist"

toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
Full quote “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.
- Retric 8y ago
  It might be Hollywood therapy, but real world therapists are not limited to that.
  - toufiqbarhamov 8y ago
    My experience of Hollywood therapy is that it’s nothing like that, and in fact tends to be either highly confrontational, or involves magical insights from the therapist which have an almost immediate effect, and are invariably accepted with little resistance. The reality that therapy is mostly one person talking while another listens, nudging them make their own insights and helping people process difficult emotions and experiences. Of course that’s not the whole practice of psychology or psychiatry, but it is most of what “therapy” (i.e. talk therapy) is.
    - Retric 8y ago
      The Hollywood part is focusing on the conversation. 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.

technofiend 8y ago

If ask Reddit is anything to go by this is slowly becoming normal. You have to wonder if 20-30 years from now mores will have shifted to reflect the reality that there are often familial buried secrets of every kind out there. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/search?q=Dna&restrict_sr=on https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/search?q=Dna&restrict_sr=...

lallysingh 8y ago
There was a study in the UK some decades ago showing that roughly 30% of kids weren't from the father's they thought they were. I got this reference indirectly from The Red Queen, an interesting book. It's packed away, so I can't give anything more specific.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  The non-paternatity rate is very class dependant. In the upper-middle the rate is quite low, but in the underclasses it can get up to around 20%.
  - iguy 8y ago
    No way, 1-2% is more like the range. For the western world, for serious studies e.g. tracking surnames vs Y chromosomes. Most much higher figures come from counting only disputed cases, which are obviously going to be skewed. Edit, some links: Surname "Sykes": https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1288207/ Bone marrow: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22688803 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22688803
    - danieltillett 8y ago
      Most people are not members of the underclass. Anyway you can't really use historical data like this to estimate the non-paternity rate today.
      - 8y ago

russley 8y ago

Obligatory: Don't take non-medical DNA tests.

c3534l 8y ago

I don't know if this is apocryphal or not, but I'd always heard the same thing happened in the 50s when blood typing became widely available. So I don't think anyone in that industry should be exactly surprised at this particular result.

tvjoyfbhde 8y ago
When a sick child needs a transplant, the parents are the first to be checked for compatibility. Sometimes the results are impossible. The policy in such cases simply to inform the putative father that he's not a match and leave it at that.
- pl1234 8y ago
  what a disgusting policy

azinman2 8y ago

Saying “this is science” alone as an answer to the validity is really doing science a disfavor. Not only are these consumer grade tests, but there’s been a lot of evidence of the fallibility of DNA testing (particularly for crime scene analysis) in recent years, let alone the fact that everything they show is based on models that are constantly updated and effectively best guesses. I really wish they’d be more upfront but it’d probably be too big a challenge to sweeping in new customers.

paulryanrogers 8y ago
Is the science bad or are some labs just sloppy/malicious?
- ethelward 8y ago
  On on hand, the science itself is a quickly moving field; on the other one, the more precise tests kits are far more expensive. So these societies have to make compromises.
doublec 8y ago
For ethnicity results, yes it's based on models and reference samples that are often updated. You should be taking them with a large grain of salt. For the matching with other people it's useful and accurate and is a great way for doing further genealogical research to back up the paper research.
leaf_house 8y ago
Relatedness testing is pretty trivial with modern chip/sequencing tech so this stuff does actually tend to be pretty cut and dry. The big worry is sample swaps but those should hopefully be the exception and not the rule.

chriselles 8y ago

Beyond issues of unexpected ancestry, I’ve also found anecdotal examples of negative feedback resulting from customers unhappy with the results they receive from companies like Teloyears. 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.

TomMckenny 8y ago

interesting aside: 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.

prepend 8y ago
A friend of mine caused a huge stink in her village when she pointed out how two siblings had blue eyes but all parents and grandparents had brown eyes. There was much chaos.
- yareally 8y ago
  Blue eyes are recessive and brown eyes are extremely dominant though. With parents having brown eyes, there could still be up to theoretical 50% chance that the children could have them. 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.
- jules 8y ago
  Let's analyse that. Suppose the frequency of the blue eye gene and the brown eye gene are the same in the general population, and suppose the prior probability of cheating is 10%. Then we can simulate this: 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.

lewispb 8y ago

This is a whole professional discipline and should be left as such. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_counseling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_counseling

anigbrowl 8y ago

I really wish this article provided some insight on how much these people are being paid. 95% of the job may be lightweight customer service but providing emotional labor ot people in distress if quite demanding on the provider, regardless of how much training they're given.

toyg 8y ago
It’s a puff piece for dna-testing companies, designed to put doubts in your mind so you’ll go and get tested. Nobody really cares about the workers.

malhotrag 8y ago

BBC's "The Documentary Podcast" covered the same subject in a recent episode. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06w68bs https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06w68bs

LinuxBender 8y ago

Somewhat off-topic: Instead of dealing with these companies, what equipment and software would I need to do my own DNA testing at home? Has anyone written any open source applications that can interpret this data?