On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 4:53:27 PM UTC+1, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014-05-28 17:45 GMT+02:00 <[email protected] <javascript:>>: > >> >> >> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 3:13:44 AM UTC+1, Stephen Paul King wrote: >>> >>> "To detect someone with Down's syndrome, sequence data is completely >>> useless. " Please elaborate! I do know of other ways that data can be >>> organized...all >>> >> >> I was actually quoting someone else the. But the confusion is my fault as >> I failed to format things properly. Gene McCarthy - chap I was quoting was >> talking specifically about dna sequence data. Part of what I was commenting >> on, was that while he's right about the data that is there, he overlooks >> that a whole chromosome is missing >> > > No chromosomes are missing, there is on the contrary a supernumerary > chromosome 21 hence also the name "trisomy 21". So I don't understand how > sequencing data could be useless because those datas contains that fact... >
I'm sorry to have repeated wrong information...clearly I didn't check my own facts from background knowledge which was what I was pointing the finger at the other guy for doing. Still, the main objection - that dramatically different phenotype does require difference in dna sequence - still stands and it appears we agree on that one. thanks for sorting me out on the down's. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
