GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1069438133


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Marker mutation rates by radiation?
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:08:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <LPBBIOAJJFIEMAHJCAPAIEFMDHAA.maldodd@sapo.pt>


Good point Malcolm. In Canada a third of the country (second largest in the world) is composed of the "Canadian Shield", a granitic gorget - shaped loop around Hudson's Bay whose tip is in Southern Ontario. My grandfather was born in Norfolk England, but my Dad and father - in - law were born on the thinly populated Canadian Shield.

The radiation "problem" is largely "swept under the carpet", but there are hot spots such as Bancroft where it is so bad that every home has to have a concrete lining and ground ventilation system to allow people to live there safely (supposedly). If there were demographic studies comparing, for example, cancer rates in those Canadians born on (e.g., Sudbury) versus off (e.g., Hamilton) the Canadian Shield it would provide indirect evidence about the possibility that low level radiation could potentially affect the various Y chromosome markers. Of course the best study would be direct - the study of father - son pairs such as my Dad (born on the Shield) and myself and my sons (born off the Shield). At present I have only had myself tested.

I know that I differ from a Faux in England with whom I share a common ancestor born 400 years ago on two markers. If it turns out that the Y signature of my second cousins born in Norfolk England and others born in New Jersey is closer to the distant cousin than to myself, then I am going to wonder whether radiation played a role in this pattern. Now you have got me worried.............

David F.

Malcolm Dodd <> wrote:
The nuclear industry informs the public that their radiation leaks have no
affect on the local population. They say that the background radiation in
certain areas, such as Dartmoor in Cornwall, is higher than their emmissions
because of the geology. It seems as though granite emits nuclear energy.
I wonder if mutation rates are higher in geographical areas where this
radiation is highest. Should we analyse fast-moving and slow moving DNA
mutations to see if geagraphy is a factor?
Malcolm










Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA, 90740, USA



www.davidkfaux.org



This thread: