Researchers say the findings may also someday help police investigators conjure up the faces of suspects from their DNA samples. But that potential application wades into murky ethical territory
There it is
Yeah I’m sure it will never make a mistake or be relied upon as the gospel of jesus like you see with, oh idk every single piece of technology used by police provided it aligns with their existing bias at the moment
PBS did a recent video on how DNA evidence is not nearly as infallible as copoganda make it out to be.
Find a dozen people who look like suspect. Do DNA analysis on dozen “doppelgangers”. Take DNA from “doppelganger” that is the closest match, present to court using “expert” witness.
Bad news for people that look like famous serial killers.
So that’s why I want to make people lamp shades so bad? /s
Strange, almost like phenotype is dependent on genotype?
You’re telling me people whose genetics make them look similar have similar genetics???
Not proven until now.
These “duh” comments are always here in these situations.
We’re just joking around here my friend :) of course it’s important to confirm, still funny every time
I hope so, that’s good to hear. Some people seem so pissed off when making such comments about “useless” studies. 😔
People in text always sound more pissed off than they were. That mostly has to do with your expectations though ;)
You think this sounds angry???
Can you stop yelling?
The hell? I guess we gotta fight now?
Big, if true
Colossal, if legitimate
Gargantuan, if verifiable
Humongous, if credible
Leviathianic, if decipherable
Does that mean you could guess a person’s personality from just their look?
Well not their face, but definitely the shape of their skulls!
Of course you’d say that. You have the brainpan of a stagecoach tilter!
It seems this includes genes that don’t play a direct role in the formation of facial features.
It is still interesting. I wonder if epigenetics plays a larger role, or if face look is tied to other random traits.
The article says epigenetics don’t play much of a role in it, it’s all genetics.
This kinda feels like a “duh.” Or a “Well, makes sense”
Genetics, I can understand. But lifestyles? How?
Certain genetic mutations or chains of DNA can produce traits or characteristics a person exhibits, and can be hereditary.
Like diabetes, addiction, the way you and your dad have the same humor, natural abilities or inclination towards a subject, food allergies,
These traits could dictate a lifestyle, somewhat loosely defined .
If different people with similar visual characteristics have similar behavioral characteristics, doesn’t that imply that perhaps we can judge a book by its cover?
Yes but how much?
DNA has a limited number of genes. Considering the enormous amount of functions they need to encode, the number of genes for each function becomes relatively small. 8 billion people and thousands of generations, we’re bound to have duplicates.
I would say it’s even smaller in number. Because some combinations would not work and might kill you.
Yes, but the article says that certain combinations occur more often that if it was random. People with similar faces tend to have similar genes that are nor related to facial features.
That’s not exactly true. A lot of DNA is redundant, and a lot of DNA is dead code that doesn’t do anything.
Since you’ve only been told that you’re wrong, and I was also under the impression that there was a lot of junk DNA in our genome, I did a little digging and found this article that explains the progression of our understanding pretty well: https://www.sciencenewstoday.org/human-dna-98-of-your-genetic-code-is-junk-or-is-it
The TLDR is that the original junk DNA hypothesis is based on the fact that only ~2% of DNA is actually used in mapping out protein-construction. That was generally supported by the science from the 70’s to the early 2000’s. What scientists have found in the decades since then is that a lot of what DNA does involves regulating activity in the cell and responding to changing circumstances.
Is it really dead code, or we haven’t found out what it does?
That’s a very outdated idea.
I’ve wondered this about people who act the same. They also tend to have some of the same facial expressions and mannerisms.
Maybe like our brains have certain tempaltes of personalities that we alter along the way. A starter personality of sorts.
I mean there’s this town in rural [state my family had a farm in but now we don’t hallelujah farm work is hard] that everyone looks like me because, well, go back far enough and all 500 of them and me are related. First time I went to the old farm it was frightening. Like walking into a clone factory.
There are only so many permutations of topological entanglement!
7 colors × 6 directions = 42 types of individual entanglement within the topological matrix we are not IN but rather ARE
…We all look like 98% similar.
they all look the same…
thinks some alien, prolly
I love this short story!
How similar is DNA from convergent evolution animals?
I mean, my uncle (who spent very little time with his bio father) has all the same mannerisms as him. As do I and my mother and one of my brothers. Some of it is that we inherited similar skeletal structure so our posture is similar. Some of it, I dunno.
Why didn’t they give FB-007 shirts?
Any qualified 007 could report to Q for cutting edge clothing and gear?
@RegularJoe I’m curious about how this might work across ethnicities. I can’t point to a photo, but several times, I’ve noticed people from other continents who could easily be someone I know here, except they’re African, or Asian, when the person I know is white, just for example. Under the expected differences in hair, eyes, etc, the basic facial structure is the same. A DNA match seems less likely in these cases.
I don’t have a great answer other than of the 32 studied, these were their stratification:
Related to population stratification, among the 16 look-alike pairs, 13 were of European ancestry, 1 Hispanic, 1 East Asian, and 1 Central-South Asian.
Source: https://www.cell.com/cell-reports/fulltext/S2211-1247(22)01075-0
But whether people who look close enough to perform as another, such as the “Chinese Obama” (Xiao Jiguo) I can’t say.
Then there’s Indonesia’s former president, Joko Widodo:
https://nextshark.com/people-love-indonesias-president-looks-like-barack-obama
It would be interesting to get the researchers to analyze their DNA.
@RegularJoe thank you! This is quite interesting. I’d forgotten about the celebrity look-alikes you mentioned. I’m not surprised the studies aren’t there.
I don’t think it’s about a DNA match. Those people you mention could share more DNA than the rest of us, which could account for their similarities, but their DNA will never “match” anyone else’s.
All humans are within 23 degrees of being cousins. The thing that surprised me most is that sub Saharan Africans are the most diverse genetically speaking.
So should you avoid having kids with someone you look similar too then? Like is it that the virtual twins have genetic similarities akin to 3rd cousins or siblings…
This is why my sister and I always use protection.
I mean, iirc there’s no genetic reason first cousins shouldn’t have kids, I doubt third cousins would be a problem.
First cousins not having kids is generally good since it prevents the founder effect from getting too bad or long term inbreeding like with Charles of Spain or really any European royal.
Nice to see research shared like this, thanks. I’ve always been fascinated by facial similarities. The other thing I often look at, especially when pronounced, is the difference in the two hemispheres of the face.
Pictured “doppelgängers” have very little common outside pose and hair/beard styles.
It is, after all, a smallish planet. Bound to be some duplication.
