Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The reason it takes so long to run a batch?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    i think they take long because they also do the testing for National Genographic

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by HenryVelasquezJr View Post
      i think they take long because they also do the testing for National Genographic
      It is my understanding that FT-DNA does the Geno 2.0 analysis in a different lab. Geno 2.0 should have no effect on FT-DNA's commercial tests.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by KATM View Post
        I mentioned this in another thread recently, but my experience was transferring my father's 23andMe to FF on 2 March, and getting the results about 18 April. So, about 6 weeks there. I'm sure I was told the same as you originally; 6-10 wks.

        I didn't understand why it should take so long, either, but guess I figured it was the build 36>37 difficulties. Guess they are not out of the woods yet.
        My 1st cousin tested initally with 23andMe and matched me as a 2nd cousin. She was adopted at birth as was I, so we had no knowledge of our relationship prior to the match.

        As I have 2 bio-halfsisters tested in FTDNA, I suggested that she transfer her results so that we could determine if she were on my paternal or maternal side. She was told that it would take 6 - 10 weeks for the transfer. This was just prior to the release of results for build 37.

        I was able to view her results within 10 days and her total results were available within 2 weeks. So some of these estimates are off a little. It is better to have the results come in early than to have a too optimistic estimate and go way over.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by gtc View Post
          I imagine that police have arrangements with labs where they get top priority and lab staff may work around the clock on such jobs.
          Yes, apparently this was the case for the DNA-tests of the daughter of Amanda Berry and Ariel Castro:
          http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americ...451737624.html

          Comment


          • #20
            A member of the Sicily Project ordered an upgrade from HVR1/HVR2 to the full mtDNA sequence on April 18, during the recent sale. He just received his results today, May 10. I believe that FTDNA tests all 16,000+ mtDNA bases for a full sequence, even if it's an upgrade from already existing HVR results.

            This shows that FTDNA is working successfully to reduce turnaround times on testing, at least for mtDNA full sequencing. Here's what FTDNA wrote in an e-mail announcing the DNA Day sale last month: "We are proud to announce we have successfully moved our mtDNA Full Sequencing line from Sanger DNA sequencing to what is called Next Generation Sequencing (NGS). This gives us much greater capacity to process tests, to reduce costs without sacrificing quality, and to ensure shorter turnaround times."

            That's certainly a positive achievement by FTDNA. Hopefully, more people will be encouraged to order the full mtDNA sequence now that it seems that turnaround time is significantly reduced.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
              Hopefully, more people will be encouraged to order the full mtDNA sequence now that it seems that turnaround time is significantly reduced.
              It should also matter that the standard price for the FMS has been reduced to 199$.

              In fact, for the FMS things would be OK if only FTDNA would update their answer to this FAQ

              http://www.familytreedna.com/faq/ans...spx?id=10#2139

              and get rid of the way too optimistic:

              "Matching on the Mitochondrial DNA Full Genomic Sequence test brings your matches into times that are more recent. It means that you have a 50% chance of sharing a common maternal ancestor within the last 5 generations. That is about 125 years."

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
                A member of the Sicily Project ordered an upgrade from HVR1/HVR2 to the full mtDNA sequence on April 18, during the recent sale. He just received his results today, May 10. I believe that FTDNA tests all 16,000+ mtDNA bases for a full sequence, even if it's an upgrade from already existing HVR results.

                This shows that FTDNA is working successfully to reduce turnaround times on testing, at least for mtDNA full sequencing. Here's what FTDNA wrote in an e-mail announcing the DNA Day sale last month: "We are proud to announce we have successfully moved our mtDNA Full Sequencing line from Sanger DNA sequencing to what is called Next Generation Sequencing (NGS). This gives us much greater capacity to process tests, to reduce costs without sacrificing quality, and to ensure shorter turnaround times."

                That's certainly a positive achievement by FTDNA. Hopefully, more people will be encouraged to order the full mtDNA sequence now that it seems that turnaround time is significantly reduced.
                I would certainly be applauding, were it not for the fact that there are people who ordered FMS tests in December 2012 and still have not received their results.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Lklundin View Post
                  It should also matter that the standard price for the FMS has been reduced to 199$.

                  In fact, for the FMS things would be OK if only FTDNA would update their answer to this FAQ

                  http://www.familytreedna.com/faq/ans...spx?id=10#2139

                  and get rid of the way too optimistic:

                  "Matching on the Mitochondrial DNA Full Genomic Sequence test brings your matches into times that are more recent. It means that you have a 50% chance of sharing a common maternal ancestor within the last 5 generations. That is about 125 years."
                  Yes, FTDNA's FAQ on full mtDNA sequence matches is wildly optimistic. I would like to see some statistics on how many, if any, full sequence matches have actually found a common maternal line ancestor in so few generations back.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Sarmat View Post
                    I would certainly be applauding, were it not for the fact that there are people who ordered FMS tests in December 2012 and still have not received their results.
                    I don't think it's reasonable to expect that FTDNA could get significantly reduced turnaround time when they didn't have the new testing equipment in December. Now that they have the new equipment, the turnaround time for those December orders should be reduced too, unless they already started the testing on those orders using the old equipment.

                    If your kit was involved in an FMS order from December, you should write or call FTDNA and cite their fast turnaround time with the new equipment and ask if your order from December will be tested with the new equipment.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
                      I would like to see some statistics on how many, if any, full sequence matches have actually found a common maternal line ancestor in so few generations back.
                      Well, for an exact FMS match the math is pretty simple.

                      If the most recent mutation in the mtDNA that both persons have was n generations back, then the 50% probability that the FTDNA FAQ mentions is simply at n/2 generations[*].

                      The problem with that is that for most of the common haplogroups n is on the order of 100's (or even a 1000) - and to my very limited knowledge, there are exceedingly few (if any) known sub-clades with n=10, which is what the FTDNA FAQ postulates for _everybody_ no less.

                      So the FTDNA FAQ is off by one or even two orders of magnitude.

                      Or in plain English:

                      The FTDNA FAQ is total BS.

                      In fact, someone who read the FAQ and bought the FMS should be able to successfully sue FTDNA for false advertising.

                      [*] For any given most-recent-mtDNA mutation out there, it is unlikely that the distribution of the Time to the MRCA among its bearers is completely flat, and this will have an effect on the TMRCA. But probably not too much.
                      Last edited by Lklundin; 10 May 2013, 03:18 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
                        I don't think it's reasonable to expect that FTDNA could get significantly reduced turnaround time when they didn't have the new testing equipment in December.
                        Well, I don't think it's reasonable for them to leave people who ordered tests in December (some of whom paid much more for their tests than the new, reduced price) hanging for five months with no explanation or even an apology, while other people who just recently placed their orders are getting results back in a less than a month.

                        If your kit was involved in an FMS order from December, you should write or call FTDNA and cite their fast turnaround time with the new equipment and ask if your order from December will be tested with the new equipment.
                        They eventually ran mine after four months because I started calling them twice a week to ask for status updates. Several others from the same batch are still waiting.
                        Last edited by Sarmat; 10 May 2013, 03:38 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Sarmat View Post
                          Well, I don't think it's reasonable for them to leave people who ordered tests in December (some of whom paid much more for their tests than the new, reduced price) hanging for five months with no explanation or even an apology, while other people who just recently placed their orders are getting results back in a less than a month.
                          I agree with you that it's inexcusable for FTDNA not to contact you with an explanation when the time to get a result was taking so long. It's pretty clear that FTDNA gets swamped at times, especially right after sales are held, and neglects to explain to customers why their results are taking so long, whatever the reason is.

                          However, I don't think you should blame them for getting results more quickly for customers who placed an order after new equipment made it possible for the newer customers to get speedier results. Do you expect FTDNA to withhold the newer customers' results for a time so you won't feel bad about someone else getting results more quickly than you? This is a good time to consult Jesus' parable - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable...n_the_Vineyard - which is analagous to this situation.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by MMaddi View Post
                            I agree with you that it's inexcusable for FTDNA not to contact you with an explanation when the time to get a result was taking so long. It's pretty clear that FTDNA gets swamped at times, especially right after sales are held, and neglects to explain to customers why their results are taking so long, whatever the reason is.

                            However, I don't think you should blame them for getting results more quickly for customers who placed an order after new equipment made it possible for the newer customers to get speedier results. Do you expect FTDNA to withhold the newer customers' results for a time so you won't feel bad about someone else getting results more quickly than you? This is a good time to consult Jesus' parable - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable...n_the_Vineyard - which is analagous to this situation.


                            Of course I don't expect them to withhold anyone else's results, but it is not at all unreasonable to expect them to prioritize the results of people who have been waiting for over five months.

                            It's pretty darn simple. Let's break it down:

                            People order FMS tests in December 2012. FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of late February. It's now the middle of May, and they're still waiting with no explanation and no apology.

                            Other people order FMS tests in late April, and FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of June. Some of them already have their results.

                            What FTDNA ought to be doing is making sure that the people who have been promised no fewer than FOUR different due dates are getting their results ASAP, while those people who haven't yet had their expectations let down at least FOUR times and don't even expect to get their results until June won't be too disappointed by a wait of a week or two while those old, lingering tests get cleaned up and sent out.

                            That's just good business sense.

                            I can't even fathom why this is a contentious point, unless you're just arguing for the sake of argument.
                            Last edited by Sarmat; 12 May 2013, 11:08 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Sarmat View Post


                              Of course I don't expect them to withhold anyone else's results, but it is not at all unreasonable to expect them to prioritize the results of people who have been waiting for over five months.

                              It's pretty darn simple. Let's break it down:

                              People order FMS tests in December 2012. FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of late February. It's now the middle of May, and they're still waiting with no explanation and no apology.

                              Other people order FMS tests in late April, and FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of June. Some of them already have their results.

                              What FTDNA ought to be doing is making sure that the people who have been promised no fewer than FOUR different due dates are getting their results ASAP, while those people who haven't yet had their expectations let down at least FOUR times and don't even expect to get their results until June won't be too disappointed by a wait of a week or two while those old, lingering tests get cleaned up and sent out.

                              That's just good business sense.

                              I can't even fathom why this is a contentious point, unless you're just arguing for the sake of argument.
                              I agree with your point that I have bolded. In recent times FTDNA has made a right mess of various IT changes that it has tried to implement, and I wouldn't be surprised if its administrative systems (such as batch oversight) are in a mess, too.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Sarmat View Post


                                Of course I don't expect them to withhold anyone else's results, but it is not at all unreasonable to expect them to prioritize the results of people who have been waiting for over five months.

                                It's pretty darn simple. Let's break it down:

                                People order FMS tests in December 2012. FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of late February. It's now the middle of May, and they're still waiting with no explanation and no apology.

                                Other people order FMS tests in late April, and FTDNA gives them a turnaround time of June. Some of them already have their results.

                                What FTDNA ought to be doing is making sure that the people who have been promised no fewer than FOUR different due dates are getting their results ASAP, while those people who haven't yet had their expectations let down at least FOUR times and don't even expect to get their results until June won't be too disappointed by a wait of a week or two while those old, lingering tests get cleaned up and sent out.

                                That's just good business sense.

                                I can't even fathom why this is a contentious point, unless you're just arguing for the sake of argument.
                                Obviously, I don't have the answers, since I'm not in a position to know how far along in testing your sample is and what their normal procedures are. FTDNA is in that position and you should definitely get some good answers from them as to what is taking so long for your results.

                                However, I am guessing that since you placed the order in December, they already started the process of testing your full mtDNA sequence using the old equipment. I'm also guessing that their lab protocol is to complete the test using the old equipment and that shifting your mtDNA test to the new, more efficient equipment would entail a significant cost to them.

                                The key point is that they've acquired new equipment since you placed your order which significantly reduces the amount of time to complete a full mtDNA sequence test. I posted in this thread because the higher efficiency of the new equipment in giving faster results is relevant to the topic of this thread. I thought that would be greeted as good news, but it's not good news for you and others, it seems.

                                My guesses may be wrong, but if they're not, then that would give how they're handling this situation some legitimacy. As hard as it may be to get answers from them, only FTDNA can give you the answers.
                                Last edited by MMaddi; 12 May 2013, 11:34 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X