If you carried out a DNA study that said the closest relation to the Japanese were African bushmen would you?

Question

a, think... that's not right, and get it checked by other scientists.

b, think... I must publish this immediately. I'll be famous!

Answer 1

A.  It would be very surprising considering how far the two populations are separated geographically.

Answer 2

I would say A but maybe also C, like Darwin, wait until someone else is about to publish and say, Hey, wait a minute.

Answer 3

Just thought I'd pop in to say that the San (that's their language group.  The term bushmen is actually considered very rude) call the Japanese "European San."  So who knows :)

Answer 4

Whatever I thought about the results, I'd send it out for peer review before getting it published. I am relatively certain, however, that I wouldn't attempt a study unless I was pretty sure I could do a competent job. In an ideal situation, I'd be ready to deal with my results as fine before I even began my study. That's sort of what the scientific method is for, after all. Radical results would, of course, make me want to double check my process.

Answer 5

Personally I'd go back research the people that the DNA came from. Given the global migration pattens of the last 500 years it's entirely possible that African DNA had mixed with Japanese.

Second issue would be the size of the sample. The " Microdontia  Eve" research was criticized for both it's sample size and the groups that the DNA came from.

If you want to be famous, not infamous then make sure the results are valid and can be replicated.

Answer 6

Definately A.  There would be plenty of reasons to doubt the original conclusion.  I would reserve B for a circumstance where I uncover something totally unknown and/or unexpected that didn't have obvious conflicts with existing knowledge.

Answer 7

My choice would very much depend on the quantity and quality of my investigation. If the data and its analysis were statistically sound that would deserve proper attention, I would go for b and get it published for peer review. If it were a cheap-&-quick survey variety of investigation, then I would definitely reserve publication until I've gained both a stable result and an insight into how this could have been more probable than not. Publishing a result that goes against conventional perception without meeting these criteria would be unethical personally.

Answer 8

Which Japanese? The original ones that are more primitive looking (hairy caucasians with beards...BUT NOT EUROPEANS) or the Japanese we see now that are directly Chinese.

Answer 9

I'm not politically correct & don't give a whit about what others think... still I would have others check my conclusions, redo them several times, then publish.  Way too many publish inaccurate information.  Because DNA can be so easily contaminated, I would not trust early results. As an engineer, I hate the thought of being wrong.

Answer 10

That's extremely illogical. Get it checked.