ysbel
Heir Apparent , TRF Author
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,377
- City
- New York
- Country
- United States
Discussion:
Establishing the Identity of Anna Anderson Manahan
Mark Stoneking, Terry Melton, Julian Nott, Peter Gill, Colin Kimpton, Rosemary Aliston-Greiner, Kevin Sullivan
Nat Genet 9:9-10, 1995.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please review the following Community Rules and Member FAQs before posting:
TRF staff recently were able to view the Gill report which is a peer-reviewed report written by the scientists that conducted the mtDNA tests done on tissue samples of Anna Anderson Manahan to test her claims that she was the Grand Duchess Anastasia. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the Gill report.
Readers who would like to read the report for themselves should follow this link. The report is available and costs $18 to subscribers of nature.com
Because the contents of this report are not so easily accessible to the general public as other literature, we decided to provide for our readers a short summary of the main points in the report.
Be warned however, that as laymen, we cannot vouch for the accuracy of the report. We can only read the report as layman and provide a summary of the main points in the article for benefit of our readers who may not have read the report. We can note however that the presence of the findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal does add a generally accepted level of reliability in the report's findings however the fact that a paper has been peer-reviewed and printed in a journal does not guarantee that the report is 100% accurate.
Of course being layman, there may be errors in our summary. Again, this summary is only provided as a courtesy to our readers and should not be taken as evidence in and of itself. Only the original report can do that.
If any member finds errors in this summary, please inform one of the Russian moderators and we will review and revise.
If you have access to the original report, you may quote up to 20% of the original report here at TRF. Because this is a copyrighted work, do not quote more than 20% of the report.
If you would like to refute part or all of the Gill report, it would be helpful to the layperson if you compare apples to apples and cite another peer-reviewed scientific report as your evidence. It would also be helpful if you provide a link and a synopsis of the report as we are doing here for the Gill report.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing the Identity of Anna Anderson Manahan
Mark Stoneking, Terry Melton, Julian Nott, Peter Gill, Colin Kimpton, Rosemary Aliston-Greiner, Kevin Sullivan
Nat Genet 9:9-10, 1995.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary provided by Russian moderators for the benefit of the TRF community. This summary is only made for the benefit of our readers who may not be able to see the original report and we make no claims with this summary other than the fact that this report appears to fulfill the standard for scientific literature in that it is published in a peer-reviewed scientific publication.
Summary
Establishing the Identity of Anna Anderson Manahan
Mark Stoneking, Terry Melton, Julian Nott, Peter Gill, Colin Kimpton, Rosemary Aliston-Greiner, Kevin Sullivan
Nat Genet 9:9-10, 1995.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please review the following Community Rules and Member FAQs before posting:
- Insulting comments about other posters and royals are not permitted. Criticism is acceptable; insults and flames are not. We expect our members to treat each other with respect.
- Whenever possible, opinions should be based on factual information obtained from reputable sources and should be backed up by references to those sources. The moderators reserve the right to delete posts containing the more fanciful types of gossip and speculation, whether they originate in gossip magazines and websites or are simply fabricated.
- Discussion of other forums and websites should be limited to royal-related content. We do not allow criticism of other forums or continuation of disagreements that started elsewhere.
- I received a message from a moderator saying that my post had been removed because it contained speculation. We don't know the royals and we get all our information second hand, so isn't it all speculation?
Our rule about speculation is intended to prevent tabloid-type flights of fancy which often slip into outright fantasy and sometimes even libel. While we realise that much of the information posted in the threads is based on reports in the media which we can't verify, we expect posters to base their statements on published reports rather than on wishful thinking or unsubstantiated hearsay. The forum moderators have the final say about whether posts are unacceptably speculative. Disagreements with moderator decisions must take place via private message, not by arguing in the threads and certainly not by reposting deleted material.
- Are really old photos copyrighted? If the copyright belongs to the photographer, and the photographer died 50 years ago, do I still need permission to post the photo? Surely copyright protection doesn't last for ever.
Copyright protection usually extends several decades beyond the lifetime of the photographer or author. However, photos and articles dating from the beginning of the First World War and earlier should no longer be subject to copyright restrictions and may be posted without permission.
- If an article is copyrighted, does that mean I can't post even one or two sentences of it without having to get permission?
Under the fair-use provision of the US copyright law, small amounts of articles may be posted for the purpose of discussion without having to obtain permission from the copyright holder. As a rule of thumb, we're allowing no more than 20% of the text of an article (but not photos) to be posted, along with a link to the original. Ideally, only a very small amount of the article should be posted: just enough to give an idea of the topic of the article, which may then be read on the original website. When posting material from copyrighted articles, it's always better to post less than more.
TRF staff recently were able to view the Gill report which is a peer-reviewed report written by the scientists that conducted the mtDNA tests done on tissue samples of Anna Anderson Manahan to test her claims that she was the Grand Duchess Anastasia. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the Gill report.
Readers who would like to read the report for themselves should follow this link. The report is available and costs $18 to subscribers of nature.com
Because the contents of this report are not so easily accessible to the general public as other literature, we decided to provide for our readers a short summary of the main points in the report.
Be warned however, that as laymen, we cannot vouch for the accuracy of the report. We can only read the report as layman and provide a summary of the main points in the article for benefit of our readers who may not have read the report. We can note however that the presence of the findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal does add a generally accepted level of reliability in the report's findings however the fact that a paper has been peer-reviewed and printed in a journal does not guarantee that the report is 100% accurate.
Of course being layman, there may be errors in our summary. Again, this summary is only provided as a courtesy to our readers and should not be taken as evidence in and of itself. Only the original report can do that.
If any member finds errors in this summary, please inform one of the Russian moderators and we will review and revise.
If you have access to the original report, you may quote up to 20% of the original report here at TRF. Because this is a copyrighted work, do not quote more than 20% of the report.
If you would like to refute part or all of the Gill report, it would be helpful to the layperson if you compare apples to apples and cite another peer-reviewed scientific report as your evidence. It would also be helpful if you provide a link and a synopsis of the report as we are doing here for the Gill report.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing the Identity of Anna Anderson Manahan
Mark Stoneking, Terry Melton, Julian Nott, Peter Gill, Colin Kimpton, Rosemary Aliston-Greiner, Kevin Sullivan
Nat Genet 9:9-10, 1995.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary provided by Russian moderators for the benefit of the TRF community. This summary is only made for the benefit of our readers who may not be able to see the original report and we make no claims with this summary other than the fact that this report appears to fulfill the standard for scientific literature in that it is published in a peer-reviewed scientific publication.
Summary
- Anna Anderson Manahan is the woman who claimed to be Grand Duchess Anastasia, daughter of Nicholas II, Tsar of Russia and Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna (born Princess Alix of Hesse and by Rhine).
- She had an operation in 1979 at the Martha Jefferson hospital where part of her intestines were removed and kept in formaldehyde.
- Two DNA samples were taken from Anna Anderson Manahan; one from her intestines from the operation; the other from her hair donated by Susan Burkhart with the assistance of Syd Mandelbaum and Peter Kurth. The samples were badly degraded. mtDNA testing was used.
Note: mtDNA tests the DNA that is a shorter sequence than regular DNA and is more abundant in the body. The DNA is only inherited from the mother; therefore its important to only compare DNA from persons who might be related from the maternal line. - The Forensic Science Service (FSS) and the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) carried out independent tests on Anna Anderson's tissue samples from the hospital in different locations. In addition, the Department of Anthopology of the Pennsylvania State University independently analyzed Anderson's hair samples.
- The two samples (hair and intestine) were a 100% match with each other. (lab's conclusion: they both came from the same person and therefore it is a very high probability that they both came from Anna Anderson Manahan)
- The two samples were a 100% match with Karl Maucher's sample...Karl Maucher was a great nephew of the factory worker Franziska Schanzkowska and related to Franziska through the maternal line (important for mtDNA analysis). (lab conclusion-Karl Maucher and Anna Anderson were related through the maternal line)
Note: A German detective had come up with evidence in the 1920s about Franziska's disappearance and had first hypothesized that Anna was Franziska. Until this test, there was no independent scientific evidence that Anna and Franziska were the same person. - The DNA profiles from Anna Anderson and Carl Maucher were checked against a database of DNA sequences from over 300 European Caucasian individuals. Assuming that the databases used are representative of European Caucasians, the chance of finding matching DNA profiles if Carl Maucher and Anna Anderson are unrelated through the maternal line is less than one in 300. (Lab conclusion: Suggests but doesn't prove that Anna Anderson and Franziska Schwanzkowska are the same person)
- The two samples have a 16.7% match with Prince Philip's DNA (1 of 6) and an 83% mismatch with Prince Philip's DNA -
Note: Prince Philip, duke of Edinburgh, is through his mother, Princess Alice of Battenberg, the grandson of Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine, Grand Duchess Anastasia's maternal aunt and sister of Anastasia's mother, the Tsarina. Prince Philip is related to Anastasia through the maternal line (important for mtDNA analysis) and he is Anastasia's first cousin twice removed.(lab conclusion-Prince Philip and Anna Anderson are not maternally related. In addition the samples were not able to be associated with any maternal relative of the Tsarina, Anastasia's mother, or any maternal relative of Prince Philip. It is known that Prince Philip and Anastasia are maternally related therefore it can be ascertained that Anna was not Anastasia).
Last edited by a moderator: