DNA for dating purposes offers to maximize genetic dissimilarity between prospective partners and that is WRONG!!!

There is a milestone paper “Does the contraceptive pill alter mate choice in humans?” written by Drs. Alvergne & Lummaa (2010) that is a big punch to “DNA matching methods, based on the T_shirt Experiment”

Alvergne & Lummaa clearly say:
“Furthermore, whereas normally cycling women express a preference for MHC (major histocompatibility complex) dissimilarity in mates, pill users prefer odours of MHC-SIMILAR men, indicating that pill use might eliminate adaptive preferences for genetic dissimilarity.”
…………….
“Recently, Roberts et al. attempted to eliminate these potential confounds by adopting a within-subject design in which women’s mate preferences were assessed before and after they began taking the pill. Women starting the pill showed a significant preference shift towards MHC
SIMILARITY compared with three months before the pill was taken, a shift that was not observed in the control group of normally cycling women. This study replicates previous evidence based on between-subject comparisons, and suggests that contraceptive pill use disrupts disassortative mate preferences in women, leading to a preference for individuals who are SIMILAR to relatives.”
………………

Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle [Gangestad, S.W. and Thornhill, R. (2008) paper "Human oestrus"]

Other papers showing the freshest Research in Theories of Romantic Relationships Development outline: compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.

IF personality is build by 70% of genetics and 30% of environment influences, genetic similarity matters (for long term mating with commitment) AND NOT to maximize genetic dissimilarity as DNA dating does.

Regards.
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com