R
randomguy1235
Captain
★★
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2018
- Posts
- 1,643
I also assumed that the figure was inflated due to a self-selecting sample size (as you mentioned, people who suspect would test more positive for paternity fraud). However, this is not the case:That number has been debunked many times and I first thought it was real.
Men that take paternity tests have a reason to doubt it it their offspring and humans are able to recognize if a child doesn't quite look like theirs.
The sample is biased. There have been a lot more methodologically sound studies and they all point to around 3-5% and quite frankly that makes a lot more sense.
"In the early 1970s, a schoolteacher in southern England assigned a class science project in which his students were to find out the blood types of their parents. The students were then to use this information to deduce their own blood types (because a gene from each parent determines your blood type, in most instances only a certain number of combinations are possible). Instead, 30 per cent of the students discovered their dads were not their biologically fathers."
This was in the 1970s on a random selection of children in the UK. With the normalization of hypergamy, feminism, cuckoldry, TINDER/online dating, etc, the number should be even higher in now.