DNA from hair is located in the follicle at the base of the head. For hair to contain DNA it has to be pulled from the scalp.
So, cut hair wouldn't have DNA, thus avoiding incrimination.
@Slayer1022, this. Not a valid question, the girl needs dna science explained to her.
@Slayer1022, what about mitochondrial DNA
@Lonely Monkey Fart, see my comment below
@Dragoon0106, don't tell me how to live my life! Y'all don't know me!
@Lonely Monkey Fart, ok don’t!
@Dragoon0106, there you go again! Now I'm confused as to what I'm supposed to do now! My life has become a paradox
@Lonely Monkey Fart, you’re honestly just stuck forever now in an endless loop of inaction.
@Dragoon0106, that doesn't actually seem that bad.
The most reliable method of hair testing depends on the follicle. Most hair that detaches from a person naturally includes the follicle. Donated hair that is attached to the person artificially will not. This limits the testing to mtDNA testing (from the shaft), and it will be easy to compare with other (natural) DNA samples and determine that it was a totally different person.
I don’t think the donor would need to worry.
@Dragoon0106, the more you know
Don't donate to Locks of Love they charge for the wigs they make, donate to Wigs for Kids
@jdeaux, i mean... Is it excessively expensive? If not i can acceptvcharging a bit to cover the costs of running a charity-like organization
She may be 12, but she raises a valid concern.
Honesty, that's a thinker.
Short answer: no
Long answer: Refer to Slayer’s and Dragoon’s comments
That's a valid question.
Wtef ? Why are you folks giving answer to that post?
Without the DNA from the hair follicle (which would not be found in the cut off length donated), forensic analysts would rely on microscopic similarity comparisons. The hair in evidence will be matched, but such data cannot be filed for comparison the way DNA and fingerprints are.
I.. I need to know the answer. For mu- Science!