up vote 18 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

A recent report published by LePoint claims that a Frenchman named Jean-Marie Loret is Hitler's son. The evidence in favor of this claim cited by the Huffington Post includes:

Hitler and Loret have the same blood group. Another study showed that their handwritings are similar.

Additionally, in 2009 the Daily Mail reported on a study that supposedly collected Hitler's DNA from:

...forgotten cigarette butts in a small village in Lower Austria, a used paper napkin in a New York fast food restaurant and the seals of letters sent over 30 years ago from northern France.

Are there really no more credible sources of Adolf Hitler's DNA?

link|improve this question
50% accept rate
1  
Thanks to National Geographic forensic biologist Mark Benecke got a chance to look at Hitler's teeth, which are stored in Moscow (FSB archives). He seems pretty sure that those are indeed his teeth. If Benecke is right, then those should be a prime source for Hitler's DNA. – Oliver_C Feb 24 at 11:43
Accoring to the telegraph, Hitler really did only have one testicle: telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/3481932/…. A good place to look for DNA might be the one that was extracted! – Jon Egerton Feb 25 at 23:45
We currently do not have confirmed direct samples of Hitler's DNA, only speculations. 'Same blood group' and 'Similar handwriting' are major red flags for the credibility of this claim btw - it shouldn't be hard to find hundreds of people with those two things in common with Hitler. Also, the HuffPo is well known for it's very low standard for publishing unverified and bogus claims - I admit this is a bit of Poisoning The Well, but I think it's another red flag and is relevant in this case. – Fabio 'Petrucio' Stange Feb 27 at 1:57
feedback

1 Answer

up vote 8 down vote accepted
+50

According to an article in Marianne2 [French source], Loret's DNA was compared to that of Hitler's known male relatives, who must share a Y chromosome with Hitler. The results were that Loret cannot be Hitler's son.

Those Y chromosomes can be considered partial, indirect samples of Hitler's DNA.

link|improve this answer
Probably not what the OP wanted, but technically an answer (and a smart one at that). :-) – Sklivvz♦ Feb 23 at 21:16
Good to know, and yes that is a form of Hitler's own DNA, though an indirect representation of it. Perhaps I should have specified: "entire genome"? In any case, I think the spirit of the question is pretty clear, and your response doesn't exactly settle the matter, though it does add to the big picture here. – SamTheBrand Feb 25 at 22:42
@SamTheBrand: If you trust that this experiment was done, how does this not settle the matter? The claim has been addressed, and refuted with evidence. – Oddthinking Feb 27 at 17:11
@Oddthinking - OK, i'll give jd. the "check," but reluctantly. I suppose I'm looking for proof or an authoritative statement on the claim that none of Hitler's physical remains or other source of his own DNA are known to exist. But OK, the Y-chromosome(s) described in this study are indeed more credible than handwriting, blood group classification and specious saliva evidence. Accepted it is! – SamTheBrand Feb 27 at 22:16
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown
discard

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.