WA WA - Seattle, WhtFem 30-50, 159UFWA, UP12916, alias 'Mary Anderson', copper IUD, breast surgery scars, Oct'96

Learn more about this case on DNASolves.

  • #781
Patient is a virtue I am trying to work on :) No, I do honestly understand that these things can take years but I suppose I am just asking what happens if things like DNA are used up, or if you get too "stuck" in genealogical research - basically, does it always get solved? It's such a fascinating thing to think that ANY of these sorts of cases get solved, after so many years.

To start off: I’m no expert, and this is just my opinion.

Theoretically, the DNA could get used up, so that it was not possible to progress. In practice, the science keeps progressing. Things are possible today that would have seemed impossible just a few years ago.

One potential impossibility would be that records were lost and they can’t find where a person was buried. That’s happened. Or, some jurisdictions cremated their unidentified. That’s happened. Science can’t create something out of nothing.

Some genealogical situations are extremely difficult, but I don’t think there’s such a thing as being permanently stuck. At any moment someone new could add DNA that opened up new lines to research. However, as you said, patience is a virtue. The DNA Doe project recently announced an identification that they had been working on for three years—just the genealogy part.
 
  • #782
To start off: I’m no expert, and this is just my opinion.

Some genealogical situations are extremely difficult, but I don’t think there’s such a thing as being permanently stuck. At any moment someone new could add DNA that opened up new lines to research. However, as you said, patience is a virtue. The DNA Doe project recently announced an identification that they had been working on for three years—just the genealogy part.

Thank you! You are more of an expert than I am.
 
  • #783
  • #784
Mary Anderson
 
  • #785
so hopeful for this case...
 
  • #786
I wonder where she actually lived, in part because very few American women used IUDs in 1996. Were they more popular in Canada, or does anyone here know?
 
  • #787
I wonder where she actually lived, in part because very few American women used IUDs in 1996. Were they more popular in Canada, or does anyone here know?

Some women don't respond well to birth control pills -- migraines and stroke are among the side effects generally attributed to the hormones. Not linking, had the migraines.

A Copper 7 doesn't include the hormones, so was a solution for some women, no idea how many & Google isn't very helpful on usage numbers.

jmho ymmv lrr
 
  • #788
They were more frequently given to women 40+ who did not want (more) children and needed a reliable, cheap, no fuss longterm birth control option until menopause.
 
  • #789
This article is from 2006 and says Nulliparity was once a relative contraindication to using the copper IUD. However, new research and changes in product labeling have eased safety concerns. Side effects remain a major problem with copper IUD use in this population.
Copper intrauterine device use by nulliparous women: review of side effects - ScienceDirect

I hadn't thought about this related to this UID before. Back in the 90s I learned in nursing school that IUDs (especially the copper ones) should only be used in women who had previously given birth. Some of my friends (age 40s) have gotten IUDs after/in between children but when I was younger nobody I knew used them. Supposedly "Mary Anderson" had never given birth. Perhaps she had some previous pregnancy losses that would have "qualified" her for the copper IUD.
 
  • #790
The copper IUD is also given to females who can’t have much hormones due to a hormone sensitive cancer, like some types of ovarian cancers, breast cancers,…

The surgery on the breasts in combination with the copper IUD made me immediately think of breastcancer, imo.

In medical situations they are also prescribed to females who did not already give birth.
 
  • #791
The original IUDs were dangerous, especially the Dalkon Shield. That's why they fell out of common use until recent years.

Some women are also allergic to the copper in an IUD.

p.s. I haven't read the whole thread, but I wonder if the "breast surgery" was a reduction? That WAS a common surgery in the 1990s.
 
  • #792
This article is from 2006 and says Nulliparity was once a relative contraindication to using the copper IUD. However, new research and changes in product labeling have eased safety concerns. Side effects remain a major problem with copper IUD use in this population.
Copper intrauterine device use by nulliparous women: review of side effects - ScienceDirect

I hadn't thought about this related to this UID before. Back in the 90s I learned in nursing school that IUDs (especially the copper ones) should only be used in women who had previously given birth. Some of my friends (age 40s) have gotten IUDs after/in between children but when I was younger nobody I knew used them. Supposedly "Mary Anderson" had never given birth. Perhaps she had some previous pregnancy losses that would have "qualified" her for the copper IUD.

It is dependent on the type of IUD. Many are suitable for nulliparous/ or women who had kids via csection. The 7 is suitable.
 
  • #793
  • #794
Has Auriana Taylor been mention as a possibility?

5'8" 250 Lbs last seen in New Mexico, April 1996.

Brown hair, brown eyes.

Good suggestion. Her age and physical description seem to fit. From her NamUs: "Her boyfriend claimed she had simply left him". It's not clear who the word "claimed" came from, but it seems to imply his story may have been less than credible, and there could have been foul play.
 
  • #795
  • #796
Did either of you submit the possible match?

Would there have been an automatic comparison? Does Mary Anderson have rule-outs?

'Boyfriend' does correlate to IUD, imho.

@Lilibet can you check the rule-outs for The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs)

She is the subject of this thread, while The National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs) is suggested for comparison.

Thanks a bunch!
Sorry @Laughing. I really don’t know how to check for rule outs and I’m not up to taking on the learning curve right now. Thanks for thinking of me. :)
 
  • #797
Sorry @Laughing. I really don’t know how to check for rule outs and I’m not up to taking on the learning curve right now. Thanks for thinking of me. :)
It's easy enough to do. You just have to register for an account.
The current exclusions list has only 3 names:
MP1304
Elaine Johnson
11/22/1990
Cuyahoga OH

MP20296
Sharman Carey
01/17/1996
Pierce WA

MP32573
Peggy Wilker
10/12/1986
Pierce WA

ETA Auriana Taylor has one exclusion:

UP12683
06/06/2014
Newport News VA
 
  • #798
It's easy enough to do. You just have to register for an account.
The current exclusions list has only 3 names:
MP1304
Elaine Johnson
11/22/1990
Cuyahoga OH

MP20296
Sharman Carey
01/17/1996
Pierce WA

MP32573
Peggy Wilker
10/12/1986
Pierce WA

ETA Auriana Taylor has one exclusion:

UP12683
06/06/2014
Newport News VA

Thanks @Curious_in_NC. I appreciate your guidance and encouragement, but it’s just not something I can do right now. It sounds like you’re on top of it. :)
 
  • #799
With the recent annoucement from Othram regarding identification of the Christmas Tree Lady (Annandale Jane Doe), it would be wonderful if we see an announcement about Mary Anderson soon. Fingers crossed - if anyone can, Othram seem to be the ones who do it.
 
  • #800

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
61
Guests online
2,728
Total visitors
2,789

Forum statistics

Threads
633,008
Messages
18,634,841
Members
243,375
Latest member
tt94
Back
Top