For decades, fingerprints were the gold standard in forensic science. But how do they stack up against the more modern DNA profiling? While both aid in identification, they work on vastly different principles.
Fingerprinting relies on the unique ridge patterns on our fingertips. These patterns are visually matched, but are susceptible to smudging or incomplete prints.
DNA profiling, on the other hand, analyzes an individual's unique genetic code found in almost every cell. This method is far more precise and can be used on samples much smaller or degraded than fingerprints. It also can establish familial relationships which traditional fingerprinting cannot.
So, is DNA profiling better? Not necessarily. Fingerprinting is cheaper and faster. DNA profiling requires specialized equipment and expertise. Ideally, both methods are used in conjunction to provide the most reliable identification, bridging the gap between classic and cutting-edge forensics.
