The Times wants your views: DNA ethnicity results

[Pegasuss]

I have (so far) been wary of spending so much of my meager funds on DNA testing,  for all the reasons already stated by previous posters.

As has been said, the idea of putting my DNA online for anyone to see/use/make money out of is also not making me a happy bunny. 

I will keep my eye on this subject, and if/when there are more economical (and secure) ways of me taking part I may change my mind & Join in.

[Barbara.H]

I haven't done any DNA tests and don't at present have any interest in doing them. I don't have any strong feelings for or against DNA testing as a concept. It's just that most of my family lines go back to fairly humble origins - ag labs, weavers, joiners etc - so I don't expect to find anything much before the 18th century and I'm not that bothered, to be honest.

The main thing my DNA-free tree has shown me so far is that my Manchester identity really is a product of the Industrial Revolution, with ancestors from all over the UK and Ireland (and Germany in one line) migrating to the city in the early-mid 19th century to find work. I've been happy enough to trace these migrants back to their birthplaces with perhaps a generation or two beyond that if possible. I don't really care about ethnicity percentages, nor do I care if someone's dad turns out not to be their biological father. It's the lives they lived and the journeys they made that spark my interest; the points at which individual lives become part of a broader historical fabric.

Hope that helps with your survey
  Barbara

[trystan]

Hi all,

Thank you to everybody for taking their time to contribute on this thread to help Mark Bridge at The Times with his research into ethnicity results of DNA testing.

A big welcome also to newcomers who have spotted this topic and have posted also. We know that this topic has been widely circulated on other channels and blogs so it's great that you've found us.

As the topic was growing arms and legs and walking off in all sorts of directions I've taken the liberty to chop it short and lock this topic. 

If you would like to to contribute further with this research then please contact Mark Bridge via Personal Message. I am sure he will be delighted to hear from you.

Thank you again everybody!

All the very best,
Trystan

PS I've unlocked it again now in case somebody wants to add to the original question. However, as this is a long topic thread I'd ask please to keep it on topic. Thanks. 

[Constance Cole]

The Ethnicity test is only as good as the testers. Where does the determination of ethnicity come from. Either they have tested the remaining inhabitants of the area and somehow cataloged the findings without scholarly publication or the ethnicity is determined by testers who self report.

Where did we migrate from or where did we migrate to? Until the companies providing this information share how they have come to the determination it is just a working theory. Are they reporting on your haplo group information and not providing the same to the tester or are they reporting on the other 22 markers?

Since they ask ethnic origins for the tester maternal and paternal and report that info maybe it is a report based on that information. The ethnicity is still reported in percentage. It is unclear if this is a percentage of your genetic makeup or a report of the percentage of those matching you. Are 18% of those reporting from Asia and Asian, or are 18% of your matches saying they are from Asia origins, or are your ancestors 18% Asian?

What is the total that your DNA is being compared to? How many individuals are in your genetic pool? These are all legitimate question for which there is no answer is supplied. So genetic genealogy is still the paper trail you have.

[MissBea]

I had my mtdna done with Oxford Ancestors (around 7 years ago)and they said that I belonged to the Helena Clan and that my origins were Northern Spain and Southern France, I think it was 10,000 years ago. They also stated that I had a mutation and gave me the list of dna numbers (sorry not sure what this is called). To say that I was disappointed in the service would be an understatement. I have no idea what the mutation is, what it means to me, or how it affects me. I see others talking about certain "dna groups" but I have no idea which group I belong to.
My maternal ancestry (via records) can be traced from England to Scotland then to Northern Ireland and possibly Ireland, this journey takes my maternal line back to the late 1700s.
I would advise most people to wait until the science is more developed. I also question the ethics of storing private information by these companies.

[Jan_A]

Hello All,
 I don't have the time this evening to go through all the postings but wanted to add my two cents (will follow up and read the postings when I have more time).

My father never knew his father or that family, so my mom and I did both of our DNA testings through Ancestry.com just before Christmas 2015. We got our results back and I was astounded to see my G.Britain is at 50% (residents of the region are 60%)- so Ancestry.com says.  Mom's is mostly Scandinavian.

Now we knew that my father's GMother was a Simpson and I am back in Ireland with that search. His Gfather from Germany. My MOTHER's side: the Goss is supposedly from England and the other line: Germany.

I had my raw DNA uploaded to GEDmatch for free and I'm still researching that since I am knew to this DNA thing.  I had uploaded to FamilyTree but with less than a dozen people to weed through - I emailed them and asked them to remove my dna results and my account.

Ancestry.com has confirmed a lot through lines I already knew but it's opening more as I go along, unfortunately MOST people are doing the DNA testing but no one wants to answer emails even when it says you are related (I don't understand that: test but don't research?).

I am a firm believer in DNA (having gone through this topic for a degree in Criminal Justice).  And will be looking forward to going through the MANY replies on this topic.  I am so looking to finding my origins with future plans of making the trip to Ireland (retired military - I've only been there on leave).

Thanks for the work you are doing on this topic!!

Jan_A

[hurworth]

My impression is that people don't understand what is meant by the ethnicity results, and the fault for that lies with the testing companies for not explaining it very well, and some companies are worse than others Your ethnicity results will not tell you where your gt-grandparents are from - two from Wales, one from France, two from Spain, a couple from Sweden and a German.   The "ethnicity" goes much further back than that.

My parents don't do Internet banking at all.   They go to the bank, and when they want to pay me for something they post me a cheque.   They're astounded that I actually use internet banking because apparently it is absolutely fraught with risk.

Some of the responses in this thread as to why people won't ever submit DNA for genealogical testing reminds me my parents' attitude to Internet banking.   They are afraid of it because they don't understand it.   Or there is a  misunderstanding regarding what can or can't be achieved.

Back before the prices came down my husband and I had DNA testing.  Not for genealogy.  He'd had surgery and the surgeon (of Irish descent), while he was "in there" noticed that his liver looked dark and recommended he be tested for hemochromatosis.  Ireland has the highest rate of the "Celtic" type of hemochromatosis in the world.   It is estimated that in Ireland one person in nine has one haemochromatosis gene, which is generally considered to be a carrier but some "carriers" still develop the complications.   Therefore approx one person in 81 in Ireland is homozygous (has the gene on both chromosomes).

I've since been tested for it as well, as a blood test to do with my iron status suggested I may have it. 

I've also been tested for some other genes for other things that some results suggested could be caused by having a particular gene-type.  I'm reluctant to call it a mutation, as in certain situations it can be advantageous, and "mutation" sounds negative whereas I see them as an "alternative" gene and not necessarily better or worse.   It's a bit like the colour of your skin.  Lighter skin is more prone to skin cancer and darker skin makes you more prone to Vit D deficiency.  The colour of your skin is easy to see, but say it was just a gene and you couldn't tell which one you had by just looking at yourself in the mirror?

So, increasingly in the medical setting gene testing is being offered to the public.

Not all testing companies have the same "fine print" regarding your data, so do bear that in mind and do read the fine print if this worries you.   Roberta Estes has written about this.

I actually think the cost is minimal considering the price of some records.  Four birth certs from the UK for people who may turn out to not be related to you after all cost about the same as one autosomal (the one that looks at all your chromosomes and finds "cousins") test (depending on which company).

If you are very happy with your genealogy paper trail and that's all you need then that's fine.

My mobile phone is a brick.  Personally, I don't understand the benefit of a smartphone.  But you are most welcome to have one if you like.  Just don't send me a photo - you'll have to e-mail that.

[coombs]

I think DNA testing is a good idea, I have French Huguenot and Scottish ancestors as well as my English lot. I have heard that Huguenots may have had Jewish converts hiding among them, maybe a DNA test would tell me more. DNA testing is a great way, especially seeing as autosomal DNA is being worked on, ie a cousin through a maternal grandfathers sisters grandson instead of the maternal or paternal line DNA we are so used to testing.

My English ancestors came from Sussex, Oxfordshire, Essex, London, Suffolk, Durham, Dorset, Norfolk, Kent, Warwickshire, Gloucestershire and Berkshire. It would be nice to see my ancient origins.

[Anne Rand]

After ordering mitochondrial DNA testing for myself, and for a paternal first cousin whose mt DNA would be that of my father's I learned/realized that mitochondrial DNA results are useless without a paper trail - which in my case ends with each 4x great grandmother.  I have had very interesting and helpful results and contacts re my brother's 111 marker Y-DNA, and am hoping for the same with my maternal grandfather's Y-DNA (the earliest ancestor was a French Hugenot who came to North America in the 1690s).  But most interesting and helpful has been the autosomal testing of myself and scores of cousins.  I have been able to take that maternal grandfather's ancestry back several generations further in a couple of lines, and have connected with distant cousins with whom ancestor and descendant information has been, and will be shared.  The X chromosome is inherited in a very specific pattern, and having one's X data on gedmatch allows me to see who I match.  It is easy to eliminate known cousins from x matching, because males inherit X DNA from fewer ancestors, but interesting to see which known cousins might be an X match but are not.
Testing is getting more specific (and less expensive) all the time.  I think that anyone interested in their genealogy should invest in genetic testing.  And still recommend Family Tree DNA as the best option, with their chromosome browser, etc.  However, if you have tested with either Ancestry or 23andme upload your results to gedmatch and take advantage of additional autosomal matches, and of X matches.