How accurate are your DNA Ethnicity Results?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
- Were you shocked or disappointed with your ethnicity results? Are you skeptical about DNA testing to identify ethnicity?
👉🏼 Learn more about DNA+Ethnicity👀 • DNA Ethnicity Results:...
----------------
CONTINUE LEARNING
📺 Blame Reference Populations if Your Ethnicity Results Are Wrong • Blame Reference Popula...
↪️ Grab your FREE genealogy research guides and templates at www.familyhist...
⚡ Want to grow your family tree faster? Join our membership program.
/ @familyhistoryfanatics
📗 Like to read? Check out these books
www.familyhist...
----------------
✅ Let's connect:
✔️ Subscribe for more genealogy tips: tinyurl.com/FH....
✔️ Website: www.familyhist...
✔️ Share Video Ideas: www.familyhist...
#genealogy #ancestry #DNAResults
👉🏼 Learn more about DNA+Ethnicity👀 ua-cam.com/play/PLcVx-GSCjcdlvwsLScE4NPKwGA-XUNhhM.html
"Ethnicity" and "race" aren't the same. Ethnicity is a set of social, cultural, linguistic and religious beliefs common to a specific population. Subspecies, often referred to as "race", is a set of genetic morphologic characteristics particular to each human subspecies. Countries aren't synonymous to which subspecies one belongs to, for they are inhabited by groups with distinct phenotypes. Semantics matter, hence why so much mislead regarding genetic studies vs the sociopolitical/cultural way they are explained to the public.
The exact thing that autosomal testing (commonly called ethnicity) is actually the tendency for some proportion of your ancestry in around the 1700s to have come from areas with relatively stable long-term populations, such that they could homogenize their local genetics out. Its those stabilities that the genetics companies are hunting for. So in a way it could be called "race", but its far below the level of most morphology. You are right that it has nothing to do with nations and politics; it has to do with stability and local geography.
Its not like this in every county. Lets say in Greek and Cyprus. We Greece are Greece because we belong to the Greek nation. For any Greke to belong to the Greek nation and be Greek he must have Greek parents and grandparets etc so our nation is our race. Today...many people thing that they are Greek just because they were born in Greece... and those leftish idiots say that its not the blood but the place u rise. False. But in America is like u said because there is not american race. America is a multiculture country.
Ethnicity comes from the Ancient Hellenic world εθνος or ethnos in latin writing. Well Herodotus was the first to defy this word and he did this this way; "Is a group of people that have same blood (aka dna) , same lifestyle/culture/politism, same language, same religion."
@@jimb8296 όπως τα λες φίλε. Άντε γιατί θα μας τρελλάνουν. ΕΛΛΑΣ ΜΟΝΟ
@jeisa Jeis 400 years not 800. And there isnt any turk blood into Greek blood. There is greek blood into Turk blood because many Turks are Greeks Kurds and Armenians. Todays Greeks of Greece and Cyprus according to scientists and historians dont have turkish dna.
Genetic ancestry tests are unreliable, and still in the early stages. There is a margin of error depending on the company that conducts the test. As the technology improves, the results of these tests might change.
I believe that.
Interesting point..am puzzled by mine!
They are based on reporting levels within certain populations. It Also assumed that different polymorphism are unique to certain population and that just isn't true
While I think the percentages are certainly unreliable the results left no surprises from what I already knew about my family
@@esterherschkovich5002 As am I, especially about the 1.4% Central Asian and the Welsh part of the 27.4% Irish, Scottish, and Welsh ancestry.
A set of identical triplets sent in their samples to a number of companies doing DNA testing and they all got dramatically different results.
Butterfly effect
I know my ancestors are from planet earth.
But are you sure...
Are you sure? :p
Lol..☺goodo.
Lmfaoo
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics If you were born and raised in the USA, can you're ethnicity be American?
I come from a Cuban descent and Iberian didn’t come up on my ancestry! This video makes me feel so much better! 🇨🇺
Glad to provide some explanation.
U adopted
I hope not! 😂 I listen to reggaetòn everyday. They’re was an update in my test a couple months ago. My 22% French went down to 10% and the other 12% was Iberian (Spain).
Luca Cruz Half Puerto Rican - I was wondering where all that French came from in my results! 😂
Staci lol 😂
So in terms of continents,it's accurate.But when it comes to the countries,it's not accurate?
Continents accurate, countries might be accurate but there really isn't enough data to tell.
And also, you have to remember that borders have changed throughout history and that when it comes to African countries for example, ethnic groups can be spread in different countries and share a similar DNA since most of them were historically nomades.
Yeah, that's right. The barriers that prevented much mixing in the 1000 years before 1700 were mainly geographical, so counties apply only in the circumstances where their borders are geographical rather than the result of war or diplomacy. Oceans, mountain ranges, rivers before transportation rose above domesticated animals, deserts. The things that kept the eager swain on his side of the fence more often than not.
Lol it said I have 2% European Jewish: stick to it!
"Country" is not a valid concept in genetic placement. Ethnicity might be. "Rough area" might be a better claim.
5:15 I am sure "West Asian" means {W. Iran, Turkey, Armenia, Georgia}. Some companies take it to include the Middle East, but most don't. India/Pakistan is under "South Asia"; a completely different cluster.
The regional clusters are confusing to be sure.
Thank you for doing these videos. Your tone and teaching style correlates with my learning style. I am learning a lot!!!
Thanks, we'll keep it up, if you have any suggestions, let me know.
Family History Fanatics I have seen Horn African dna results and they tend to come up with Middle Eastern and North African dna. They always having discussion on being Arabs or not etc. What do you think ? Haplogroups don't help too as E1b1b is in Middle East Africa and Europe.
@@jbaron8120 They are considered North African, and sometimes Middle Eastern.
@@jbaron8120 Some consider them Arab, some don’t.
Great video. I really like the way you explained it. My DNA is nearly identical at Ancestry, Family Tree DNA, My Heritage, and Living DNA. They all show me much more Irish than I ever thought I was. But I have since found Irish ancestors in the lines of all 8 of my great grandparents sothat explains it.
Awesome. This is one of the positive things that the ethnicity results can do for you. If there is a significant amount (>5-10%) of something that you didn't already know about, it is probably a good clue to look for ancestors from there.
It might interest you to know that Ireland carries strains of all the tribes of Europe and western asia as well, over the last 5000+ years.
Great explanation as to why different companies give different results.
Thank you
I took MyHeritage first and it said I'm 100% east European and I was like no way so I uploaded results to different and they said about :
Ancestry GenPlaza: 77% north eastern Slavic(including Mordvin), 19% northwest Europe and the rest ambiguous.
K29 GenPlaza : All northeastern Slav but 3.5% Albanian and 1.8% gurjati Indian. Random
Family tree DNA says 86% east European and 12% scandi with trace regions of southeast Europe. It only gave me 98% .
Confusing. I have more questions now hahah. I am from West Russia and thought I was part Baltic but no
My question is, how can AncestryDNA and MyHeritage have results that are so different? It’s almost like the first two are swapped and the last one is completely different.
AncestryDNA
61% England, Wales, & N.western Europe
33% Ireland & Scotland
6% Germanic Europe
MyHeritage
69.3% Irish, Scottish, & Welsh
24.2% English
6.5% Scandinavian
Each company classifies things differently and each is using a difference reference set to make that classification. Most genetic genealogists will tell you that results at the continental level are consistent, but at smaller divisions there may not be consistency.
I find it more interesting to find the people you are related to and where they lived. It doesn't really matter to me if one has inherited some part of your DNA from some person that my of been from some part of the world.
Thanks for sharing your insights.
At the end of the video we talk about how it should be easy to diferentiate between broad regions (Europe, North american native, MENA, SSA, etc). But how does that work at the edge of said regions? (So southern Morocco as opposed to Mauritania which may have a lot more SSA, or Spain and Northern Morocco, Greece and Turkey, etc)?
This helps out a lot. I was so confused when I had my 23andMe results. My sister got majority SE Asian, some Chinese, a tiny bit Iberian and traces of Oceanian and South Asian. When I got mine I just got mostly SE Asian, very little Chinese, and a bit of Iberian. My dad is Chinese so the percentage was so low! I was disappointed no S. Asian or Oceanian showed. However on GED Match and other platforms, Oceanian and S. Asian consistently pops up. Sometimes I even see Amerindian... It really is confusing. So I'm not sure if I really have Oceanian and S. Asian lol.
You might, but very low percentages could just be noise. The Oceanian reference population for 23andMe is only a few dozen people, and that is supposed to be representative of those from Madagascar to Hawaii? Not quite I would think.
I'm from England and I used My Heritage. It told me that I am 64.1% Irish, Scottish and Welsh - 25.8% Scandinavian - 4.6% Greek - 3.6% Italian - 0.9% Baltic and 1% Melanesian (SE Asia). Be aware that if you use My Heritage and you are English, they incorrectly class Proto-Celtic as Irish, Welsh and Scottish. The fact is that the vast majority of English DNA is also Proto-Celtic, even though England was invaded by tribes from Scandinavia and Germany, the majority of the indigenous tribes in what is now England remained, they were just dominated and took on their culture. If your're reading this My Heritage, the classification should be Proto-Celtic from Britain and Ireland. All Proto-Celts in Britain and Ireland were of the same stock.
I took the Ancestry.com test. I'm from America but predominantly English in descent. This username is ironic because I have a Scottish surname but only a small amount of Scottish ancestry. It's somewhat common over here for people to retain surnames that no longer reflect their ethnic make-up. I had something similar to you, with much higher Celtic and Scandinavian results than to be expected, as well as one other. I received a very low percentage for British (English). The rest was W. European (W. Germanic). My English ancestors all came over in the 1600s, and mostly from SE England. I have some German ancestry as well, and they came over from, well, exactly where the Saxons came from when they settled in the area my English ancestors came from. I'm willing to bet before industrialization the two populations, albeit in different countries, were genetically more similar than they are today.
I hadn't understood why the Celtic results were so high on mine, but what you are saying could help explain it. But also, for people who are English or of English descent, watch out for the mix-up with Western European, which might also be called W. Germanic, or sometimes summed up as German & French. The Ingvaeonic people, the Angles/Saxons/Jutes/etc. were W. Germanic. To give some perspective, none of these tests can distinguish Irish from Scottish, and those two populations have been separate for a longer time than the English from the Germans.
Yeah, it's often difficult to breakdown with accuracy and obviously it is only an estimate, but I have also done research on my ancestors and most are of indigenous stock from England going back centuries in Yorkshire and some in Lancashire. Apart from some Irish (my great Grandmother) and also Viking going back 1,000 years which I traced through my surname, there is no Scottish or Welsh so being as high as 64.1% Irish, Scottish and Welsh doesn't add up, but the Proto-Celt connection does. I have a new kit from Ancestory.com, the results will be interesting.
Scotty McScott their genetics are so similar remember they're all in one island so the genetics will be so similar that's why ancestry doesn't give you a specific country they give a region. For example the Great Britain region includes Scotland Ireland wales England and northwestern France.
Not with MyHeritage.com, they said I was Scottish, Welsh and Irish and no English dna despite my traced English ancestry. This was the point I made earlier, they were wrong.
DickTurpin it's pretty hard to separate which is which because they all share one island it's like determining Native American from the us and a native from Mexico it's going to be hard to differentiate. So that Scottish they gave is either English or you ancestors were really from Scotland and moved to England a long time ago you can't even find paper records. But it's a highly likely they couldn't tell the difference between the two so in conclusion you're English af.
I'm just grateful to humanity has come this far. Solutions to various problems are raising. It's also fascinating.
It is fascinating to be sure.
My family, and friends joke that I don't look like anyone in my family. My aunty on dad's side of the family has done the test just for fun. I'm going to do it, to compare. I know there will be differences. I just hope we share a large percentage of one country/area.
My Ancestry DNA results says I am 68% Eastern European and 32% Balt. I was adopted from Poland.
That ethnicity result lines up perfectly with where Poland is located.
Another brilliant video. Thank you, that answered some questions I had.
Glad it was helpful!
I took ancestry dna, and got the raw data. I uploaded that same raw data to myheritage. On myheritage it said I had 6% North African and 1% Nigerian. On ancestry, there’s no mention of Africa anywhere.
Different reference databases + different algorithms = different results. Some of those different results are minor like in my case, and some are major like in your case.
Michael Finnie I know myharitage states I am 9% North African but I don’t believe it.
@@viviansalg12 You might have North African ancestry. You never know. 😉
I took my original dna test on ancestry and it said I was 53% great britian and only 7% irish. Which didn't make any sense to me because I have an Irish Last name and I know for a fact that I have family from Ireland. And then I uploaded the same dna test/kit to my herritage dna. And It said I was zero % English. And 66% Irish. Which is what I was originally expecting. But how could ancestry be THAT far off? 53% English to zero % English? How does that make sense? I definitely think the zero % English is more accurate though.
Having an Irish surname doesn't mean you're predominantly Irish. It simply means that you more than likely have an Irish ancestor. You can have an Irish ancestor and 0% Irish DNA depending on how far back your Irish ancestor lived. Many of your 4th great grandparents will have passed on no DNA to you at all
English and Irish are nationalities not races.they are very very similar with mixing with each other
100% human
This is interesting, I took 3 tests, and I had 3% Ethiopian , and 2% Anatolia in FTdna, 2% Senegal, 2% Congo 1% Ashkenazi Jewish in Ancestry. My Heritage didn't show these results.
I don't think the Ancestry dna is 100 % accurate.
None of them are anywhere close to 100% accurate when it comes to ethnicity results
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics I agree!
They can be very accurate in terms of which race you are but not exactly from which region
@@jalousy100k7 True! I believe that too.
@@manniesreactionchannel3808 the reason is because through times people have been mixing due to wars etc if you look in WW2 a lot of German soldier pics there is a lot of them who look exactly a like buy now there is a lot of mixing and those who claim to be full German aren’t really full German even if they take a dna test they might be a bit German buy not as much as it shows this is because they grabbed dna samples from people of Germans who have probably mixed with others
Do I need to buy two separate kits to compare results? Is there some way I can look up what each company would interpret my results as just by looking at the raw info from 1 kit?
If you really want to head down this path...
Buy an Ancestry DNA kit and a 23andMe kit.
Transfer your Ancestry kit to MyHeritage, Family Tree DNA, and GEDmatch.
For the price of 2 kits you can be in five databases. There are some minor transfer fees for MyHeritage.
Don't transfer the 23andMe kit to any place.
Now you will come to see that the companies will not agree.
Instead, take the Ancestry test and start building your genetic family tree. It would be money better spent. ua-cam.com/play/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI.html
All I can say is with Ancestry DNA it was pretty accurate! I'm from the UK and I got back 16% of my DNA is from Scandinavia, I didn't know that but when you look at the history of these Isle's, it's not that surprising!
I notice like me you are from Yorkshire. The eastern part of Yorkshire does have a higher percentage of Scandinavian than many other parts of England (although still a minority), the dialect from that part of the world is derived from old Norse and the breakdown up until just after WWII was actually around 15% Scandinavian dna, so it sounds about right if your family is also from the eastern half of Yorkshire, but bear in mind the western part of Yorkshire where I am from, is heavily Proto- Celtic, hence Brythonic sounding place names such as Pen-y-Ghent.
Stachel Schwein If you're Slavic that's highly likely since Finland is really close to Russia so i wouldn't be surprised if Scandinavians crossed over settled in whatever country you're from and interbred
I got 16% Scandinavian too. I'm not sure these tests are actually accurate.
Yorkie Bar Indeed, it's not surprising that Scandinavians migrated to the UK and Ireland. In my case, it's not surprising that there was mixing among North Africans, Arabs, and Southern Europeans.
..I was born in the UK but was given 100% Celt,I knew I had Irish connections+was placed in an Orphanage..but I ve received messages from people in the States(an Uncle+Nephew)the Uncle comes up strong 1 st Cousin,could be their Grandfather/GG is my father but would.nt I have some other connection to Europe like them??Any ideas?Thanks.
i took the myheritage and ancestry dna tests and I made my mother take a test as well.. she is half hungarian.. I gut Eastern Europe and Balkan on myheritage and ancestry also said I’m Eastern European but it couldn’t pinpoint it down any further... I uploaded our raw data to GEDMatch, LivingDNA and DNALand.. the GEDMatch oracle shows mostly Hungarian but my mother’s results on DNALand show 6% Northern Slavic and 17% Finnish.. is it possible that Hungarian dna is confused as Finnish dna because of the Finno-Ugric relations?
When you look at your two kits using the various calculators on Gedmatch, do you get different admixture results for your 23andMe and Ancestry kits?
Sometimes.
It is a lot like what people say in philosophy "everything means something and everything means nothing." If one looks at all the factors in which a culture is classified (race, national origin, language) they are all to a large weak in determining ethnicity. The greatest factor for culture/ethnicity is YOU and how do you identify.
I understand what you're saying. However, there are some genetic markers that many groups who lived in specific regions shared. For those who wish to learn more about their heritage, DNA testing can help. However, there isn't enough for which as to compare ourselves to the reference populations to ensure accuracy. But building our tree following the tips my wife shares on this channel, we'll be able to know our heritage and that can help us with our identity. .
Hello Andy,
Thanks for your work.
As a quick feedback to this video I think the way you interpret the black (mismatch) regions is not necessarily right. I know 23 and me leaves big segments of Chromosomes unchecked so if those are done on the other kit then it's probably going to be considered mismatched regions on GED. The main reason to think that is that the black regions are too contiguous and there's no color for regions to reflect missing information on the GED graphic.
I watched the video again, and what you are describing is the same thing that I am saying (although using different words). If you think it is different, could you give me a more thorough explanation?
My DNA results had 14% Italian, which was way too high. No Italian in family. This was from CRI Genetics, in the recent DNA. They also had Tuscan, or TSI snips in the timeline almost every generation from 1875. They did change the 1875 one to Native American, though. All very confusing! I'm testing at MY Heritage now, and hoping for better results.
Might I suggest that you keep watching my videos about DNA + Ethnicity. ua-cam.com/play/PLcVx-GSCjcdlvwsLScE4NPKwGA-XUNhhM.html
It's entirely possible that you won't get better results from MyHeritage.
If you really want to know your heritage, please take the action of building your family tree with the knowledge you have and see where that road goes. It'll be much better in the long run for your results.
I have question that you may be able to help me in. Does mixed blood (mestizo in my case) show up as native?
It likely shows up as Iberian and maybe Native American (if there is a reference population that is a close match).
Some tests are better at certain areas, if you know kind of where to look you can pick one based on that, I read that natgeo is doing it for Native Americans. Others like Jewish, it's also the only ethnicity you can convert to, genetically they use four families, so it only picks up 40% of Ashkenazi Jews (but if they test specific populations compared to local, (like Bnei Menashe in India, (not Mizrahi or Sephardic either) the markers are different, but the same in other small Jewish groups globally).
Wich one is good for jewish please?
If you convert you are not an etnic Jew. You can only be an etnic Jew by birth. That is why converts do not get any results
Each DNA company is hindered by the fact that all of them struggle to have enough people in their control groups (reference populations) to provide accuracy and reliable ethnicity results. This is why I tell people to be in (Ancestry, Family Tree DNA, MyHeritage DNA, and GEDmatch). Build your family tree through records and DNA cousin matching and don't worry too much about the ethnicity results.
A Beginner's Guide to Getting Started in Genealogy ua-cam.com/video/Fx2Tff-R-yI/v-deo.html
The Basics of Building a Genetic Family Tree ua-cam.com/play/PLcVx-GSCjcdnEg-YtkXA7Nj2YxxamaYKA.html
Hiiiii, I’m east european (bulgarian) and so are my parentents, my wife is asian (filipina) wich tests would be more accurate on us?...
We are very curious but we aren’t sure wich one to pick.
Ps: tnx for the uploads... it’s very entertaining
I would start with 23andMe. They seem to have larger reference populations for your expected ethnicity.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics will do, thank you
Short answer, accurate enough.
Short response... depends on the question asked.
I know this video is older so I hope you see this: I’ve tested with both AncestryDNA and 23andme.
For the most part my results were the same (African,European, and south Asian admixtures).
However AncestryDNA reported that I had a small percentage of West Asian/North African and 0% East Asian/Native.
23andme reported that I had 0% West Asian/North African and 1.3% East Asian/Native American (very small percentage I know).
However, when I compare the two on gedmatch both ethnic groups show up on almost all the projects that are best suited for me. I was wondering why that might be if the continental results are pretty much accurate.
Percentages less than 5% are sketchy at best. This is especially true if the population in question borders another one to which you have a significant amount (like what you are showing).
Family History Fanatics Thank you for the quick response!
That’s what I figured however my South Asian percent was quite low as well
Since the mitochondrial haplogroup is only from your matrilineal line, it is entirely possible that its origin doesn't match your predominant ethnic origins. 23andMe tests a significant portion of the mtDNA, more than enough to make an accurate identification of your haplogroup.
While C1c is one of the six founding haplogroups of Native Americans, it doesn't preclude it not being present elsewhere in the world. It is possible that you are descended matrilineally through a Native American or you might be an outlier of C1c from somewhere else in the world.
I have a question I took the ancestry DNA test. It said at first I was seven percent British . Also said I was half german. Then they updated it noe I'm 75 percent British. Then said no German how can this be.
Check out this video to see if it helps explain. ua-cam.com/video/ScZtHuU78n4/v-deo.html
The Anglos and Saxons and Jutes were Germanic tribes that settled in England in 500, so some English genes will be from them. Just the same as the ones who didn't migrate and stayed in Germany.
As a Balt myself I strongly disagree with placing The Baltic states under Eastern Europe. So wrong from point of ethnicity and genealogy. What is here meant by Baltic? There are only two Balt nations survived up to modern days - Latvians and Lithuanians. Neither Poles, Germans. Scandinavians or Finno-Ugrians (Finns and Estonians) should be placed under Baltic category. So, the question at the end how accurate these tests are? Especially for European (any, including the south, north, east and the west as there are many different nations and ethnicities in all these regions).
You need to think geographically. It is a section of Eastern Europe. It's not in Southern or Western Europe.
@@ELee-zv5ud Geographically it is the north Europe as the east of Europe stretches beyond Latgale (the east border of Latvia and Russia/Belorussia).
West Asia is not India and Pakistan. West Asia is Russia and the Caucasus mountains.
It all depends on who is defining West Asian. Geographically, I agree with you. However, when it comes to genetic populations, each algorithm defines their results differently
My heritage seems to be very inaccurate. I sent them my Ancestry Dna data and they came up with completely different results. My italian ancestry went from 9% to 0 they same for my irish. My african ancestry went down also, but my native american ancetry went up. he weird thing is the test for specific regions like central america, native america and amazonian indeginous and mine came back 26% central american, but I know my native ancestry is specifically from Minnesota of Mdewakantonwan ancestry and also Shoshone indians from eastern nevada. I have no central americans in my family
Reference populations from the Americas are primarily from Central and South America because those populations have pockets of people who have not interbred with the Europeans and Africans. Most all of the US native americans are an admixture of European and Native American so they don't make a good reference set. The Central American reference set is probably closest to your native heritage genetically.
I had the same problems with My Heritage vs Ancestry DNA. They were completely different. My Heritage even told my blond haired, blue eyed Scot/German husband that he came from Nigeria and N. Africa.
I got the expected results, Ashkenazi. I find the ethnicity results of my matches very useful for one thing, identifying those rare cousins that are only half Jewish. That can help me figure out which of their parents is my cousin.
Glad you can find value in ethnicity results. Don't stop there. Use the tests to piece together how folks are related using segment data. However, with endogamy common to Jewish ancestry, you're in for a difficult ride.
People should at first know something about history or do not worry whether their ancestors came from Africa, too.
I have used the same DNA test with many comapanies of dna kits...
results at my heritage:
47,4% iberian
26% north european
11,5% balcans
8,5% north african
3,8 italian
1,5 nigerian
1,3 middle east
At my familytree dna for example i have:
83%iberian
10% italian peninsula
4% central europe
Yep. That's to be expected. You're a mix of the Mediterranean.
I’m a little confused on the MyHeritage ancestry test my family did it shows I share 40 with my aunt (my mom’s sister) and only 22 segments with my mom. With my mom’s dad I share 29 and my mom’s mom I share 22. I would think it would be more with my mom.
You are looking at segments. You share 22 segments with your Mom because you share 22 chromosomes. With your grandparents and aunt you share more segments, but the segments are smaller so the total cM you share is less than with your Mom.
Can you compare more sets of data at once say like 6, or take the parts that aren't shared and isolate them to run in different algorithms?
Perhaps. I haven't done that.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics thank you, is CRI genetics worth buying from?
You should do a up-to-date DNA test because they just found out that pharaohs are black and not Greek so you might be Egyptian because they found out that Nigeria is part of Egypt the people are black
I will take that into consideration. However, based on the general principles casting doubt on the accuracy of ethnicity results, what has really changed? The reference populations are still small around the world and some groups refuse to participate.
Thus, I'm not sure an update to this particular topics is warrant. Unless I misunderstood your premise.
I am sick and tired of MyHeritage adds every time I open youtube. I dislike their marketing, their constant spam, their poor search tools, and their selling of information that is really member's intellectual property. I use WikiTree and or FamilySearch. I'm also told they provide our dna information to medical companies without out consent. They also do not do male or female dna and the only company that does all that is familytreedna.
None of the DNA testing companies provide information to 3rd parties without your consent. It would be illegal in the US as well as Europe I believe and result in a class action lawsuit rather quickly.
So really the testing is not really any good?
west asia doesn't mean india pakistan etc, it means anatolia (turkish, greek, armenian...)
That depends on who you ask, now doesn't it?
Is there also a difference when you send your DNA twice to the same company?
Maybe because of unclean analysis, ...?
We have a video on this in the works, actually just waiting for the second test results to get back.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Ok, perfect.
Thank you.
I'm very curious.
did you test with each company or move the results from one company to the other?
Tested with 23andMe and Ancestry. Moved 23andMe kit to FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage. Moved both 23andMe and Ancestry kits to Gedmatch.
I apologize. So to clarify: You took two different tests. #1 23andme #2Ancestry. Is this correct? Why is that necessary? DNA is DNA I was told. Each one tests against a different group, however. Thanks again
I just listened again. It is a different "chip". Got it. I tested with LivingDNA out of England last Rootstech and just submitted the results to Gedmatch
@@4allmyancestors I've listened to a lot of these videos so my memory on this might be a little mixed up. However I am pretty sure that I heard that the different companies test different parts of the DNA segment. So different results may arise because of positioning on the DNA segment.
Nice info! Thanks
Any time.
Hello can you please make a video about how to create a genealogy research to go kit for traveling and or could you do a video on how you organize your research
Ask and ye shall receive. ua-cam.com/video/uPwMIlLfhfk/v-deo.html
Hi, I was hoping that somone can give some clarity, My dad, mom and I did a test on My Heritage. My results came back as ...
English
41.9%
North and West European
15.7%
East European
14.3%
Greek and South Italian
11.4%
Scandinavian
8.7%
Italian
3.2%
my father on the other hand had ...
North and West European
54.8%
Scandinavian
25.4%
Balkan
8.6%
Iberian
1.0%
and my mother as ...
North and West European
67.7%
South Africa (Gauteng and Free State)
South Africa #2
South Africa (Western Cape)
Italian
16.5%
Greek and South Italian
9.8%
Scandinavian
6.0%
What confuses me is that English does not show in any of my parents results, My Heritage does say that my parents are my parents so that bumb is ruled out. I also show Melanesian even though its small but its not present in any of them. Could this just be a mistake?
Thanks
Ancestry only tests back to 1700 or later; 23andme goes back much further and gets much more information about ethnicity than Ancestry. Ancestry showed no NA but on the Trulines I have Native American ancestor beginning from the 3rd ggrandparent and back further. Possibly, I just didn't inherit the gene or the DNA needed to be tested further back for it to show up. It is definitely only an estimate as to what our makeup is.
That is marketing talk. Both are testing the same thing.
These companies are not wrong, yet they are often inaccurate. For example, I'm Dutch and North-West German, but Ancestry DNA had the Netherlands in the Category of "England & Northwest Europe", making it seem as though I'm English with a dash in vaguely northern European. The problem is often the topology or naming conventions/ categories. But that is because our ancestors moved around a lot. Many Nordic and Germanic men ended up in England (Anglo-Land, sounds like a terrible amusement park), so I match people in Germanic Europe and England. The same thing often happens with Spain and Portugal; Greece and Italy, Southern France and Spain, etc. They all overlap on a Venn diagram.
DNA doesn't lie, but it doesn't tell the whole truth. And the ethnicity algorithms are doing the best the can with the available data. The biggest need is for more people to test for the reference populations around the world. After that, fine tuning of categories would be open for serious discussion.
I'm a Turk from Southern Bulgaria. My brother got 15% Sephardic North African and 5% Ashkenazi, while I got 0.0% of either. I got 20% Anatolian while he got 2%. I had 55% Balkan and 0% Slavic, while he had 30% Balkan and 20% Slavic.
All this seems just plain inaccurate and unreliable. It's able to predict us being full brothers, but ethnicity estimates seem like a selective random card game or something. I'm sure it works to a certain extent in giving you a very rough general idea, but all this we could have roughly estimated without the DNA ethnicity "science" here. This stuff probably still needs millions of more samples before being able to make decent estimates. At this stage companies just suck up our money while we fill their databases for them at the same time.
My original results by the way were done by the Genographic Project 2.0, while my brother had it through MyHeritage. I transferred my results over to MyHeritage to compare with his.
I've read that it is quite common for siblings to have entirely different results from DNA tests. There was a famous case of beautiful triplet fraternal twins who all had different results.
Several problems, first the populations you mention haven't done much DNA testing so it is more difficult to get accurate info, Second did you both test with the same company and at the same time Each company uses different data sets, so there will be differences because of that, also at different time the company improves their chip so it samples more and so the results will be different as the later one will be more specific. Also remember you share only 50% of your genes with your brother. Your 100 % genes are made up of 50% from your father and 50% from your mother. Each time a new sex cell is made (sperm ,ovum) the genes are reshuffled. So the 50% that you got from your mother will not be the same a 50% that your brother got. Some will be the same but not all, you each will get some ones the other didn't from the other 50% that was not used from your mother's genes. Same with your father. You are not identical twins so there will be differences in what shows up and how much. Sounds normal for an area in which there was a lot of mixing. It's in the history of that region.
Good video..makes sense as well .thanks
Glad yo uliked it.
Hello nice videos. I live in Greece, I know my parent's ancestry is from a Greek island.. Fact is I am concerned about my mother's side, because her father was Greek from Pontus region (Black Sea). Though I know there was a flourishing community there before the Turks did the ethnic cleansing (churches, Greek colleges) I am still thoughtful. Greeks say these places were Ancient Greek colonies, before the Seljuks appeared in 1100 BC. The test goes back till 1000 BC??
Not really. DNA tests are great at establishing heritage at the continental level, but not specific regions at specific times.
In short NO they are a comparison of other applicants that paid not general population of each area.
Not exactly. DNA is compared to a reference population. This consists of public genetic databases and users identified by the company to fit their criteria to represent a region. (Typically, the taker has documented evidence that all of their grandparents or great-grandparents lived in a specific area.)
Am puzzled I was given 100% Celt/Irish(I was put in an Orphanage) but I.ve been contacted by New First Cousins from America who have DNA/Origins from Europe etc.
The vast majority of Americans have DNA origins from Europe.
I did not initially put my surname in when I did the test, and because of that I got very little ancestry back in my report to identify with, so I assumed I had none from my spit. Then later I put my surname in, then bamb, I'm Scottish, English, Irish. This is because it's my surname not my actual DNA. My surname is a slave name not by real ancestrial name. So tha'ts when I knew they just guess. 🤣🤣
Is this true 😯
Do you have any solid evidence that they take your surname into account? If they do that, it defeats the whole purpose of the test. And, as you said, many surnames are shared by peoples of absolutely unrelated ethnicities.
I've wondered this myself. I have a British surname, but that part of the family where the name comes from were all full blood Choctaw indians.
Erik Ludlow Yeah the surname thing is not true. My surname is so rare, and I had not put any other info other than that and my results were pretty accurate.
My maiden name is hella Italian but I got 0% Italy in my results. Which could be correct, but I was expecting a pretty small amount at least.
In general there is accuracy. However, Ancestry.com does update that totally change the percentage and deleted areas. Whereas, RAW Data amongst other sites share more areas that you would see on the free site DNA.land. For example, Ancestry initially had me as North African whereas the MyHeritage RAW Data called it the Iberian as well as Wegene listed it as Spanish. It appears that Ancestry is catching up to others as they have not updates. See my videos where I have MyHeritage RAW Data vs Swab test.
So despite testing a lot of different markers they still are able to tell your ethnicity with only 0.1% error? How does this explain results with a difference of more than 0.1% which are very common? I'd say the way they choose to label DNA segments is what leads to differing results rather than them getting your dna wrong.
No company claims they can tell your ethnicity with only 0.1% error. Most will report results down to 0.1%, but if you dig into their literature they will also tell you that anything below 1%-5% could just be noise and probably isn't accurate.
They also only guarantee 50% accuracy in the results. The basic problem here is that they are trying to find markers that are particularly indicatrive of specific regional groups. Right now they claim to be able to differentiate between about 20 such groups worldwide. Their marketing shows that people want more and more specificity, but the trade-off there is accuracy. Ten years ago they only claimed to be able to see 3 groups: European, African and American Indian. I believe their accuracy then is uite a bit higher than today. But they are gathering more and more data, and will find better and better markers out of the billions possible.
If DNA test goes only 200 yrs back does that mean if I had for example an 10th Iberian grandfather it won't show it in the results ??
Not really because how would you know who that person is without genealogical records? Autosomal DNA really only stretches reliably to your 5th great grandparents.
There’s alot of different ethnicity in Thailand and Burma and it’s funny how the DNA call all of them Thai and Burmese even though they’re not blood related😂 Karen people are Mongolian. They’re not Burmese and Thai. They can only look at the country not ethnicity.
How far back do these DNA tests go?
Well think about this i exported my dna from ancestry .com then imported it as dna results at myheritage. Com do a comparison and guess what percentages were different also!
I took a DNA test, and I'm supposed to have Neandertal and Denisovan DNA. So maybe I don't have these DNA?
23andMe reports the Neanderthal variants. I don't think any of the other genealogy companies do. Unless all of your ancestors are from Africa, you have Neanderthal DNA. Denisovan DNA is not as widespread as Neanderthal DNA.
I don't believe Neanderthals were human or that the Human race is descended from them. I think it's a lot of BS propagating Evolution. Humans are descended from Adam & Eve. Those Neanderthals are a result of DNA splicing by Extraterrestrials.
Moontrucker lol I enjoyed that
@@moontrucker8939 If that is what you believe then DNA is not for you it is based on science not religion.
To Family History Fanatict and anyone who knows what they are talking about > PLEASE HELP! I am a woman. I am thinking of getting aa Ancestry DNA test kit for my younger brother and our mother. Should I buy kits for all of us or only our mother + brother only ? A kit for my brother and mother should be a definite as the male line thing and for the fact our mother will go back one generation further. My mother has a sister - should I get her a kit - maybe with a different tester, like 23andMe. I want to maximise the information I can garner for our family.
If you want to maximize information, then get everyone tested. The reason is all types of DNA can be used for genetic purposes.
1) Testing your mother will get her autosomal DNA (chromosomes 1-22). You have some of this and your brother has some of this.
2) Testing you and your brother will get most of the same autosomal DNA as your mother (each of you will have a different portion) but it will allow you to do DNA triangulation easier. This will help to separate false matches from true matches.
3) Testing you and your brother will get most of the autosomal DNA from your father (which I am assuming you can't test directly since you didn't mention him). Between the two of you, you will have about 75% of the autosomal DNA from your father.
4) Testing your brother will get the Y-DNA from your father
5) Testing your aunt (along with your mother) will get about 75% of the autosomal DNA of your grandparents.
6) Testing all of the people you mentioned will get the Mitochondrial DNA, which should be identical so if you are doing a specific Mitochondrial DNA test (through FamilyTreeDNA) you only need to do one person.
I cover all of these topics or plan to cover them in future videos. You are started on the right path. Keep watching and learning, the answer to your question is a lot more complicated than one comment can answer.
Thank you for your most thorough reply; it is much appreciated. Our father has passed on. I shall make a copy of what you have shared. I look forward to further videos of yours.
How does this guy not blink ever??
Hypnosis.
Baltic is not Eastern European.
Baltic States = Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
Countries with shoreline on the Baltic Sea = Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, and Sweden.
From a Geography standpoint, you are correct, however, reference groups are defined by the different companies so Baltic may be Eastern European for genetic genealogy purposes in some cases.
Poland and Russia can be described as Eastern European. The rest of those countries I have always thought of as Northern European/Scandinavian. Thank you for your reply and explanation.
Most DNA testing companies pretty clearly distinguish between Baltic and Eastern European.
Mans 100% Africaan. Give me namibias desert have ya, aahara desert. Man will bever be hot.
Lol wtf
I went on Ancestory.com and it told me that i was 50% Black and 100% Nigga🤷🏾♂️
Good for you.
My grandad was a sheep farmer and my results were shocking .
That's interesting.
Funny me & my mother used 23andme she was kinda pissed that her result showed 1% native her mother was red skin with strong native feature and her grandmother is pure native very strongly
Very little DNA data is available on native americans (north american) so their results don't usually show up.
Even people who think they are pure native and even have a status card can well have some European DNA.The fur traders from the 1600s onwards lived in native villages and there would have been people having fun. So it may be back a few generations but it's most likely there.
Ten years ago the somatic genetic test offered only three percentages: European, African and Native American. That was the state of the art. However, the companies have determined that a great selling point is the abil8ty to give you percentages of 20 or more divisions of the world as it was before great explorations started in the 1700s. So they are on a quest for specificity in their results, and the concommitant trade-off is accuracy. They can now nail down 20 or more areas your ancestry may come from, but ony at a 50% AVERAGE accuracy. Remember, you, the customer in aggregate, wants it that way.
Over the last decade the companies have also increased the size of their reference populations which allows for the the specificity to more admixture breakdowns.
Yes, they have. Any estimate on how accuracy differs from what it was 10 years ago? If it is about the same, then marketing is spreading the specificity out about as fast as the reference population is growing.
In my opinion the best way is through classical paper-trail genealogy. Thankfully, that can, today, be done from the comfort of your home. You'll need a subscription to ancestry.com or other equivalent service, good family tree software (could be ancestry as well), and time. The key to accurate results is documentation. You find documents that nail down dates and places for life events, like birth, baptism, death, burial, marriages and spcial events, tie them to evidential records, and copy and organize copies of the documents. Use documents from your family, compare against others, resolve problems, and work your way outwards. That is what I've done.
They are based on a false premise and have a huge margin of error
No, they are based on a measurable concept which lacks sufficient data to be accurate at anything more than a continental level.
k so i uploaded to GEDmatch most of my matches have only 1 segment in common in the Autosomal and none in the X how many segments would be a good match plzzzzz TY
I usually try to focus on people that I have at least 3 segments with (preferably on different chromosomes).
its not accurate at all all these companies test come out different they cannot assume
Each DNA testing company compares your DNA to its own reference population. I talk about that in this video ua-cam.com/video/ScZtHuU78n4/v-deo.html
hey i just wanna know that cause i got a bit indian and african in my chromosome painrings, majority of them i got it, but could it be a mistake?
It depends on how much the percentages are
Why don't you also use National Geographic Geno 2.0?
Geno 2.0 is being discontinued. 😞😔
there was this filipino girl who had fair skin and fine features ..she sent her sample to 23 and me and it came back 99% filipino and austronesian..not satisfied she uploaded her result to ged match and wegene[chinese] and found 15 % chinese, up to 8%bangladesh and asia india, traces of eastern europe and west asia with siberian and finnish and rest were austronesian...so weird...my conclusion, take these results with a grain of salt correlate your results with oral family history, your phenotyope and history of your country,and upload to other DNA sites
Ethnicity results should be used as clues to guide your efforts to build your family tree using DNA matching. ua-cam.com/play/PLcVx-GSCjcdmsw25mbI-wJin_9_9QQUzI.html
They all seem pretty useless, as the databases are poor.
I've always known that my dad is (or mostly) Native American, looks heavily Amerindian, and was born and raised in a remote highland area in Sierra Madre with his tribe people (Huichol). My mom, on the other hand, was born to European descent Mexicans (blonde, green/blue eyes) and had a Chinese grandfather. According to their results, my dad is 44% European and 48% Native American while my mom is only 38% European and 33% Native American. How is this possible? My parents and I think this is a fraud and we refuse to believe this. No way my dad is going to be whiter than my mom and no way my mom is going to have Native American. And no, my paternal ancestors did not look a bit mestizo. And none of my maternal ancestors were mestizos. My dad's father could barely speak Spanish since he was an uncivilized Amerindian. And also, my maternal grandmother's ancestors were all French people who arrived in Mexico in the late 1800's and later changed their surnames/data in order to save themselves from getting captured by the Mexican government for exploiting the gold mines along with the British and French. In the end, we got no French DNA. Something smells very fishy about these DNA tests. Anyway, have a wonderful day!
All ethnicity estimates are only estimates. They are not definitive results in any way (despite what the marketing departments of the companies want you to believe). For Europeans, they are pretty decent (but not what I would call accurate), because the vast majority of testers (80%+) have been of European descent. So there is a lot of data to compare it to. In your case, having a lot of native american (which have had the least amount of DNA testing of any population) would make the results sketchy at best.
@Tangerine Sky333 I couldn't find anything past my maternal great-grandparents in the census while I found nothing in my paternal census. All of my grandmother's parents were born in Durango, Mexico to wealthy French gold hunters who arrived in Durango and later modified their identifications. I even have a photo of my French great-great grandfather who looks full-blown French/Germanic. Hell, my grandma is even unhappy to have French ancestry and would still refuse to believe our DNA results - 0% French.
Really? 'Cause most ancestry results I see(and mine specifically), especially by 23andme, when they breakdown to regions/countries, they were almost *always* correct.
So I don't know what you mean...
You're fortunate. My wife's percentages (and many others) vary wildly below the continental level.
They keep changing my Ancestry.com results. what a load of bullshit.
As more people have their DNA tested and as their reference population (to which your DNA is compared), the ethnicity results will change but still remain within the range of possibilities.
Humans are interesting creatures: I mean we take value from being unique combinations of regional/ethnic stocks, as well from being able to successfully breed with any human being of the opposite sex, at least in principle: We can appeciate the value in both, though they are opposite realities. But sadly, both are also seen as bad things by some of us, and are the cause of much contention.
Ultimately we are all of one kindred and perhaps because of that we make too much of our percieved differences, while ignoring that which make us all the same, even across gender which really is the relevant biological distinction; -relevant mainly in terms of reproductive function; perhaps not so surprisingly, that's another difference that many of us are far too obsessed with.
We are far, far more alike than we are different, especially where it actually matters, that is, in what makes us human: -our minds. And increasingly we see that the higher mammals are not all that different either. In fact quite a lot of our DNA is common to many other species.
Food for thought.
Thanks for sharing. As a genealogist, ethnicity clues can help direct you to records upon which to build family trees. Thus, I appreciate the groups that may be identified.
What are your credentials to be talking about DNA and genetics. There are blind spots that modern DNA test do not see. The ethnicity/ethnicities are but an estimate perhaps reliable but nothing in life is ever 100%.
Do I need credentials other than experience, studying logic, and understanding statistics?
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Then you should not pose yourself as an expert especially using absolute terminology in a area with the technology we have today is a science but, kind of a pseudo-science. So yes, you should have some credentials. I have had classes in human genetics and read an immense amount of material and I am by no means an expert. Some of your statements seem like broad estimates to me. DNA HAS BLIND SPOTS. There are two types of DNA Mt and Y chromosomal. Now I realize that a test done through Ancestry, 23 and me, ect. is an autosomal test, a hybrid composite if you will. But it can't sow everything. For example there is a greater amount of African DNA in African-American women than men because of what is inherited through a man's male genetic line of ancestry. These tests originally had the results in very broad categories; European, Asian, African. Yes, there are genetic markers (haplogroups) common to a certain culture but, 1. DNA clusters and 2. sometimes these haplogroups can be held in common by different ethnic peoples there are markers Mediterranean people have in common with East Asian people.
My advice to you, don't speak with such certainty and DO YOUR HOMEWORK!.
There is no solid data on ethnicities. & it makes sense that there was barely any black marks because your results from 23&me & ancestry were very comparable. & as I said on one of your previous videos, British people like you have German & Scandinavian mixed within you guys which is something that my heritage & familytree DNA did not pick up. & I said before that a guy from my heritage told me that their DNA data set is not as rich as the competing companies. Not to mention, they get there data from familytree DNA which was also innaccurate for me & you. Overall, I liked this video because it showed that DNA testing cannot be 100% innaccurate & how comparable those 2 companies were
My grand daughter and sister did a DNA test with My Heritage. My sister matched with a person that my grand daughter also matched with. The ethnicity results this person has on my sister's site is significantly different to the ethnicity results this person has on my grand daughter's site. So My Heritage has given this person two different ethnicity results different regions different percentages. My Heritage was contacted about this but gave no explanation !!!!!! Cheryl
Two things to remember. First, is that you are probably matching only through one side of this person's tree. Without knowing what the other half is, that may skew the results. For instance if your sister and your granddaughter are all European heritage it is entirely possible to match with someone who is majority Asian or African with only a minor percentage of European, and your ethnic ancestry results will be much different.
Second, how ethnicity results are calculated in no way relates to how your relationships are calculated. Relationship calculations (at least for 2nd cousin and closer) are very accurate and for up to 6th cousins have a decent degree of accuracy. Ethnicity results are based on reference populations which may or may not actually be representative of that population in the near or distant past.
Did you view the person's family tree to see if you had a common ancester? Is it possible that the father had a child out of wedlock? Happens all the time.
My sister had her DNA tested first and several months later my grand daughter had her DNA tested. The reference population for the person they are both matched with must have changed in the short time between their DNA tests. This could explain why this person has a different ethnicity on my grand daughter's site compared to my sister's site.
Cheryl de Silva my heritage is more accurate but they are fixing a problem right now on the close relations right now. So be careful if you follow your DNA to any distant cousins in your list. Go with gedcom and plug in your info. It's reccomended by genetic genealogist for better results.
I had the same problem with my heritage about where I'm from. It doesn't make sense. Look up the phone number on the site and give them a call. They are pretty friendly. Or you can write this lovely lady CeCe Moore who is also on Facebook as 'CeCe Moore DNA.' But here is her email for questions. yourgeneticgeneologist@gmail.com and she is a professional.
Sometimes the DNA doesn’t match their research data.
It doesn’t say where you come from .only where you dna predominates.a blond from California could predominate in Charlottesville then predominate in east anglia uk then Holland or sa only all correct
It says how your DNA compared to reference populations which included a sampling of individuals who have taken a DNA test and have all of their grandparents (and sometimes great-grandparents) from a specific area.
Im of African descent and most slaves came from Nigeria and modern day Cameroon (my two highest percentages ) and I got some European etc are you saying these results aren't accurate (I know for sure that the Nigerian and Cameroonian are accurate )
I'm saying at a country level I don't know. It may be correct, the percentages may be right, but they may be different. There may be other groups involved in your ancestry that are not within the representative populations.
In the background you spelled LSD wrong.
People also need to understand that most DNA test only tell you ONE side of your DNA. Paternal or Maternal. So its partial. It is not accurate. Just an estimated guess.
Only Y-DNA tests for mtDNA test look at single line (matrilineal or patrilineal). The majority of DNA tests (90%+) that have been taken are autosomal tests which look at all of your DNA and has the ability to match cousins from any ancestor in the last 5-7 generations.
Family History Fanatics I’m talking about the actual percentages. And even then what you are saying is based on algorithms. That’s why two identical twins come back with different ethnic percentages. The side of DNA you are talking about is like the DNA the police use. If it was as accurate as what you are saying then 23 and Me, Ancestry, and all the other DNA ones would come back the same. But they don’t. Not even on identical twins. These DNA test only secure random and small samples of your actual DNA. Less than one percent I think and then the algorithm fills in the rest based off of other participants who have used the programs.
Family History Fanatics They only test specific parts of your Genome. .02 percent of your DNA is used. That is not and never will be accurate. These test are mostly based on algorithms. That’s us why different companies vary so widely. They only tell you one side on top of all that also. Either or on a male and just the maternal side on a female. What you referred to later in your post is called autosomal testing. And still it’s only based on .02 percent of your dna. These test are estimates. Educated guesses. Race is entirely made up. Nearly all humans expect a for few groups in Africa, are mixed. Race is what the world identifies you as based your Phenotype. Race has nothing to do with Genotype. I would just use these test for fun. But I would take the results with a grain of salt.
But they also test autosomal dna which is taken from both parents
I really just want to take this test to put to rest the theory floating around both sides of my family that we have a native in our line. Geneology research I’ve done has shown absolutely no evidence of this, but of course my older family members claim that this is because the family would have originally tried to suppress this. Either way, no one in my family looks native at all(my father, brother, and I had more hair and melanin as children than my other family members did but that’s not super unusual for white people). I really think it’s a made up story formed to try to justify the fact that both sides stole land from the natives.
Unfortunately, taking a DNA test is not going to prove that you don't have native american in your ancestry.
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics The problem is that there is only a small amount of people of native american ancestry in the data set, not many people have tested. Second, there was enormous mixture from 1600s onward, so the native american likely had some percentage of European by the 1800s. Also may have had some African. So depending upon what generation the claim is based upon, the genes may have disappeared as it's too far back.
That's cool but is there anything to see what percentage of races you are?
Yeah, just click on Admixture proportions rather than Chromosome painting
@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Oh okay cool, I got the test and me and my brother are both a little more than half black but we didn't know exactly how much European we had in us lol. Thanks!
Future Trunks Greetings. Just to point out that “race” has nothing to do with DNA as race is not a biological, genetic, or scientific term. It has always been a socio-political term. By the way, all human beings have the exact same alleles (AGCT) and due to environmental pressures give rise to the different frequency of genes, which in turn give rise to the different population groups we see worldwide. Furthermore, the continent of Africa contains the most genetic diversity than all other continents combined. Moreover, Europeans are genetically closest to Africans whereas there are many population groups who may physically resemble some Africans (e.g., some South Pacific Islanders and the Sentinels); however, they are they farthest genetically from Africans. All these DNA tests do is provide estimates of your ancestral makeup. Nothin more and nothing less.