Posted on 06/17/2017 5:35:52 PM PDT by nickcarraway
One set of my grandparents came from Italy, the other from Sweden. As expected, I’m about 30% Scandinavian, 30% Western European, 30% Southern European. I’ve got some Japanese and Neanderthal. The surprise to me is Native American: “You most likely had a fourth great-grandparent, fifth great-grandparent, sixth great-grandparent, or seventh great (or greater) grandparent who was 100% Native American. This person was likely born between 1680 and 1770.” I may be more Native American than Elizabeth Warren.
So really what does it matter?
Amen! That is all an American needs to know. To heck with anything other. Anything other is dead anyway!
I found the test to be fairly accurate. Based on the DNA results, Ancestry.com showed people that are second, third, etc. cousins, and we were able to verify these relationships via family trees.
Some details, such as ethnic ancestry, were not borne out by the DNA testing. I was always told that we were part American Indian--but the test showed Indian ancestry, not Amerindian.
One of these days, when I have a lot of time on my hands, I will use the DNA test results to try to find out who my great grandfather was. My great grandmother had the morals of an alley cat (as I like to put it), and there is very little documentation of who my great grandfather might have been. I cannot verify the name I have via any public records--other than a 1930 census, there is no record of the person. But if I look at the people who the DNA says are related to me, I might be able to deduce who my great grandfather really was.
The DNA results can also reveal uncomfortable truths about families. Like cases where the father really wasn't the father.
As far as using the DNA tests to try to determine disease risk, that science really is not as clear-cut as people might think. Very few diseases are 100% genetic. The fact that someone has genes that predispose them to a disease does not mean they will get the disease.
Speaking of privacy concerns, there was a recent 48 Hours or similar show about a young woman who was murdered in somewhere like Colorado or Montana. Law enforcement had DNA, but no suspect. LE submitted the DNA to ancestry and got a close (though not identical match). LE was able able to get a subpoena for the guy’s identity. They figured from him they could get the names of his other relatives. The guy turned out to be a young filmmaker from New Orleans who coincidentally had traveled through the victim’s town near the time of the murder. So for a while, this guy was the prime suspect. He was eventually cleared (and became friends with the victim’s mother and made a documentary about the murder). But, anyway, if ancestry or 123andme has your dna, it’s possible for LE to get access to it.
Doesn't matter a heck of a lot. I'm curious about how either my farmer and fishermen Swedish ancestors, or poor Italian ancestors hooked up with a Native American around 1700. On the other hand, if Elizabeth Warren used her dubious Native American status to get a job at Harvard....
Or to some shadow organization tied to the keepers of U.N. Agenda 21, 22 et infinitum.
“The LDS church owns Ancestry.com”
Yep! And lot’s of other businesses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancestry.com
RE:
“Paranoia is epidemic”
Simpleton response.
Go to thedatamap.org to see how 8000 different healthcare entities use your PHI (personal health information
) data without your explicit informed consent.
I will concede that some of what I received from Dublin did check out. This with what I knew about family history. I need to have second check with a different agency. This before the accuracy of what I received is ratified.
Or the Sami is registering as Native American, due to the ancient Asian connection.
I have always thought that there is so much possibility of abuse with DNA information falling into the hands of insurance companies that I would never have DNA analysis done for something as trivial as knowing my genealogy. Unfortunately, my brother wasn’t so cautious, so I guess my DNA profile has been put at risk as well.
The danger in DNA is what I may be going thru now.
I had my DNA done.
I am assuming the DNA results all around for all my family are accurate.
My uncle (my dad's younger brother) had his DNA done.
I should have had the same ancestry markers\areas as my uncle.
I didn't.
He had way more and different markers\areas and he was identified as my first cousin.
This posed questions regarding: me, my uncle, and my uncle's father and maybe my father.
My dad had an older brother.
I am going to try and get one of his sons (my first cousins) to take the test.
They should have the same ancestry markers\areas as my uncle.
If they don't...(uh-oh)then it would seem they should have the same as me. If they don't match either, then...(uh-oh)
I will also see if my sister will take the DNA test.
Her ancestry markers\areas should match mine.
I'm not sure why I need to know as the answers don't matter, but I am super curious
I had this done because I was looking for biological family. As an adopted person, I’m not allowed to have my original birth certificate. I was able to identify my biological father, and verify that the woman I had found the old fashioned way was indeed my mother.
For me, it was well worth whatever risk. Non adopted people don’t understand.
For others, as mentioned, a lot of family skeletons get unearthed (like adopted out children, affairs, etc), or the family ancestry and origins is shown as false.
GATTACA meets Skynet....
What could possibly go wrong?
Is it really paranoia though? DNA is the essence of who we are and some people are just private, even with something as silly as checking a box on ethnicity or revealing their age.
Anyway this reminds me of an instance, years ago I got a kit in the mail where they wanted me to prick my thumb and send back a sample on a slide. Twice they sent it. I didn’t recognize the company but the literature made it sound like it was connected to my health insurance carrier or something. I should have investigated further. When I thought to ask a few co-workers if they’d received any such thing none of them had.
LOL! Nah, I’m a female version of my dad, so not likely. I know for an absolute fact that my mom’s side is as Greek as its possible to get, and my dad’s side proudly British for generations. Those two countries didn’t even show up in the testing. From what I understand, they can’t actually tell your ancestral background from DNA, they juat use algorithyms based on genome tyoes of other submissions. They missed me completely...big waste of moolah.
It stuck in my mind when I saw someone elses DNA readout by Ancestry.com. The only one I have seen, gave their British Isles ancestry as exactly 58%. The same as mine. I look forward to trying to find out if others with my background are given 58% British, 22% West Europe. If these figures are used consistently, then it is a bit deflating.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.