Posted on 10/01/2006 6:01:24 AM PDT by cbkaty
The idea of taking a DNA test first came to me in August, after I read a Time magazine article entitled "Diving into the Gene Pool." The author, Carolina A. Miranda describes herself as an "olive-skinned Latina," but a DNA analysis test uncovered connections to places likesuch as Poland and Mozambique. Intrigued, I decided to order my own analysis kit from DNA Tribes, a company that promised to trace my ancestry back to ancient times.
I didn't expect my experience to be anything like Miranda's. For starters, I was fairly certain of my ethnic heritage: Irish on my mother's side, German and Polish on my father's. This genetic profile was evident both in my family's cultural heritage and my appearance: I have the fair skin and blond hair that is typical of Northern Europeans. I assumed that my DNA analysis would show strong links to Northern Europe, with perhaps a smattering of other European blood on some distant branch of the family tree. But like Miranda, I was in for a surprise.
The first part of the test identified "deep ancestral roots," listing the top 20 places in the world that my ancestors likely came from. I was shocked to see that my strongest genetic roots were in Spain, followed closely by the Himalayan region of India. Other top matches included Turkey, Norway, Romania and Saudi Arabia — places I'd never dreamed of identifying with. And I apparently should not waste time searching for long-lost relatives at Oktoberfest parties this year: Germany graced the bottom of the list, barely beating Northern Italy as a contributor to my genetic profile.
The second part of the test listed 20 places in the modern world where my genetic relatives are likely to be found today. Because of our shared Spanish origins, I have strong ties to the people of present-day Mexico, Costa Rica and Argentina. And while the test suggested that many of my relatives — such as the Swiss and Norwegians — look like me, others bear no resemblance. Outside of the Hispanic world, my closest relatives can be found in northeast India.
My family was just as baffled as I was by the results. There are plenty of possibilities: For example, my mother's ancestors might have been "Black Celts," or Irish citizens of Spanish descent. But there are few clear answers. Without extensive genealogical research or possibly a time machine, most of my genetic connections will remain mysteries.
Although the DNA test couldn't explain how people from across the world came together to create me, a white Christian girl living in the American Midwest, it did prove many of my assumptions false. I took the test thinking that my ancestors farmed potatoes in Ireland and fought in Charlemagne's noble army, and some of them did. But others bowed to Mecca and weathered harsh winters in the Himalayan foothills. Without a DNA test, I never would have known it.
I'm not alone in my ignorance. Geneticists claim that many Americans' genetic profiles are as diverse as mine, and few precisely reflect the cultural identities we embrace.
If this is true, it raises some interesting questions.
First, what do terms likesuch as "race" and "ethnicity" really mean? Do they describe a person's actual genetic makeup, or do they relate more to social affiliations with a particular group? Since I have genetic links to several populations that are considered nonwhite, should I start checking the "multiracial" box on government surveys and job applications? These questions are difficult ones, and every answer is highly debatable.
In any case, DNA tests have proved one thing: People of different ethnic identities often have more in common than they think.
Discovering your true ancestral origins can be confusing and even painful. But it can also be the first step toward greater appreciation for people around the globe.
Herzog is a journalism student at Ohio University in Athens and a graduate of The Woodlands High School.
That seems to be the issue...I say slam the door to perks based on ethnicity & skin color...
I was sent to the back of the bus in the 70s...yet I somehow overcame my birth skin color by hard work, honesty, honor, integrity, and perseverance.
race is too broad a catagorie. Ethnicity is easier to define in its purest sense. It is a lot easier to define ethnically what a Japanese person is within a specified range than to accurately describe race.
And cauliflower.
Yep, the democrats will have to fall back on their old 'one drop' rule...
Terry Schiavo? < /Richter scale sarcasm>
I'm with you. Since there's no "control" done on these analyses, who's to say they're not just making the results up? Or that they didn't substitute some of their own DNA for yours?
It would be interesting to double-blind this test and compare the results. It would be even more interesting to do it using dog DNA. "Well, our results show that you have strong ancestral links to Dalmatia and Ireland, and that you bay at the moon."
The childish prattle happens to be today's reparations and welfare crowd that fervently cherish their "extra points" and place in line based on ethnicity... I will always pray for a colorblind society.
Since you are involved in genetic genealogy, can you tell us what kind of results one would get if they had this type of DNA test? What I mean is, will it pin down your racial roots into catagories, and give you percentages? How reliable do you think it is?
Despite my blond hair and blue eyes, many of my girl friends are convinced that I have to have black ancestry based on other physical attributes. I hate stereotypes so I'm thinking I should get a DNA test or something?
I'm holding out for levitation, myself.
I happened to be born in China to Caucasion American citizens. When the Census Taker came around, I told her I was a Chinese-American and to list me that way.
She become confused and flusterred.
I don't know how she listed me.
I've seen these tests advertised on genealogy sites, and they are intriguing.I've seen them especially for finding american indian links.
Do you have any sense of which companies are reputable ?
I would say that the DNA "results" are highly suspect.
Why couldn't it be accurate?
If you assume 25 year generations, ten generations back you have 1,024 (210) ancestors 250 years ago. If you go back twenty generations, you have 1,048,576 (220) ancestors 500 years ago. At thirty generations you have 1,073,741,824 (230) ancestors 750 years ago. In just 33 generations (825 years), you have more ancestors than there are people living today.
If that will rid us of the boxes....so be it.
It's NONE of the government's DAMNED business.
Unless you're a lurker from DU, in which case you're lucky to have a dozen ancestors from 10 generations back. And a few of those are farm animals.
I agree, it sounds very plausible to me. I think that the National Geographic society is offering a similar service, with the results to be included in a giant genome map that traces the movement of ancient peoples around the world.
I think that checking the multiracial box on the government forms is a great idea. It would throw a giant monkey wrench into affirmative action, all the related programs. Think of the scholarships that would suddenly open up for your kids.
Of course you have ancestors who appear multiple times, but there are still that many places to fill in the geneology chart.
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.