To think these DNA ancestry tests make no sense

[CarolineFields]

So you get back a score of 40% Nigerian. Meaning out of the tiny scrap of DNA tested - less than 0.1% -40% of that matches the average population in Nigeria. But if those Nigerians are tested, they won't come back as 100% Nigerian, so 40% of 0.1% matches people who are likely to be told they are 50% not Nigerian?

And if you are in Iceland when you have that test, you are told you are 40% Nigerian, but someone in Australia can be told they are 80% Icelandic due to being compared to you and you cohort?

I'm with you @ClipClopperDontStopper - the product isn't the genomic test, it's your genomic data.

No @CarolineFields you're wrong.

My "ethnicity report" comes back very firmly to SE Scotland. But none of my strongest matches are in SE Scotland, they are in America, Australia, South Africa. Quite obviously I do not have S African or Australian roots.

Ancestry explains how they calculate the ethnicity reports here: https://www.ancestry.co.uk/c/dna/ancestry-dna-ethnicity-estimate-update - it's all about reference panels, people like me whose ancestors lived in the same place forever and ever and have done a family tree properly, not just clicked and added loads of hints.

Obviously we're all a mix and depending on the level of information they might not be able to determine anythign more precise than West Africa or SE Asia or something.

sorry, but this is just not meaningful in any way. It completely contradicts the proper , academic research done on the genetic communities in the UK for a start, and I don't have any faith in their methodology or ability to process or evaluate their data.

I did mine. It matched up to what I already knew about the past 3 gen of my family.

It also revealed other family links into the equation. They are accurate. They wouldn't be allowed to be sold if otherwise.

Yes, it answered a couple of questions about my paternal grandma LOL

We are meant to understand the % and how they arrive it. It's medical science re DNA. It's what is used through all DNA related work.

My friend was able to find out who her dad was and family through it. She never knew any of them. Her mom never told her much. It all fitted in.

Why are people ethicentry different is because people have always moved around the world hence why it is different.

My own ethnicity came through from Sweden (Nope, I'm not unfortunately related to ABBA, ha)

My saufgrer on it too. It's accurate with hers, too.

It's blinking confusing using the site, though

Daughter re above

Do some googling about the origins of Europeans. You'll find that we are all from the (now) continent of Africa.
We were invaded by Vikings who spread their seed, as did many other invaders, several thousand years later, but we are all African

I did one 8 years ago and it updates every now and again but the changes have always been only slight. It’s just an estimate and for me it seems quite accurate when I look back in my family tree. It also accurately matched all family members who have also taken the test

yes, I am well aware of that, but it isn't anything to do with what I am saying here. I don't need to google anything, I am a genetics expert. And these tests make absolutely no sense to me.

Oh, so sorry, @CarolineFields , you hadn't indicated you were an expert. How silly of me to attempt to contradict you by stating a few facts and arguing against your assertion that Europeans are decended from Vikings. Which apparently, is not what you said (did I mis-read that post?)
Next time, to prevent arguments, why not tell us your areas of expertise at the start.

… Look, no name calling, and I’m just going to go ahead and say your math doesn’t math and leave it at that. There was both a pre and a post Viking period. People already lived in the UK before the Vikings. There was a whole Celtic civilisation that many British people are descended from without any Viking interference. Vikings CAME to the UK to sack abbeys that already existed (they started at Lindisfarne). Out of curiosity, who did you think built Stonehenge… the Vikings?

In fact, the three groups that connect Europeans don’t include Vikings. They precede Vikings by thousands of years: European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, Anatolian Neolithic farmers, and early Bronze Age groups from the Steppe (2507 to 407 years before the Vikings).

But to add the science, only 10% of SCANDINAVIANS (where Vikings originated) have Viking DNA. And only 6% of those in the UK have Viking ancestry. Not even DNA, but ancestry (an even easier task).
https://www.xcode.life/dna-and-ancestry/physical-signs-of-viking-ancestry/

I don’t do my own math. I look things up. I recommend it because we can all make mistakes like this. What makes you less an object of empathy was that you just kept telling others THEY were wrong.

show me where my maths is wrong!

I am telling you I am right, because I know I am, and your post shows you have not understood anything I have said.

I'll try again.

Rounding all numbers to an average. 1000 years ago. Aprox 40 generations, given a generation time of 25 years. So you have 22 hundred billion ancestors at that point. But there is only 50 million people here. And 1 million of them are Vikings. So the average Viking is related to you 22 hundred million times.

I did mine out of curiosity because I started looking into my family history when I retired and got a bit of a shock to discover that a lot of things I had been told about my origins were seemingly not true. All relations in my parents' generation and older are dead now so I will never know how the misinformation arose and whether it was deliberate or not, but I thought I'd get my DNA tested just to see whether it linked to the country I thought my ancestors came from, or the one that my research pointed to. It agreed with my research, linking me to a specific area that matched birth and marriage records I had unearthed so I am as sure as I can be that everything matches and is correct.

@CarolineFields, my degree was in genetics, but I'm afraid I don't recognise the language that you're using to talk about this.

It's really not. The Vikings didn't get everywhere, albeit they were comparatively better travelled than most.

what dont you understand?

(my degree was in genetics too)

I am a genetics expert.

She's being polite. You are talking nonsense, and need to listen to her rather than double down.

My background is complex and my test results were surprisingly accurate.

It worked for me my ancestor's came from Scotland on one parents side Wales on the other and we settled in England it came back Scottish Welsh and mainly English very simple and straightforward

I am not talking nonsense, show me where my maths is wrong.

DNA tests are pointless without drawing up your own family tree.

I am on ancestry and me and my mum did a DNA test because her dad was unknown, other than he was a GI.

the results we got meant i was able to identify who my grandfather was. It involved some of my mums first cousins doing DNA to eliminate them as siblings, so after three years of DNA and document searches we knew who he was.

This also explained my high Scottish/irish heritage.

And the area of my largest DNA linkage of three miles in ireland is totally correct.

Just to give some context to the opening post...

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a60755278/meghan-markle-nigeria-honor-quotes/

DH's ancestry results followed closely his family records to 6 generations- his heritage is very mixed with unusual combinations from several continents. It was bizarre to see the percentages corroborating what he knew.

Just my two cents as someone who doesn't have a degree in genetics

So we are all descended from Viking’s because 40 generations ago we have more ancestors than people alive at the time? So doesn’t the same logic mean that we are descended from everyone alive at that time?

It's not that your maths is "wrong", but your interpretation is poor. I too did not read your initial posts as those of someone with a high level of genetics understanding, sorry.

(I wouldn't call myself an expert, but have degree level maths and some postgrad genetics study, amongst other things).

From what I hear, the "ethnicity" interpretations from these DNA tests are improving but I agree there are substantial flaws (eg if the tests aren't allowed in France!). I have serious concerns about privacy and consent - see username, I was not in contact with a relative who had done a test but that was the link through which I was tracked down.