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?

Only 6% of people in UK have viking DNA. https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/16/six-percent-of-uk-population-have-viking-dna-new-study-finds-13283006/

yes, this is all it can show you, where close relatives are - not what their ethnicity is, or where they came from

WE are ALL descended from Vikings - show me where my maths is wrong!

What this article means is that 1 gene rightly or wrongly identified as Viking has been found in 6% of their sample - but Vikings had more than 1 gene!

🤣🤣 thank you! I needed that!

A lot of this pop media science, and misconceptions is deliberately played on by these companies.

Please provide peer-reviewed research links so I can expand my knowledge

None of the sites will tell you if you do or don't have Viking ancestry as they're comparing you to modern day population groups. The adverts where they mention Viking ancestry are just a marketing gimmick.

When you actually do these tests there isn't a Viking category in the results and (marketing gimmicks aside) they don't claim to tell if you are of Viking descent or not.

Yes.

Well it can. Someone needs to have used the same company and then it will give you matches and say how close they are. It is luck.

My cousin was born in what was then euphemistically called, "the naughty girls' home" ie a mother and baby home in England. After giving birth she returned to Ireland and never told anyone she had been pregnant.

My cousin's birth father had only been in Ireland for a matter of months and then went on to work elsewhere in the world.

He had no idea my cousin existed.

You are proving yourself to be quite silly.

Just want to point out, as a fellow adoptee, that heritage is not purely experience. Genetics play a huge role in our lives - from susceptible disease to having some bearing on personality.

Ancestry DNA tests are not highly accurate, but dismissing someone’s need to find out more about themselves isn’t really ok. A lot of people know a lot more about their heritage or family than they think. It’s hard to contextualise experience without any knowledge of your own background - and some, like me have only scatterings of knowledge because social services lost my file. It can be a deep need to understand more about yourself. No, not every adoptee has this need, but many do and it isn’t reassuring to be told to dismiss it. We’re one of the most silenced groups - people are very uncomfortable that the loss of one family is still a loss, even when you have fantastic adopted parents; they’re uncomfortable with both forced removal of a child due to historic issues with mothering out of wedlock and the idea a parent could inflict harm on a child but still be loved by that child. We’re often told “You don’t need to be sad, you’ve got a new family now” when it’s normal to grieve and be sad as well as also loving our adoptive families.

Sorry, don’t want to derail anything, but felt it needed to be said as offhand comments like that can be hurtful for many. Heritage is complex, as is identity.

I haven’t done one of these tests, but considered it. I do know lots of adoptees or adults who experienced care as children and no longer have access to family to ask (or don’t feel able) who have. I think they’re known to be inconsistent in their accuracy at the moment, but when it’s a choice between that or nothing, lots of people choose testing.

Mine came back as 100% Welsh/Irish/Scottish. I.E Celtic.

which is what we are. White celtic, nothing else.

Dunno OP.

Mine was worryingly accurate. It got geographical locations of my family (that we know so far) exactly right. Even the allergies and traits were spot on.

There will always be variations, and nobody will come back as 100% anything. But it's an interesting exercise.

Mine was also accurate based on what I know about my family in the past 200 or so years.

And that's because autosomal DNA testing only looks back that far really. Mine is very accurate in that time period too, I have done a Y DNA test on a male family member in the hope of getting further on my paternal line but there have not been enough other people testing (because it's very expensive) to reach any conclusion.

An off the shelf DNA test cannot and will not ever tell you that you are descended from the Vikings and doesn't say that it will.

Also agree that there is no point in doing an Ancestry or MyHeritage test without drawing up a family tree, but thousands of people do. I have matches with some of them!

The OP is very much giving off the vibes that silly genealogists have no business messing with DNA testing, leave that to the proper scientists and stick to mooching around graveyards and looking at the census returns. Because you have to be a proper scientist with a degree and everything to get any benefit out of commercial DNA testing.

You have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 great grandparents, 16 great great etc - so think how many people have contributed to your 23 pairs of chromosomes over time?

And where did they all come from?

If you looked at both your chromosomes 1 - which of those relatives did it come from?

And if you looked at your chromosome 2 - which of those relatives did it come from?

What does it all mean about "where you come from?" - and that's just your chromosomes.

Your relatives are different - you have so so so many ancestors.

I agree that the number of ancestors people have is incredible.

Obviously we had a lot of "inbreeding" - or closed communities so cousins, and people with a degree of relatedness married. People didn't mix too much.

But yes - if you look at common ancestors, we have a lot in common.

And what does it mean by "where you come from?" - just going back a few generations, I have Irish relatives and relatives from Northern England. But go back further and I may have French relatives. And go back further -those 1000 great * relatives, where did they come from? There are 1000s....

And ultimately, we all come from Africa anyway

Are we all descended from a common female ancestor? | HowStuffWorks

@fuckssaaaaake My dh is adopted. He was able to verify, after using Ancestry, that a name mentioned was indeed his father.
It certainly was beneficial for him.
He found though that there are many more matches on his maternal side than on his paternal side.
He believes it's because his maternal side were poorer and many emigrated and their descendants want to "find their roots".
I hope you find your answers.

Professor Turi King, of the BBC 2 genealogy programme DNA Family Secrets, and involved ( the lead ) in the verification of Richard 111's remains, specialises in genetic genealogy and has been on the Mumsnet genealogy threads before and I believe guided posters in the right direction to gather information.
She may even be posting on this thread. She might read your post.

Think about it.

Vikings were here over 1000 years ago.

You have 1000s of ancestors. How many ancestors do you think you have who were alive during Viking times?

How many of those ancestors have relatives who came from Viking countries?

Do you know all your ancestors from Viking times?

I don't care about the ethnicity suggestions.
I do AncDNA to find cousins & family history.

It intrigues me that other people are so fascinated by ethnic origins.
And because there is a precise number ("0.3%") people think it's true.

My genetic half brother did a test that came back saying he was ~3% Jewish: cue cat among the pigeons gossip in the family. Much commentary about how it can't be from my aunt's side, even though she has Spanish heritage & Jewish people had quite interesting history in Spain...

An interesting article on autosomal testing here

Autosomal DNA Tests: Learn About Your Ancestry and Health (webmd.com)

What the "expert" doesn't appreciate is that lots of people around the world don't know where their roots are 4 or 5 generations back. If you are a white or black person living in the United States, you know that originally your ancestors came from elsewhere. You might suspect they were from Europe, but Europe is a big place to begin your research. You do an Ancestry test and come up with an ethnicity result pointing to Sweden, or Scotland or Italy (or a combination of all 3) and it helps you start untangling your ancestors' journey to the US. Ancestry also splits your ethnicity by maternal/paternal, if you have worked through your matches and sorted them according to what you know of your tree, which can help work out if you're looking for an elusive Jewish/Irish/Greek g grandfather on your mother's side or father's.

The tests weren't really ever designed for those of us whose ancestors are from the same small area of the UK and lived there for generations, never moving around. However, my ancestry ethnicity result is very accurate given what I know about my ancestors. I also know they weren't in a place "for five minutes" as that is why we use things like census returns and BMD records to track families through time.

What does that mean?

Where did those people come from?
Did they have ancestors who then went elsewhere?

Did any of their ancestors come from another country?

@cakeorwine just one disclaimer - Ancestry DNA testing which is by far the most popular in the UK, does not give any information whatsoever about health. They are purely in the genealogy market.

"The tests weren't really ever designed for those of us whose ancestors are from the same small area of the UK and lived there for generations, never moving around. "

But ultimately, if you go back even further, then those ancestors have to come from somewhere....

How far back do you have to go?

Ancestry have started doing traits now including some health related traits.

No, you are misunderstanding. Autosomal DNA testing like the one offered by Ancestry tells you where your ancestors were 200ish years ago. Obviously your ancestors might have come somewhere else originally but the autosomal DNA test doesn't ever claim to tell you that.

Before the early 19th century people didn't move around much because it was super expensive to do so and when they did, it was often a documented phenomenon such as Hugenots or Normans invading England or the Ulster plantations. Genealogists accept that once you get to a period before compulsory civil regustration of BMD, and definitely before 1800ish, things get much more tricky as the records don't exist unless by that point you've got documentation pointing you to a notable figure like a member of the aristocracy who has a written genealogy. My family were not notable, they were all agricultural labourers and although one a few lines i'm back to 1650, on others there is just no information Such is life.

A DNA test is a genealogical tool along with all the other tools we use. It cannot give your entire family tree, or tell you exactly how you are related to distant relatives who have taken the test.