Cherry picking origins?

[Gadget]

An interesting article

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jul/01/home-dna-test-kits-race-ethnicity-dna-ancestry

[Nanna52]

When you come up with 71% southern England there's not much to cherry pick.  I would have thought that with 2 great great grandparents from Wales, Ireland/Scotland/Wales would have been higher than 6%.  9% western and 6% Eastern European.  So I am not as Welsh as I thought I was, but boy am I English.  Wonder when they will include Australian, because that is what I am.

[Gadget]

I think it was a survey of Americans who've tested. Evidence suggests that many who do a dna test do so to find out their ethnicity rather than for genealogical reasons.

[davidft]

In my opinion that article immediately falls down in that it accepts the results of ethnicity DNA testing as accurate, which in my opinion they are not. I have two very different results from two different companies and they both cannot be right but they both can be wrong!

All ethnicity DNA testing is becoming is a tool to re-enforce perceived prejudices with inconvenient findings ignored and to that extent the article has a point..

[Gadget]

I believe it was asking those tested what they thought about it rather than holding a firm view about the accuracy of the ethnicity results - i.e what the users/those tested thought about the ethnicity results rather than what they (the researchers) thought or believed..

[sugarfizzle]

If DNA tests are not accurate at this stage to determine true ethnicity, it is hardly surprising perhaps that those who find something unfavorable will ignore it, whilst those who find something favorable will embrace it.  Human nature perhaps. The article gives me the impression, maybe I'm wrong, that the researchers thought the results were reasonably accurate, or they wouldn't have reseached it in the first place.

If my ethnicity results showed that I was (for example 12%) Jewish/Celtic/Native American, I would ignore it, until/if/when I found something to back it up in my paper trail. Not because I reject the possibility of me being (12%) Jewish /Celtic/Native American (or the fact that I have ancestors from Great Britain and Ireland as far back as I have gone in my research) but because I don't consider the results to be reliable. If I wasn't interested in genealogy​, only in the ethnicity results, I would probably still reject it.

IF (a mighty big if) ethnicity results become more accurate​ in the future, then the research might be more valid.

An interesting article, nevertheless.

Regards Margaret

[DavidG02]

Interesting discussion and I found this relevant to my my mums experience

always believed herself to be Native American. After the test suggested she had no Native American ancestry, she dismissed it as inaccurate and continued to identify as Native American anyway.

In my mums case she has always accepted there is Australian Aboriginal blood in her family , to explain my brothers colouring. After I had done my test and said there was no trace she said its rubbish

After convincing her to take a test her results also came back as nil AA . She is still vehement that there is and the test is wrong. (there may be deeper secrets still to be revealed)

I also accept the possibility the company did not test correctly or the sample size is not big enough for them to register it as anything but ' trace' .

[sugarfizzle]

Has your brother had his DNA tested? 

Regards Margaret

[DavidG02]

Not yet. Not sure he is interested.

I did it for the genealogy not to find any skeletons