The Times wants your views: DNA ethnicity results

[jaybelnz]

Ambly, I saw that series too. Kinda had the opposite effect on me, - celebrities! Although it was interesting, it didn't help me understand the DNA thing and it just didn't impress me!

I felt then as I do when I watch WDYTYA! Same thing every week - different people!

[Geoff]

 I have no interest in taking a DNA Test. What good does it do to get a report informing me I'm 80% Anglo Saxon 10% Viking and 10% Celt. That was the type of report a friend received after spending $500 or $600.
This is not finding your family in my opinion.

Geoff

[softly softly]

Hi, like all things I believe it probably has a part to play. I myself if I had the money would more than likely take the test. I have been able to trace with evidence my family line back to circa 1779 but am now unable to go further. Possible DNA testing of the siblings of my ggggrandfather might help. Other than that my real desire would be for "Who do you think you are" to do a programme on my lineage!!

Regards,

John

[Blue70]

If DNA testing can help to identify the geographic origins of certain lines when paper records are lacking then it could be useful in my research. I'm yet to be convinced that my investment in this research will give me what I want.

On the subject of ethnicity people's perceptions change over time. I have a relation who although English born was described as being of the Irish race in US immigration records. Now considering how many people in Britain have Irish ancestry using that old system a lot of us must be mixed race.


Blue

[Guy Etchells]

In case people think I am suggesting DNA is of no use to genealogy I will clarify.

DNA is a relatively new science; it is based on assumptions and theories which will change as the science develops.

At this point in time there is no, repeat no test which can prove one man is the father of a child.
DNA can however rule out the possibility that a man is the father.

In addition it has be proved that for a number of reasons it is possible for people to have different DNA in their body and testing using cells from one part may produce a different result from cells or blood from another part.

There is also the fact that only part of inherited DNA is passed down through time which means that the DNA of some ancestors could be completely excluded from the DNA of their descendants.

This does not mean that DNA has no place in genealogy but that is must only be used with caution.
One could compare the use of DNA with the use of BMD certificate or Parish Registers, neither of which are infallible as they rely on the accuracy of the information given and recorded.

At present DNA is an expensive additional source of information which if used carefully knowing the limitations may provide additional information to a pedigree.

There may be a time in the future when the science has developed and every newborn has samples of DNA taken  that it is possible to claim it provides a factual pedigree but we are no where near that stage yet.

Cheers
Guy

[deeiluka]

I know my husband would love to do a DNA test to see if he has any Aboriginal ancestors in his bloodline.
Me.........one of my maternal cousins has had a DNA Test which confirmed the majority of our Family History Research.

Cheers
Susie

The only real interest I have in DNA testing at this stage would be to know if my children have any Aboriginal or Romany links, and it would be them who would have to do the tests. I think they will, but my son says he wants to wait until the process and its accuracy is developed even further, as Guy suggests.

Apart from that I prefer to continue researching using traditional methods......though from my experience certificates are not always accurate either! People are not always truthful about the information they give. 


Dee     

[california dreamin]

Hi Dee
As I said before my understanding of the science is limited, however the idea would be with the male chromosome testing -that your father carries the same DNA has his father as his father etc.  However, over time the DNA can mutate therefore you really want the eldest living male relative to test to get a closest match to your ancestors.

I know that DNA is not some great panacea however, I think in time developments in this field will improve and as family history researchers we should all be open to methods that will help us understand the evolving nature of our family over time.

[cocksie]

Fascinating to read 22 pages of opinions.
Now my two bobs worth:

Some time ago I did explore, investigate and read up on the different types of DNA testing that we're available. Unfortunately the output and discussions on the web about what the results were (and meant) did my head in - I couldn't retain the new terms ie "mitochondrial", "halytrope" "y6tr2" (ok I'm starting to make things up).

Then the sceptic in me raised its ugly head:
"Where does this data end up?" - not necessarily problematic today but might be in 10 years time.
"Where does all the monies (fees) go?" - if it went towards some bigger medical DNA research then it would seem less "frivolous" to me.

I came to the conclusion some time ago that I cannot absolutely know for a fact that my 4th g grandfather was the son of my 5th g grandfather, for example. However, the probability is very very high that my 4 th g grandfather is the son of my 5th g grandmother. So, perhaps DNA  testing could confirm (or not) this kind of thing. 

But do I actually care if my 4th g grandfather is not biologically the son of my 5th g grandfather? No, because My personal belief is that I am a product of nature/nurture combinations,  as were my ancestors before me. Genealogy research, for me, leads to a lot (a LOT) of general history reading about the certain time frames and events that, I suspect, informed my ancestors decisions and choices and I find social and political history fascinating. Establishment, via DNA ethnicity testing, that I am genetically 62% English (or Irish, or Danish, or gulumptite) leaves me cold.

...... However if DNA ethnicity testing could pinpoint the townland (preferably including the GPS location) in Ireland where my Irish convict ancestors came from (as well as the names of their parents I would be very, very, very INTERESTED!

Cocksie

[Genetta]

I and my father have both had autosomal tests at 23 and me. Initially I did mine because I'd done some courses in genetics and developed an interest. I didn't even consider it's use in genealogy
I later had my father tested because  this would enable me to see whether people I matched DNA with, matched on my mothers or on my father's side. It narrows the field considerably.
I have lot's of matches on both sides but they are only of any use when the other person also has a family tree; then just occasionally you may be able  join the dots and make a connection . I recently found a match on my mother's x chromosome with a person in Canada. It transpired that we shared the same 5xg grandmother. He hadn't got back that far and I hadn't traced this sibling line across the Atlantic. 

Ethnicity is a different matter though. It's mildly interesting but no more than that.  My ancestry is firmly rooted in the Midlands with all 16 gg grandparents born there (12 of them from Northamptonshire). I think my results are exactly the sort of mix I would expect in central England .   
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/18/genetic-study-30-percent-white-british-dna-german-ancestry
 
50.0% From Mother (she has all of g grandparents from Northamptonshire)
23.9%British & Irish
6.7%French & German
3.1%Scandinavian
16.1% Broadly Northwestern European
0.1% Ashkenazi
0.2% Broadly European

 50.0%From Father  (4g grandparents from NTH, the rest from the West Midlands, a couple of whom might have recent ancestors elsewhere)
 34.7% British & Irish
4.6% French & German
0.4% Scandinavian
9.3% Broadly Northwestern European
0.1% Ashkenazi
0.7% Broadly European
< 0.1% Middle Eastern & North African
< 0.1% Broadly Middle Eastern & North African
0.3%Unassigned