DNA testing

[quiffdo]

Hello all

Has anybody on here ever taken a DNA test to see where their ancestry lies?

I was looking at the Wilson DNA Genealogy site and it looked pretty good.
Can somebody please offer any opinions please?

Danny

[Olde Crone Holden]

Danny

How will it help your family history research to know that ONE, just ONE, of your millions of ancestors came from East Africa, or Mongolia, or India or wherever, ten thousand years ago?

WHICH? magazine did a survey of these geographical DNA tests - one person's DNA tested by five different companies - 5 different geographical origins!

WHICH? magazine concluded that geographical DNA testing was about as useful as Astrology and just about as accurate!

Save your money to buy paper proofs of YOUR personal family tree, which should include ALL of your relatives, not just your "Alpha male" ancestors.

OC

[quiffdo]

Hiya OC

I did wonder if the test would show different results for each separate company that do these tests.

It was either pay for a test or use the money to get a researcher to do a lookup for me in a records office in Devon.

Thankyou for the input OC, guess I know which one is worth spending my money on

Danny

[zoejg]

I'm not so sure it's useless. DNA testing might be the ONLY way I can find out who my great grandfather was - if I can get a male descendant of the 'suspect' to test his Y chromosone against my father's Y chromosone, and they match, then that would be proof that cannot be found on any certificate. It's a very delicate area though!

[garstonite]

I had a 67 marker DNA test 2 years ago....I now have 780 =12 marker matches/ 358 =25 marker matches / 5 =37 marker matches and 3 =67 marker matches with a distance of 5 ....OC is correct.....I don`t have any 67 exact markers ....in fact nowhere near......my Haplo is 1a......and so is about 600 million other europeans....it`s farcical....and oh by the way ...a 67 marker cost £450 2 years ago....so probably £500 now...a complete waste of money....allan

[Guy]

I'm not so sure it's useless. DNA testing might be the ONLY way I can find out who my great grandfather was - if I can get a male descendant of the 'suspect' to test his Y chromosone against my father's Y chromosone, and they match, then that would be proof that cannot be found on any certificate. It's a very delicate area though!

That would not provide proof.
It could prove that the suspect was not your great grandfather but no DNA test in the world can prove who your great grandfather was.
Cheers
Guy

[zoejg]

I would prove that male A was a relative of male B, though. Along with the family rumours of who the father of my grandfather was, it would be a pretty good indicator.

[Merry Monty Montgomery]

That would not provide proof.
It could prove that the suspect was not your great grandfather but no DNA test in the world can prove who your great grandfather was.
Cheers
Guy

Your right that it's not 100% proof, but it could provide at least as much "proof" as the name written on a certificate and we all seem to be happy with that the majority of the time!

[Olde Crone Holden]

We are talking about two different types of DNA tests here.

Danny is interested in the geographical DNA testing, which tells you (supposedly) where your "deep ancestry" comes from in the world.

Zoejg is talking about paternity DNA testing which is a completely different thing. Although Guy is right - you will NEVER get a 100% YES from a reputable company, you can often get a 100% NO. If you get a 99% YES result, and you already had the culprit in mind, then you have found the right man, or his very close relative. If you are trying to distinguish between those two very close male relatives, that can be done too, although it is always an expensive test.

Paternity DNA tests are scientifically valid. Geographical DNA testing is not scientifically valid because the "experts" cannot agree on which DNA comes from where in the world, apart from anything else.

OC