Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm very much with you on that. I remember that you used to be able to access the SS Death Index which had very important information on it that should be free public information. But at a certain point it was bought up by Ancestry, and you couldn't access it anymore unless you bought a membership. That really burned me up. And it's that way with just about anything anymore, grrrr.
I think people complained about it being a privacy issue because it has a lot of details of people who only very recently died. Particularly when it included actually SS numbers on it, people thought it was a huge privacy issue so they made it pay-only to make it more private, less available to everyone.
I strongly suspect that Ancestry, 23-n-me, Nat Geo project, etc. etc. inflate the percentage of non-White DNA in Whites in order to make us think that we're more "diverse" than we really are.
No, they don't. I manage 5 kits across multiple companies and several of them come back with 100% European. Even when small amounts of non-European pop up, the companies always explain that this could just be noise, which is like a false positive, and doesn't necessarily mean you have any recent ancestry in that area (recent meaning in the last roughly 1,000 years, give or take a few hundred or thousand). If they wanted people to believe they weren't 100% white, why tell them that it's probably just noise (and therefore they can largely dismiss it)?
Quote:
They might take your DNA when you pay for a kit, they might run your DNA, but can they alter the results before giving you the data? It seems to me like it's highly possible and you're not the only person who's post I've read or talked to in person who has received results wildly different than what they know their family origins to be.
They can't alter your actual raw DNA data, because it would influence the DNA matches too much. The ethnicity reports are interpretations of that raw DNA data, but all companies make their methodology available in detail, and furthermore, since you can take raw DNA data from one company and upload it to other companies, it means they'd all have to be in on the same big conspiracy, which is a little tinfoil hat sounding to me.
I found the exact opposite to be true. My old 23andme and old Ancestry were so similar, I thought they were accurate. Both have had recent upgrades and while 23andme became more precise with African results, Ancestry broadened theirs. I went from 21 percent Nigerian to 2 percent. While 23andme has me at 31 percent Nigerian. My Cameroon/Congo/Southeast Bantu is now one big blob, which I find upsetting. I could go on. And my brothers' and my result are so...off.
Stick with 23andme.
I was also not happy with Ancestry's gigantic Cameroon/Congo/Southeast Bantu blob. That encompasses
West, Central, and South Africa. That made up a sizable percentage of my African DNA. 23andMe and Family Tree DNA have me as being mostly Yoruba from around the area that is now Nigeria. Ancestry has me at 5% Nigerian. Ancestry brags about having more regions, but their groupings are awful.
Family Tree DNA was originally all over the place. After an update, the DNA results were almost exactly the same as 23andMe's. I suspect that 23andMe is the most accurate. Ancestry's DNA service is relatively new. If my results change to be more like 23andMe's, then that will confirm my suspicions.
I don't trust My Heritage. It said that most of my European ancestry is Italian. What are the chances that southern black people have mostly white ancestors from Italy? The one consistent thing between the three DNA tests I took is that most of my white ancestry is British.
Ancestry does have an explanation for DNA results differing among family members. For example, they say that just because Native American didn't show up in your DNA does not mean that the stories of your family having Native American ancestry aren't true (they usually aren't true). It's just that you didn't inherit any Native American DNA. You can choose to believe this or not.
I was also not happy with Ancestry's gigantic Cameroon/Congo/Southeast Bantu blob. That encompasses
West, Central, and South Africa. That made up a sizable percentage of my African DNA. 23andMe and Family Tree DNA have me as being mostly Yoruba from around the area that is now Nigeria. Ancestry has me at 5% Nigerian. Ancestry brags about having more regions, but their groupings are awful.
Family Tree DNA was originally all over the place. After an update, the DNA results were almost exactly the same as 23andMe's. I suspect that 23andMe is the most accurate. Ancestry's DNA service is relatively new. If my results change to be more like 23andMe's, then that will confirm my suspicions.
I don't trust My Heritage. It said that most of my European ancestry is Italian. What are the chances that southern black people have mostly white ancestors from Italy? The one consistent thing between the three DNA tests I took is that most of my white ancestry is British.
Ancestry does have an explanation for DNA results differing among family members. For example, they say that just because Native American didn't show up in your DNA does not mean that the stories of your family having Native American ancestry aren't true (they usually aren't true). It's just that you didn't inherit any Native American DNA. You can choose to believe this or not.
If you really want to get a more in-depth breakdown of your African ancestry, you should think about getting the African Ancestry DNA. I do not work for them (I know it sounds like it ), but they are going to have a larger sample size. You should read their FAQs. They address a lot of concerns in that section. They will also analyze your results from another company. One of the doctors did an interview on the Breakfast Club, and it was very informative: https://youtu.be/y-9bEW-J1rQ
People will knock it because it's a black company, but based on their site and the interview, I trust their knowledge. I did a quick search on one of the tribe's mentioned in the interview, and the tribe's background checked out with other information regarding black history in the South.
If you really want to get a more in-depth breakdown of your African ancestry, you should think about getting the African Ancestry DNA. I do not work for them (I know it sounds like it ), but they are going to have a larger sample size. You should read their FAQs. They address a lot of concerns in that section. They will also analyze your results from another company. One of the doctors did an interview on the Breakfast Club, and it was very informative: https://youtu.be/y-9bEW-J1rQ
People will knock it because it's a black company, but based on their site and the interview, I trust their knowledge. I did a quick search on one of the tribe's mentioned in the interview, and the tribe's background checked out with other information regarding black history in the South.
Interesting, but I likely won't do this. They only do maternal and paternal lines, and each test is $299. I don't really know any men from my father's side. Even if I could get one of them to take the test, there will still be huge gaps on both sides because the tests can only pick up one direct line. For example, I would have to test a male on my mother's side just to get the paternal line that comes from my maternal grandfather.
FYI, African Ancestry only uses Y-DNA and mtDNA, not autosomal DNA. So you will not get a percentage admixture, and it does not include your full ancestry, only the direct paternal path (father's, father's, father, etc), and/or direct maternal path (mother's, mother's, mother, etc), and if you're female, it will only include mtDNA since women don't have Y-DNA. It is not unusual for male African Americans to actually have a European Y haplogroup (due to slavery, it's not unheard of for the direct paternal path to lead back to a white slave owner), so in those cases, I'm not even sure how much they'd be able to tell you about that.
So for example, you're not going to get 20% Nigerian, 30% Ghana, 10% Mali, etc - they'll just tell you your Y path comes from Nigeria, and your mt path comes from Ghana. That's it. And if you're female you won't even get the Y origins, just the mtDNA.
I am not saying don't take it, or that it's unreliable - just that it's important to understand what it is and therefore what to expect from it. It's a completely different type of DNA test than what companies like AncestryDNA offer so they are not comparable. It is more comparable to FTDNA's Y-DNA and mtDNA tests, and it may very well be better for Africans than FTDNA's Y and mtDNA tests, but it is NOT a replacement for an autosomal DNA test like AncestryDNA.
Yes, they say on the website they will not analyze admixture. I'm guessing it's because the results are not as reliable...but I am not a scientist so someone please correct me if I'm wrong. Seriously! I want to know what I'm talking about. Also, wouldn't it be better to get direct line? For accuracy's sake? The doctor explained that for African-Americans, going through the mother would actually be better (if your purposw is knowing your African ancestry) because the mother is likely to be more "African" due to miscegenation. As an aside, I think it's better for blacks to go through the mother because of cultural reasons. We live in a patriarchal society, but many African societies were matriarchal. Whether you want to blame broken homes or what...many black households are still headed by women. So what looks like pathology can still actually be cultural and embedded in our DNA. Please note that I am NOT trying to normalize broken families. But even inside the family, the mother is often "in charge" of the home. We can take this back to the basics. The father supplies the seed; the mother carries (houses) the fruit in her womb.
I was also not happy with Ancestry's gigantic Cameroon/Congo/Southeast Bantu blob. That encompasses
West, Central, and South Africa. That made up a sizable percentage of my African DNA. 23andMe and Family Tree DNA have me as being mostly Yoruba from around the area that is now Nigeria. Ancestry has me at 5% Nigerian. Ancestry brags about having more regions, but their groupings are awful.
Family Tree DNA was originally all over the place. After an update, the DNA results were almost exactly the same as 23andMe's. I suspect that 23andMe is the most accurate. Ancestry's DNA service is relatively new. If my results change to be more like 23andMe's, then that will confirm my suspicions.
I don't trust My Heritage. It said that most of my European ancestry is Italian. What are the chances that southern black people have mostly white ancestors from Italy? The one consistent thing between the three DNA tests I took is that most of my white ancestry is British.
Ancestry does have an explanation for DNA results differing among family members. For example, they say that just because Native American didn't show up in your DNA does not mean that the stories of your family having Native American ancestry aren't true (they usually aren't true). It's just that you didn't inherit any Native American DNA. You can choose to believe this or not.
Are you Creole?
I am part Creole (1/4), and black people with Creole ancestry can get French, Iberian (Spanish/Portuguese) as well as Italian ancestry. My 23andme showed a small amount of all three.
Ancestry had me originally as 14 percent British, 6 percent Iberian and small amts of Eurowest, Scandinavian and Irish. Now I am at 9 percent French, 7 percent Irish, 2 percent Spanish, 1 percent Portuguese, 2 percent English, 1 percent German and 2 percent Norway. But I have one brother who shows up as 22 percent English. It is all over the place.
The massive region that Ancestry has created is crazy to me. They should have split it up either by tribes or by more regions and got even more specific (Congo vs. Southeast Africa like Kenya and Mozambique vs Nigeria vs Benin/Togo etc) since they got more samples.
I am convinced that black Americans will never be able to pinpoint our roots...the technology isn't there and the DNA is too complex.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
), but they are going to have a larger sample size. You should read their FAQs. They address a lot of concerns in that section. They will also analyze your results from another company. One of the doctors did an interview on the Breakfast Club, and it was very informative: 
