3 ms·

These tests aren't a measure of ancestors, it's a measure of a person's DNA and where that DNA possibly comes from. Theoretically, they are similar, but since

by socrates1998 8y ago

These tests aren't a measure of ancestors, it's a measure of a person's DNA and where that DNA possibly comes from. Theoretically, they are similar, but since you inherit a random 50% of DNA from both parents, on an individual scale, you might inherit a misleading percent from your ancestors. Let's say 3 of your grandparents are all full-blooded Italian. Like, their families have been in the same village for centuries. And one of your grandparents is from England (and is similarly from an old family in a small village). So, theoretically your DNA results should 75% from that region of Italy and 25% from English region. However, lets say from your mom, the parent who is 50% English and 50% Italian, you only inherit a mix of 15% Italian and 35% English (15% + 35% = 50% mom's DNA). It's random, so this is possible, especially on a small sample of ONE person. And from your Dad, who is 100% Italian, you obviously inherit 50% of your DNA as from that Italian region. Now, you theoretically should be 75% Italian and 25% English, but since it's random, your true DNA reads as only 65% Italian and 35% English. This is why it's mostly bullshit to me. It's impossible to know what percents your DNA randomly passed on to your ancestors. Sure, in our example, the two places where correct, Italy and England, but the percents are way off. And that's honestly WHY we get these tests. We generally know where our families come from, we just have no idea what the percents are. So, the whole point of the service is stupid since they equate DNA with ancestry.

devereaux 8y ago
> We generally know where our families come from No, not everybody. Even percentage that are a bit off are better than nothing at all.
- 0xffff2 8y ago
  Why though? By ancestry, I'm 25% Italian and a whole lot of other stuff. By percentage, I think I'm probably either mostly French or mostly English by ancestry, but that doesn't matter to me at all. What matters to me is that I grew up learning to cook from my Italian grandmother. As a result, in so far as I have any cultural identity other than "American", that identity is Italian, regardless of my genetic origins. It's hard for me to imagine why anyone would feel any significant connection to an ancestry that they needed a DNA test to know they had.
  - devereaux 8y ago
    Some people feel no connection whatsoever towards the culture they supposedly come from. Now it is just the rare person in the family who still feels part of the culture of the birth country (at this culture often gets swallowed by the host country). Some people have not even such luck, and do not know their ancestors at all. Records are incomplete and some people lie. So instead, they try to grasp to what they can, using anything they can. DNA is but a tool there. For me, DNA offers answers to questions about my family history, things that otherwise I would be unable to ever know. I find it psychologically helpful. It helps me relate to ancestors I didn't know I have: who they were, what they were doing. When did they immigrate, what were their hopes, their lives, their challenges. For me it is part of a healing process. I don't think it will turn me extremist. And the data is not perfect. But it just feels nice to be able to relate to others when they tell you they are from xx country, their father from yy, their great grandfather from zz, etc. It lets you joint the common story. Some family have had complex paths, with records lost. Dead ancestors can't tell you much about where they came from. I think it's just sad. I would prefer anyone to have access to the possibility if they want

devereaux 8y ago

> We generally know where our families come from No, not everybody. Even percentage that are a bit off are better than nothing at all.

0xffff2 8y ago
Why though? By ancestry, I'm 25% Italian and a whole lot of other stuff. By percentage, I think I'm probably either mostly French or mostly English by ancestry, but that doesn't matter to me at all. What matters to me is that I grew up learning to cook from my Italian grandmother. As a result, in so far as I have any cultural identity other than "American", that identity is Italian, regardless of my genetic origins. It's hard for me to imagine why anyone would feel any significant connection to an ancestry that they needed a DNA test to know they had.
- devereaux 8y ago
  Some people feel no connection whatsoever towards the culture they supposedly come from. Now it is just the rare person in the family who still feels part of the culture of the birth country (at this culture often gets swallowed by the host country). Some people have not even such luck, and do not know their ancestors at all. Records are incomplete and some people lie. So instead, they try to grasp to what they can, using anything they can. DNA is but a tool there. For me, DNA offers answers to questions about my family history, things that otherwise I would be unable to ever know. I find it psychologically helpful. It helps me relate to ancestors I didn't know I have: who they were, what they were doing. When did they immigrate, what were their hopes, their lives, their challenges. For me it is part of a healing process. I don't think it will turn me extremist. And the data is not perfect. But it just feels nice to be able to relate to others when they tell you they are from xx country, their father from yy, their great grandfather from zz, etc. It lets you joint the common story. Some family have had complex paths, with records lost. Dead ancestors can't tell you much about where they came from. I think it's just sad. I would prefer anyone to have access to the possibility if they want