Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Secret Agent Man

I did this. They were so completely wrong about my ancestry it was nuts...I mean completely wrong based upon what I already knew about my ancestors.


8 posted on 06/17/2017 5:48:37 PM PDT by freepertoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: freepertoo

That sucks. I am sure you were hoping to fill in some areas you did not know about yet.


10 posted on 06/17/2017 5:52:28 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: freepertoo

Maybe you were swapped at birth? ;-P


19 posted on 06/17/2017 6:38:01 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Some people consider government to be a necessary evil, others their personal Ponzi scheme.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: freepertoo
I did this. They were so completely wrong about my ancestry it was nuts...I mean completely wrong based upon what I already knew about my ancestors.

I found the test to be fairly accurate. Based on the DNA results, Ancestry.com showed people that are second, third, etc. cousins, and we were able to verify these relationships via family trees.

Some details, such as ethnic ancestry, were not borne out by the DNA testing. I was always told that we were part American Indian--but the test showed Indian ancestry, not Amerindian.

One of these days, when I have a lot of time on my hands, I will use the DNA test results to try to find out who my great grandfather was. My great grandmother had the morals of an alley cat (as I like to put it), and there is very little documentation of who my great grandfather might have been. I cannot verify the name I have via any public records--other than a 1930 census, there is no record of the person. But if I look at the people who the DNA says are related to me, I might be able to deduce who my great grandfather really was.

The DNA results can also reveal uncomfortable truths about families. Like cases where the father really wasn't the father.

As far as using the DNA tests to try to determine disease risk, that science really is not as clear-cut as people might think. Very few diseases are 100% genetic. The fact that someone has genes that predispose them to a disease does not mean they will get the disease.

24 posted on 06/17/2017 7:00:33 PM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: freepertoo
Can you elaborate ? They mis-read the DNA results ?

The danger in DNA is what I may be going thru now.

I had my DNA done.
I am assuming the DNA results all around for all my family are accurate.
My uncle (my dad's younger brother) had his DNA done.
I should have had the same ancestry markers\areas as my uncle.
I didn't.
He had way more and different markers\areas and he was identified as my first cousin.

This posed questions regarding: me, my uncle, and my uncle's father and maybe my father.

My dad had an older brother.
I am going to try and get one of his sons (my first cousins) to take the test.
They should have the same ancestry markers\areas as my uncle.
If they don't...(uh-oh)then it would seem they should have the same as me. If they don't match either, then...(uh-oh)

I will also see if my sister will take the DNA test.
Her ancestry markers\areas should match mine.

I'm not sure why I need to know as the answers don't matter, but I am super curious

33 posted on 06/17/2017 8:30:04 PM PDT by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson