Genealogy Chat

I purchased a DNA kit through Genes and have received my results. My family name is Welsh, yet no trace in the DNA. Strange ?

I've just had an update from Living dna and they have got rid of all them furriners.

There has been a big change around of the regional results.
Some are very odd. Now I'm more Welsh than Cornish but I do know the Cornish bit (6 x gr grandfather).
They also seem to have moved a chunk from the SE to East Anglia - I think this depends where their borders are - off to find a map of the uk the same size!

:-S :-S

Parentage is only one issue with results.

Ancestry has me at:
83% Eng, Wales & NW Europe and 12% Irish/Scot.& 2% Norway

MH, using the same data has me as:
74.3% North & west Europe (which covers the same areas as Ancestry)

With a new test Living Dna have me as 87.4% GB & Ireland

As mgnv has already said no one but the mother can be certain of who the father of a child is (and sometimes not even the mother!) so it's perfectly possible to have DNA from somewhere you are not expecting - even if you have researched the family back 200 years. You can't be sure that the informationon on a birth certificate is correct.

There isn't a lot of point in doing a DNA test if you are not prepared to accept the results.

Kath. x

MY OH has no Scottish dna, despite his mother being descended from 2 Scottish families. He has more Nigerian dna............

My dna is on 3 different sites (not Ancestry), and the closest matches come up on all 3. Plus a lot of the other matches appear too.

You don,t need to put a tree on Ancestry to do a dna test with them.

I loaded my Ancestry dna results onto M H when it was free to do so. Same data different ethnicity results.

I know of a Scot, who, according to MH has No Scottish heritage!

FYI

One of my former co-workers swiched jobs and went to work for the BC Transplant Society.
He btought to my attention a medical ethics paper he'd come across.

The researcher was looking at kidney transplants.
As one would expect, close relatives usually give the best matches, and a number of fathers offered one of their kidneys to their child.
The researcher noticed that in several cases the father and his child were biologically unrelated, unkown to the father.
She contacted transplant centres in Europe & N America, and they all reported this problem at rates of 1% - 5%
The ethical problem was who, if anybody, should be told.

I was told this over 10 y back, and I no longer remember the ref although I did read the paper.

If you are going to spend money on another site,then put your tree on Ancestry and do one with them,,,,,
they tell you where the highest % of your DNA is found,,,,,then scale down, to other part,
They do not put your grandparent or other is ,,,,Welsh,,,,because they wouldn't know.

Thanks for your replies, it certainly seems that no one has the same concerns as me regarding DNA results.
Feeling compelled now to purchase another DNA kit to prove or disprove the first results. Found myself thinking that unexpected results is another trick to get you to buy another kit.

https://dna-explained.com/2017/05/30/myheritage-ethnicity-results

read this acritical and it will explain.

ethnicity is the sole basic of your DNA not who your direct relations are.

The results you have show that *some* Western/East European DNA has been introduced at some point..and maybe just beyond 200 years,,200 year with 100% contrete proof isn't fool proof..

look into others relationships In their tree and ethnicity ..…it may not be be immediate reconised at first.

Most of my family have come from the south of the Lake District, Westmorland or north Lancashire, for many generations, but I have no English DNA at all. Most of mine is western European, with a small chunk of Scottish/Irish/Welsh, as MH don't split those up.
My family tree is on MH too, so they haven't picked that up.

And as I said earlier, you can never be absolutely sure who fathered a child..................

I bought the DNA for myself and then decided if my daughter did it it would give an insight into her father's family as and I knew my ancestors for over 200 years English. They asked for family history before she could activate the DNA, we should have questioned this at the time or just not completed the form. My cousin has done the DNA test with MH with English, Irish results. my husband's aunt has DNA results, English, Irish. The only Balkan (Hungarian) is my husband's mother's step father, who came into her life at 4 years old. She knew her biological father from London and I have traced his family back to early 1800's in England. my tree on MH has info of gt grandfather to my daughter being Hungarian. MH will not answer my question and as I can't find anyone else who has had a similar problem apart from someone who received DNA results from MH with no English ancestry when 80% of ancestors had lived in England since 1803? I was hoping someone on GR would have had a similar experience but it seems not. I can't explain it any other way than the use of my family tree.

Looking at the My Heritage website, and also online My Heritage DNA reviews, there's no suggestion that you need to have a tree on MH at all - just that you have to create a free account to either order a kit , or to activate the kit and see the results if you've been given a kit as a gift.


It does say that if you do have even a few people on a tree it can help to link you to other people and get more out of the results.
"Your Ethnicity Estimate also integrates information from your family tree, if you have one."

But a tree isn't necessary.

Just a possible, but did My heritage perhaps suggest having at least two generations on a tree would be needed to enable any type of match? Rather than that it was needed 'before' the DNA test as such?

A sideways thought on DNA tests in general is that it may be worth checking what the testing organisation does with your information.

I can't understand why any company would ask one to supply 2 generations of their family tree in order to do a dna test. Surely the test is done on the sample provided and nothing else?

Curiosity on my part. However the results were somewhat surprising, OH's even more.

The matches are interesting though. I have matched with some people that I have previously tree matched. But also with some 'cousins' I didn't know, and for both OH and myself, some of the surprising matches have made additions to the family tree

Not being personal, just a general observation on DNA testing, but if one knows for sure one has one's tree back ( and sideways), accurately as far as the paper records show, for 200 years or so ( the generations being covered by many tests) why do a test?

I have one to do, because I am vaguely interested in whether it will fill in some info on the Irish side of my family, if it will for instance, show anything of their possibly French and Italian origins, but back considerably further. I am not sure that it will and expect very little from it.

I presume you mean that you have also researched your daughter's father's tree?
It may be that because you have that Balkan 'link' in your tree that you have jumped to the conclusion that you have.

DNA results can be very strange, both with what is included and what is not. I have a trace of Nigerian DNA match, but have no apparent Nigerians in the last 300 years. OH has even more.
However, despite having done the research, we still cannot be completely sure who has fathered a child. A lady I match with has found that her late father was not her biological father, likewise her grandfather had been adopted. So surprising info can turn up and you have to be prepared for it.

I answer to my question, my heritage have responded through Facebook with a standard statement on their DNA process. I am so convinced that they have used my family tree, there is other possible explanation.