MyOrigins 2.0 is much better.

[Daragon36]

I've seen a lot of complaints about the MyOrigins results being "Wrong" or "Inaccurate". I have to disagree with a lot of you. Some of you don't seem to understand the nature of human migrations, changing borders and the lack of nations in the past. Your DNA was never tied to the newly conceived notion of "Nation States". It was always tribal and always on the move. I have my issues with FTDNA, but I will tell you that the new MyOrigins 2.0 does to me, seem to be more accurate than 1.0. Here is a comparison of MyOrigins 2.0 to 1.0 and to Ancestry 2.0 and 1.0.

MyOrigins 2.0
European----------------- 92%
*British Isles----------- 37%
*Scandinavia------------- 17%
*East Europe------------- 16%
*West and Central Europe- 16%
*Iberia------------------ 3%
*Southeast Europe-------- 3%

Middle Eastern----------- 6%
*Asia Minor-------------- 6%

Trace Results
*North Africa------------ <1%
*East Central Africa----- <1%

MyOrigins 1.0
European---------------- 100%
*British Isles----------- 46%
*Southern Europe--------- 23%
*Scandinavia------------- 20%
*Eastern Europe---------- 11%

Ancestry 2.0(Chip)
European------------------ 98%
*Europe West-------------- 54%
*Ireland------------------ 18%
*Great Britain------------ 13%
*Europe East-------------- 5%
*Scandinavia-------------- 3%
*Italy/Greece------------- 2%
*Finland/Northwest Russia- 2%
*Iberian Peninsula-------- 1%

Other Trace Regions
*Asia South--------------- <1%
*Africa North------------- <1%

Ancestry 1.0(Chip)
European------------------ 98%
*Europe West-------------- 56%
*Ireland------------------ 19%
*Great Britain------------ 9%
*Europe East-------------- 6%
*Scandinavia-------------- 3%
*Italy/Greece------------- 2%
*Finland/Northwest Russia- 2%
*Iberian Peninsula-------- <1%

Other Trace Regions
*Asia South--------------- 1%
*Africa North------------- <1%

[Armando]

So, we aren't saying that there is an incorrect result for everyone. We are saying that the results are too far off for too many people. Even if 70% of the people have a result that makes sense that means there are about 30% of the customers with results that make no sense. You are using anecdotal data to come to a conclusion about an algorithm and a private reference dataset is being used on thousands of people. The reason that a lot of us are complaining about the program isn't because there aren't those of us with kits whose results make sense. It is because some of us have kits from family groups whose kits make absolutely no sense whatsoever. It is statistically impossible for a child to have 0% DNA of a specific ethnicity when both parents have it at more than 30% each. The example I am providing mirrors exactly what a lot of other people are complaining about so I am not just using anecdotal data. There are scores of other people who have test results from family groups and the results come out wildly different. They come out so different that using the excuse of siblings inheriting different autosomal data from each parent does not explain it and neither does changing borders because a child can't have what neither parent has and the child can't miss what the parents have in abundance.

Additionally, 23andme agrees with the genealogy more often than myOrigins 1.0 or myOrigins 2.0. Ancestry isn't as good as 23andme.

[JerryS.]

yep, some people had 15% Mediterranean with 1.0 now they have 0% even with a paper trail of immigration records.... some had 50% British and 5% Scandinavian with 1.0, now they have 6% British and 36% Scandinavian with no known Scandinavian ancestors.

the question is was the 1.0 version wrong, or is the new 2.0version wrong? slight changes is one thing, however large changes show a problem...

[georgian1950]

Originally Posted by JerryS.

the question is was the 1.0 version wrong, or is the new 2.0version wrong? slight changes is one thing, however large changes show a problem...

Simple - both are wrong.

Jack

[Daragon36]

Armando,
That could be, but a lot of people complaining do seem to have a lack of understanding when it comes to such things. Never tried 23andMe, and from everything I've read about them makes me never want to. I can't really complain about Ancestry, only thing is they are missing some useful tools like Chromosome browsers and such. I do currently have a test that is processing over at Living DNA.
The thing is, Ethnicity tests are more of a novelty than they are for accuracy. No one should have the expectation of ethnicity results being accurate. There is an excellent post on DNA Explained about it.

[EraliaRose]

Maybe for you it is accurate; but for me it is not and I disagree with your post.

All the other tests are pretty consistent and similar and makes sense the way they explain things, this one does not. I get a lot of different traces no other tests give me and doesn't give me certain results I should get. I also lowered my European a bit and inflated some results a lot.

The majority of my records point to England, Spain and Native American. Yet here unlike all the other tests and records, I got no Iberian; but Southeast Europe for some reason. Gotten more Scandinavian and a lot lot of Europe West while my Great Britain dropped a lot. Doesn't match records or other tests.

[Scott Ritchie]

Originally Posted by EraliaRose

Maybe for you it is accurate; but for me it is not and I disagree with your post.

All the other tests are pretty consistent and similar and makes sense the way they explain things, this one does not. I get a lot of different traces no other tests give me and doesn't give me certain results I should get. I also lowered my European a bit and inflated some results a lot.

The majority of my records point to England, Spain and Native American. Yet here unlike all the other tests and records, I got no Iberian; but Southeast Europe for some reason. Gotten more Scandinavian and a lot lot of Europe West while my Great Britain dropped a lot. Doesn't match records or other tests.

I totally agree, I received no Iberian and I have ancestry directly from there.
I could not get FT to answer the question as to why it disappeared. My closest
match on family finder has a last name that is Spanish, and one of the sir names from my family on my fathers side? But still received 0% Iberian.

[MichaelWilbanks]

Your results barely changed between My Origins 1 and My Origins 2. I went from no Scandinavian to 55% Scandinavian.

[Brennus]

Do they have any plans to fix or address these issues?

[John McCoy]

From experience, I don't expect any "fixes", but at some point in the future, another version of MyOrigins will be rolled out and we will all be amazed that the results are, again, different from all previous versions. In some ways this is all groping around in the dark, because there doesn't seem to be an independent way to test the results.