Go Back   Family Tree DNA Forums > Geographic Project Forums > British Isles DNA Project

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12th November 2015, 05:01 AM
Standisher Standisher is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 15
Disappointed

I know I shouldn't be ... but I'm disappointed at my results

British 93%
Scando 5%
Middle Eastern 2%

Not at all what I hoped for. I'm a Celt with a little bit of other stuff in the mix. My family is from Lancashire with a Scottish mother so can't expect anything else? Any ideas on the Middle Eastern? Could this be an indication of Roman origins? .... I hope.

(submitted earlier in wrong section)
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13th November 2015, 05:25 PM
Armando Armando is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Standisher View Post
I know I shouldn't be ... but I'm disappointed at my results

British 93%
Scando 5%
Middle Eastern 2%

Not at all what I hoped for. I'm a Celt with a little bit of other stuff in the mix. My family is from Lancashire with a Scottish mother so can't expect anything else? Any ideas on the Middle Eastern? Could this be an indication of Roman origins? .... I hope.

(submitted earlier in wrong section)
Middle Eastern 2% could be a false positive. It has happened to other people with northern European ancestry. Are there people in your match list with ancestry besides northern Europe? If so, are they mixed? If you don't have any then it is likely a false positive. Have you tested at AncestryDNA or 23andme? They don't have false positives as often as myOrigins.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 14th November 2015, 01:40 PM
Standisher Standisher is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 15
They changed the result

I looked today and the result had changed to:-

69% British and Irish
13% Scandinavian
16% Western and Central Euopean
2% Middle Eastern

I'm a little concerned that the results changed in a few days. When is a result a result and when does it become purely conjectural and a moveable feast? False positives are a worrying idea. I rather trusted that labs work on the numbers rather than rule of thumb. I used FTDNA.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 15th November 2015, 12:09 PM
Armando Armando is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,663
I have read about several people having their FTDNA myOrigins results changing shortly after receiving the results. I have no idea why that happens. If you are concerned you should also get tested elsewhere.

The false positives are due to the AIMs (Ancestry-informative markers) that exist in multiple populations but since the calculator assigned those SNPs to a population that shares ancient ancestry with you then you are given that population. The calculators use comparisons of AIMs to determine which population they belong to and the calculators can't be 100% precise due to the way DNA mutates and recombines and because the reference databases still aren't big enough. Even so FTDNA has more of a problem with this than other companies.

MyOrigins will be getting another update. http://www.ancestorcentral.com/11th-...tic-genealogy/
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16th November 2015, 04:26 AM
Standisher Standisher is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 15
I understand about getting tested elsewhere. I have the feeling this is letting FTDNA 'off the hook'. The question for me is around the trustworthyness of the test. How reliable is FTDNA in the first instance and what is the value of testing with them? I may go elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16th November 2015, 07:54 AM
georgian1950 georgian1950 is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Standisher View Post
I understand about getting tested elsewhere. I have the feeling this is letting FTDNA 'off the hook'. The question for me is around the trustworthyness of the test. How reliable is FTDNA in the first instance and what is the value of testing with them? I may go elsewhere.
The autosomal DNA tests themselves are highly reliable. Any kind of admixture utility is just someone's statistical guess work. There might be something to the 2% Middle East. Rather than saying it is wrong, I'd upload my results to GEDmatch and get busy comparing with others and analyzing the results.

Most people have some lines that are different than they realize. If pre-conceived notions are always right, why test at all?

Jack Wyatt
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 16th November 2015, 08:54 AM
Armando Armando is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgian1950 View Post
The autosomal DNA tests themselves are highly reliable. Any kind of admixture utility is just someone's statistical guess work. There might be something to the 2% Middle East. Rather than saying it is wrong, I'd upload my results to GEDmatch and get busy comparing with others and analyzing the results.

Most people have some lines that are different than they realize. If pre-conceived notions are always right, why test at all?

Jack Wyatt
It's not someone's statistical guesswork. It the programs that are used that are assigning the AIMs to specific populations based on the K and reference populations used. The Middle Eastern could have something to it but a large number of people are getting it at FTDNA that don't get it at other companies and FTDNA has problems with other populations compared to other companies so the track record at FTDNA isn't as good. I haven't found Gedmatch to be anymore helpful with this specific component. Matches that weren't expected would be evidence that it is not misassigned AIMs.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 16th November 2015, 08:56 AM
Armando Armando is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Standisher View Post
I understand about getting tested elsewhere. I have the feeling this is letting FTDNA 'off the hook'. The question for me is around the trustworthyness of the test. How reliable is FTDNA in the first instance and what is the value of testing with them? I may go elsewhere.
The only way they are going to improve it is if people let them know that results that don't make sense are showing up. They don't read this forum much so this isn't how to go about doing that.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 16th November 2015, 10:36 AM
Standisher Standisher is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 15
I appreciate the comments from people who know much more than me and I try to remember that DNA testing isn't just for experts ... it's for people like me. If people are to have confidence in genetic testing then it has to be correct first time. Going to Gedmatch and analysing is beyond my level of knowledge and that isn't what I paid for. My relationship with the company is a contract for a service. Is this an evidence based test verifiable by a third party or is it not?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 16th November 2015, 11:08 AM
georgian1950 georgian1950 is offline
FTDNA Customer
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Standisher View Post
I appreciate the comments from people who know much more than me and I try to remember that DNA testing isn't just for experts ... it's for people like me. If people are to have confidence in genetic testing then it has to be correct first time. Going to Gedmatch and analysing is beyond my level of knowledge and that isn't what I paid for. My relationship with the company is a contract for a service. Is this an evidence based test verifiable by a third party or is it not?
I understand what you are saying. However, say if you go back eight generations, you have 256 possible lines. The chances are that something completely unexpected happened with a few of those lines. There is no way to get an easy answer about your ancestry without someone doing some serious digging. I sure Armando will disagree with me, but I feel confident that there is a reason for two percent Middle East in your "My Origins". I would have to be able to analyze a GEDmatch kit to see what the connection is, if any, but I don't see that Family Finder has been proven wrong yet.

If you know what the results were supposed to be, why bother with testing?

Jack Wyatt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
So Disappointed Renegade6008 Grumbles & Gripes 44 29th May 2016 09:17 AM
Disappointed Sue Collins Grumbles & Gripes 11 19th August 2015 05:31 PM
Disappointed A.H. myOrigins Basics 6 12th March 2014 05:52 PM
Very Disappointed.... Taz85 Batch Calendar 5 15th January 2011 08:32 PM
Disappointed rosebud Family Finder Advanced Topics 49 6th January 2011 09:23 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:11 PM.


Family Tree DNA - World Headquarters

1445 North Loop West, Suite 820
Houston, Texas 77008, USA

Phone: (713) 868-1438 | Fax: (832) 201-7147
Copyright 2001-2010 Genealogy by Genetics, Ltd.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.