ABDNA Test Results...

[Yaffa]

?????????????

DKF, are you Faux?

http://www.davidkfaux.org/

Why tell people who are sensitive about ABDNA & DNATribes that those tests are wrong and at the same time 'promote' another test? Are the people on this forum "a bird in the hand"?

http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2003-06/1055275962

I never heard of Dr. Faux/Fake before. I will not test with ethnoancestry.

Attached some links for you

[Yaffa]

EthnoAncestry

Why tell people who are sensitive about ABDNA & DNATribes that those tests are wrong and at the same time 'promote' another test? Are the people on this forum "a bird in the hand"?

[/QUOTE]

Ethnoancestry products http://www.ethnoancestry.com/products.htm Mentions a Total Genomic Ancestry Test in the works for both men and women but doesn't seem to be available yet

[burto]

I have not taken the test but they do say that Asian and NA markers match

Hi,
I their manual they do, but they themselves say not. I'm putting the whole thing on hold for the moment I think-many people have known ancestry to compare against or at least names and dates and locations to work back with, but not me.
Mum's maternal side is English back to the 1500's but who knows about her father's US side? I do wonder if it's worth me doing the 2.5 test to see if I get an EA score, but even if I do, what will it tell me? That I have some kind of Asian ancestry that's all.
Deep down I've always felt it's NA, which I guess is why I've tried desperately to prove it is, but it's got me nowhere, so maybe sometimes it's best to go with gut instinct rather than science, but either way I will never have Tribal recognition so for me I have to wonder why I'm doing it.
Maybe when Ethnoancestry comes out I will have a go but for now I don't see the point of speculating as it's getting me nowhere.

[Yaffa]

Na/asian

Hi,
I their manual they do, but they themselves say not. I'm putting the whole thing on hold for the moment I think-many people have known ancestry to compare against or at least names and dates and locations to work back with, but not me.
Mum's maternal side is English back to the 1500's but who knows about her father's US side? I do wonder if it's worth me doing the 2.5 test to see if I get an EA score, but even if I do, what will it tell me? That I have some kind of Asian ancestry that's all.
Deep down I've always felt it's NA, which I guess is why I've tried desperately to prove it is, but it's got me nowhere, so maybe sometimes it's best to go with gut instinct rather than science, but either way I will never have Tribal recognition so for me I have to wonder why I'm doing it.
Maybe when Ethnoancestry comes out I will have a go but for now I don't see the point of speculating as it's getting me nowhere.

Berto,

In reading some of your posts I know you were trying to prove mum's Unk father. I do see the X test more promising for your mum in the future. Right now markers 10074,10075 and 10079 are a non recombining haploblock. The X test purpose right now is just for siblingship.Especally more accurate for proving paternity because the male X does not recombine when passed down to his female offspring. 2 sisters from the same father would match exact on X chromosome. I spoke with Dr. Krahn and he is working on developing more haploblocks for the X test. The more haploblocks they find for the X chromosome testing the better in figuring out closer relationships on X other than siblingship. One day mum might be able to find her kin on her father's side through this testing even though it may not be a sibling. Also the more people that test for X, in the future the haploblocks may be able to link to certian heritage or certain parts of the world just like haplogroups for MT and Y DNA

Jodi

[DKF]

Why tell people who are sensitive about ABDNA & DNATribes that those tests are wrong and at the same time 'promote' another test? Are the people on this forum "a bird in the hand"?

Sorry, where I come from the "bird in the hand" in this context means that you would be well advised not to wait for a test that "may" be coming down the pike, but should explore all other options presently available - such as I have done.

BTW, why should people be "sensitive" about a test score if that test score has questionable validity. Is not the idea to delve into things in order to ferret out the truth? The point of the article in Science is that identity should not come from flawed DNA tests (or any genetic testing for that matter), but from the self - identification one has via family and culture. I absolutely don't buy into this view holus bolus, but they do have a point.

I am in contact with one of the authors of the Science article, and said that I have tried to get the word out about the need for caution since there are a lot of non - scientists taking these tests and some may be inclined to read too much into a number. Judging by personal messages I have received it seems some are glad that I have offered a note of sober consideration in relation to measures that is almost universally suspect by those of us who have pulled the tests apart to see how they work.

It gets to a point when some will simply not wish to hear anything further that may alter their perception since the opinion they hold at present has become deeply embedded in their psyche. Hence I will bow out of further discussion of the topic and let others get on with comparing notes.

I don't know how close EthnoAncestry is in its goal toward getting a BGA test to market, but they have held out this teaser for some time now so I am not holding my breath. Hence my statement that people should select from those tests presently on the market. There is no guarantee that a "proposed" test will ever see the light of day. Lets face it, the DNA Tribes Test and the ABDNA test and any others that may come along are a lot of good recreational fun for dyed in the wool genetic genealogists. I am a sucker for all of them since I am a hopeless test junkie.

Good luck with your genealogical and BGA searches,

DKF.

[Yaffa]

Bird in Hand

Sorry, where I come from the "bird in the hand" in this context means that you would be well advised not to wait for a test that "may" be coming down the pike, but should explore all other options presently available - such as I have done.

DKF,

About above, I didnt question what you wrote, Rainbow did!

Jodi

[Yaffa]

Testing

Sorry, where I come from the "bird in the hand" in this context means that you would be well advised not to wait for a test that "may" be coming down the pike, but should explore all other options presently available - such as I have done.

BTW, why should people be "sensitive" about a test score if that test score has questionable validity. Is not the idea to delve into things in order to ferret out the truth? The point of the article in Science is that identity should not come from flawed DNA tests (or any genetic testing for that matter), but from the self - identification one has via family and culture. I absolutely don't buy into this view holus bolus, but they do have a point.

I am in contact with one of the authors of the Science article, and said that I have tried to get the word out about the need for caution since there are a lot of non - scientists taking these tests and some may be inclined to read too much into a number. Judging by personal messages I have received it seems some are glad that I have offered a note of sober consideration in relation to measures that is almost universally suspect by those of us who have pulled the tests apart to see how they work.

It gets to a point when some will simply not wish to hear anything further that may alter their perception since the opinion they hold at present has become deeply embedded in their psyche. Hence I will bow out of further discussion of the topic and let others get on with comparing notes.

I don't know how close EthnoAncestry is in its goal toward getting a BGA test to market, but they have held out this teaser for some time now so I am not holding my breath. Hence my statement that people should select from those tests presently on the market. There is no guarantee that a "proposed" test will ever see the light of day. Lets face it, the DNA Tribes Test and the ABDNA test and any others that may come along are a lot of good recreational fun for dyed in the wool genetic genealogists. I am a sucker for all of them since I am a hopeless test junkie.

Good luck with your genealogical and BGA searches,

DKF.

DKF,

In my opinion the test for getting as many " In Betweens" as possible is the X-STR test. The more haploblocks developed for this test in the future the better. Combining the Y and MT with the X-STR testing will one day in the future help built a worldwide DNA family tree.

Jodi

[DKF]

DKF,

In my opinion the test for getting as many " In Betweens" as possible is the X-STR test. The more haploblocks developed for this test in the future the better. Combining the Y and MT with the X-STR testing will one day in the future help built a worldwide DNA family tree.

Jodi

Jodi:

The present reality is that X chromosome testing has simply not "caught on" yet. For whatever reason it has not captivated me so I have yet to take a single test of this nature - yet as a male, all of the X markers would come from my mother so it would doubtless be informative. Never have I given it any serious thought. I will have to profess my ignorance here - what could this tell anyone who does not have half siblings or really any family mysteries? I will have to look and see if there is an "X thread" here, I think there is one on www.dna-forums.org. Perhaps it is the new frontier of DNA testing. Thanks for tweaking my interest.

DKF.

[Yaffa]

X_str

Jodi:

The present reality is that X chromosome testing has simply not "caught on" yet. For whatever reason it has not captivated me so I have yet to take a single test of this nature - yet as a male, all of the X markers would come from my mother so it would doubtless be informative. Never have I given it any serious thought. I will have to profess my ignorance here - what could this tell anyone who does not have half siblings or really any family mysteries? I will have to look and see if there is an "X thread" here, I think there is one on www.dna-forums.org. Perhaps it is the new frontier of DNA testing. Thanks for tweaking my interest.

DKF.

DKF,

Right now the test only proves siblingship. It has been proven that markers 10074,10075, and 10079 are a haploblock and do not recombine. It is in the works to develope more haploblocks. The more haploblocks discovered in the X chromosome the better. As the X database gets bigger, these haploblocks may one day be able to be haplogroups like Y and MT. You only get one Haplogroup with Y and MT but the X has potential for many Haplogroups provided they find more haploblocks that don't recombine. This may take a while but I see it as being the future of DNA testing along with Y and MT.

I match someone in DNA fingerprint on markers 10074,10075 and 10079. Dr Krahn has informed me that this person would definitely be related to me somewhere on my family tree but at this point I can't tell you if it may be a close or far relation. Have not been able to get in touch with my match.

I did post a link about X and Speaking to Dr Krahn about the test

http://www.familytreedna.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4357&highlight=krahn

Jodi

[burto]

Berto,

In reading some of your posts I know you were trying to prove mum's Unk father. I do see the X test more promising for your mum in the future.One day mum might be able to find her kin on her father's side through this testing even though it may not be a sibling. Also the more people that test for X, in the future the haploblocks may be able to link to certian heritage or certain parts of the world just like haplogroups for MT and Y DNA

Jodi

Hi,
Thanks for that...yeah you never know! I've looked into prices etc. is it worth doing now or later?
Also as it's used for siblingship at the moment, can only one person get tested and what would the results show/what can I do with them?

[Yaffa]

Xstr

Hi,
Thanks for that...yeah you never know! I've looked into prices etc. is it worth doing now or later?
Also as it's used for siblingship at the moment, can only one person get tested and what would the results show/what can I do with them?

http://www.familytreedna.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4357&highlight=krahn

Berto,

Above is a link I started explaing how the test works. Markers 10074,10075 and 10079 are markers that don't recombine. Your mum will have 2 of these blocks. One she inherited from her mum and one from her father. Those 3 markers will prove relation to anyone in the world who has the same 3 markers but can not tell how close or far the relationship will be. Dr. Krahn told me he is in the process of trying to locate more markers that do not recombine. I believe we will be able to add new markers to our old tests once they discover more. So I don't think it will matter when you take the test.

Mum could just test for those 3 markers to see if she matches anyone but if somewhere out there she should have a female sibling from her father's side that took an X test, mum would have to match on all 26 markers not just on markers 10074,10075 and 10079 to know they shared the same father.

If both you and mum tested X and if she has any siblings from her mum's side to test, this may help her sort out which X markers she got from her mum and which she got from her father.

I had to take this test to prove my father. My 1/2 sister ( father's side ) and I match all 26 markers

One day the haploblocks found in X maybe able to be put in to Haplogroups like MT and Y DNA. With Y and MT you only get one haplogroup. With X if more haploblocks are found, we would get more than one Haplogroup on the X

Hope this helps
Jodi

[tomcat]

[QUOTE=DKF]...
BTW, why should people be "sensitive" about a test score if that test score has questionable validity. Is not the idea to delve into things in order to ferret out the truth? The point of the article in Science is that identity should not come from flawed DNA tests (or any genetic testing for that matter), but from the self - identification one has via family and culture. I absolutely don't buy into this view holus bolus, but they do have a point.}

They're POINT is? And your POINT is?

[Yaffa]

Deciet

Juan Carlos, yes it is my understanding that the mysterious and sometimes controversial Dr. Faux is the co-founder of EthnoAncestry, and that rumor has it that 2008 will mark the launch date of a BGA test using two or more different technologies. Apparently Faux has retired from any active role in EA, shifting all operations to the UK, in order to pursue research interests.

Yes indeed, EA has been working on the BGA test since 2004, but has been side tracked by developing new SNPs and the like. As I recall Faux has always been of the opinion that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush", and "don't hold your breath", so has suggested to people that they consider the merits of both the DNA Tribes test and the DNA Print test (known more generally known as the ABDNA test) rather than wait expectantly for something that has yet to materialize since it is still "in development".

DKF.

DKF aka Dr Faux,

Why do you speak of your self in the 3rd party? Many people in this forum are well aware that DKF ( You ) is also Dr. David Faux. This post from you, DKF, mentions Dr. Faux's link as being you. http://www.familytreedna.com/forum/s...ead.php?t=4410
Might I add that you have offened a few people in this forum!

[Yaffa]

Contradictions!

Rainbow, with all due respect you are making assumptions that I as a scientist cannot accept. This is obviously an important matter to you (judging by the number of posts), and so I will say no more. Suffice it to say that the test is no longer discussed on the Rootsweb DNA-Genealogy List. The reason is that it does not meet accepted criteria for a reliable and valid instrument that can adequately reflect a persons true biogeographical minority ancestry. As I have said before, people will believe exactly what they want to believe and will often accept results that please them and reject those that are not consistent with their hopes or expections. At best the test must be interpreted in light of a known genealogy. It simply cannot be used to reveal hidden minority ancestry. I very much wish it could, and am hopeful that in the next year or two there will be something available that can give you a truer picture. However, at the moment it is simply not appropriate to use a blunt scalpel to perform precise neurosurgery.

DKF.

You discredit Rainbow's 17%. I would like an explination for this http://www.roperld.com/DNAPrintFauxD.htm

You Claim because your mother in law has a 10% ABDNA score it's probably Cherokee beacause of her surnames and location.Those surnames could be Irish/English Do you have a paper trail to the Cherokee Nation to back up your statement that you are dicrediting other peoples scores? The MT-DNA comming from the Middle East could have been the Jews expelled from Spain. No melungeon researcher to date and I have worked with many knows who they were.It is a work in progress that seems to be never ending. Names involved with the melungeon are coming up of many different backrounds.

[darroll]

Leave Rainbow alone.
Why don’t you guys jump on the guy that said “If your DNA tests negative for Indian Blood, Your still Indian”.
Or the guy that said “A 37 point Y-DNA perfect match means nothing”.
Behave, d