No announcement yet.

23andME -- DeCodeMe

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I had a terrible time ordering 23andme.

    After filling out everything it told me my credit card was refused. My card had a zero ballance owing.

    I tried 9 times for the transaction to work, and each time it told me my card was rejected. So i emailed 23andme explaining the situation.

    Then I found out that there were multiple pending charges on my credit card from the extent that my credit card was maxed.

    I had planned that week to visit my Son, and i needed my card for the journey. It took a number of days to straighten it out.

    My credit card company even gave me a phone number for 23andme to call them to straighten the mess out.

    My credit card company said 23andme didn't call.

    I had to cancel my plans.

    When I asked to purchase 23andme over the phone, I was told by 23andme did not have the capability.

    Has anyone else been refused by 23andme?


    • #17
      Dr. Faux,

      Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
      Right off I said that I was happy for you about your 23andme test results.
      Should I take that compliment back....
      I admit that you know alot about DNA and thats why I converse with you. However, I am going to stop asking you because of your rudeness!
      I didn't even mention DNA Tribes in this posting. Although my second higest number is Ireland at 1,417.53 .So where did that come from. :confused
      I ask you if the Asian results on your DeCodeMe could it be your native showing up? But apparently the 23andme test didn't show up your well documented Native heritage! Excuse me for thinking that maybe a 500,000 marker test would show up Native heritage. I dunno know, I was feeling sorta sad for you, that it didn't show you for you But that feeling has disappeared very quickly!
      Look here, Dr. Faux, I already knew that I was Potowomeke, I don't need dna to tell me that. I just thought, like other people, including you, that the test might show that, and that it would be another source of proof, evidently not, I am a big girl, I gotta o.k.!
      I now know that the 1600's isn't going to show up on the ABDNA test, this is the reason I removed it from my signature line, we have been over this before, thats not what I said. I said that the 10% test result, if real, read carefully, must be more recent, like g.grandparent and so far, honestly, there is no proof of it. But if real I was hoping it would show in the DeCodeMe results.
      So to sum it up:
      1. I have Potowomecke heritage without the dna tests.
      2. The 1600's heritage "won't" show in the ABDNA test results.
      3. The 10% may or may not be a real, so far no prove of recent heritage,it and it gave my family bizarre results.
      4. DNA Tribes has sometimes been right, like my recent report, with my Northern Irish heritage being at 1, 417,28. It does state that it could just be where your dna foot print is the strongest, it doesn't always mean you have heritage there...Although I have Irish heritage....
      5. As far as DeCodeMe, I am only aware of the Potowomeke and European... Maybe I should be looking for Asian and African heritage....

      Have a great day....



      • #18
        Oh no...

        So sorry to hear that Mike! Hope they get it straightened out.. That isn't just a small mistake! Keep us posted!



        • #19
          Originally posted by Yaffa
          Dr Faux,

          23andMe test. I know someone who claims to have a significant amount of NA ancestry about 50% and I was told twice they could not get a reading on this person. At this point don't know if it is due to possible high NA ancestry or DNA sample was bad.

          How could they tell if this person had NA ancestry if they don't have NA samples? Or would it come out as the elusive "East Asian"


          • #20
            Originally posted by DKF

            Yes, I am extremely satisfied with the 23andme test - way beyond my wildest expectations and hopes. A super bargain. It did not show the hoped for well documented Native American but that was from the 1700s so the result was anticipated. Still, I know from the decodeme test that I have large haploblocks of Asian and African on my X chromosome so we will see how 23andme interpret the findings at these sites. I am ok with any result since I know it will reflect what is real, not a phantom.
            So is decodeme suggesting that you have Asian and African ancestry but 23andme isn't? Did you get 100% European with 23andme?
            I'm confused now-I thought 23andme was supposed to be more accurate and yet it seems that decodeme has picked up your Native American ancestry through East Asian score.


            • #21
              a couple thoughts

              Delete text
              Last edited by Deirwha; 12 November 2008, 10:46 AM. Reason: I need to delete a duplicate post and don't know how


              • #22
                a couple thoughts

                Hello all. I thought I would share a couple thoughts. I know everyone is aware of email's attribute of conveying a thought with more force and negativity that perhaps the writer intended. But we lose sight of that sometimes because it functions a little like an extension of thought. In head out email. I know because I have seen many posts on this and had many discussions about it in part because of my emails having given offense I really did not intend to give (and some, well, ok, I did intend ). Never could understand why folks called me Fang.

                But there is also another issue that maybe some are less aware of that I am, because I am constantly in communications with cousins from another country. There are cultural difference in boundaries and communication style, even between the UK and the US. Fancy that. There are within the US, also.

                Often in the US we are influenced by the business style of communication. We are careful to win friends and influence people and not step on each other's toes. We have a thought we don't just ready, fire, aim. If we are reflecting something to somebody we surround our little mirror with a bouquet of sweet smelling flowers and soften the angle at which the light hits. We "negotiate" boundaries with acquaintances over time so we don't inadvertently trigger a flash point.

                With my cousins in the UK I quickly learned that their boundaries are set at different spots than mine coming from the US culture. And when I step over them I find a drawbridge comes up like a slamming wall safe ... and I get it direct and in between the eyes. Period. Ouchie.

                There is an exception to what I said about US culture. It is the Montel Williams culture, where guests are encouraged to talk about THE most personal aspects of their lives, and the "talk" quickly degenerates into five people screaming obscenities at each other at the top of their lungs, maybe even fighting for the entertainment of the audience. Closest thing to a true gladiatorial contest in the US. That type of show has condition communications among some.

                Bottom line the participants on this forum come from many different cultures with different norms of where the boundaries begin and what to do about it when one steps over them. Add that to the function of email of which we are all aware, it makes communications a high and noble challenge you might say ... quite apart from differences of opinion.

                I have recently come out of a period of "lurking" to post again. I went into lurking because of some of those challenges. I think it would be good to remember why we are all here. We are all here to learn from each other and work out problems that do not make sense. I have seen only a couple of posts that made me wonder if someone was deliberately trying to start a fight.

                As long as I am on the subject I will now try to raise two more hopefully with everyone understanding I am not trying to start a fight. 1. Native American issues. It is very clear. You only need to count the number of "hits" that are recorded on the front page to this forum, that Native American ancestry is the chic, hot topic of the last several weeks. Wonderful. I don't post on it. Why? Because i don't have an ax in any fight there and it seems to me it is a very touchy subject with a lot of people. 1. The Bible. From time to time people use the Bible to bolster their arguments. I no longer respond but for those interested in communicating with me and people like me it might be good to not some of us cherish that old document for its part in the tapestry that is our culture, but not necessarily as the arbiter of disputes .... much less someone's interpretation of what to some of us appears an ambiguous phrase. I do not want to be disagreeable or to "come back" at someone on this point so I just do not post anymore when the topic turns to the Bible, about which, btw, I do know a thing or two, scholastically speaking.


                • #23
                  as for me, I'm just a misfit

                  I'm not the ordinary American. I 've been without employment most of my life. I don't have a resume nor do I have any references. That's probably why I don't concern myself much with PC, etc. Mostly I just want to uncover facts or elicit new facts from various forum participants.

                  U5b2 & R1a1


                  • #24

                    My comments were not directed at any specific person, not even myself.


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Deirwha
                      But there is also another issue that maybe some are less aware of that I am, because I am constantly in communications with cousins from another country. There are cultural difference in boundaries and communication style, even between the UK and the US. Fancy that. There are within the US, also.
                      Yes I am Canadian (UEL and recently arrived English), and a scientist who shoots from the hip. This is e-mail. I don't concern myself with sensitivities since this is not a support group (or shouldn't be). People are free to believe what they want, but if they make assertions in a public forum they will be challenged if their statements don't wash with what is known about genetics.

                      There are tests discussed here that no person with a background in science and statistical analysis would consider anything other than something akin to a parlor game.

                      I am bemused by the wannabe factor. I am part Mohawk and have written a book on Six Nations genealogical research - but I am not going to be a "pretend Mohawk". I am simply a person who has a small amount of NA heritage - so small it doesn't even show in valid and reliable tests (right now this means 23andme). There seems to be a yearning need among many to identify with Native Americans - to have some sort of connection. Hence a number on a questionable test is translated into "Native ancestry" even without any genealogical verification. Even with genealogical "proof" if these ancestors were born in say the 1600s they are, sadly, probably only "paper ancestors" whose effect on one's genome may be zero - or by sheer luck there may be a trace of less than 1% that will probably disappear in the next generation thanks to recombination of the autosomes and X chromosome.

                      Paper or genome, I am quite fascinated by my Native ancestry since it can be documented through many generations into the 1600s from the 1800s. It has triggered an interest in archaeology (I assisted with the Mohawk Village excavation in Brantford Ontario), and history (I wrote an oft quoted paper on the documented heritage of the Mohawk Village). I even attended the "bread and cheeze" events with my kids (an old tradition dating back to the time of Queen Victoria) on the Rez (we lived on the other side of the road). None of that makes me a Mohawk. Clearly the autosomal genetics testing by 23andme shows that my statement is clearly correct. Most official and non-official definitions as to who is and who is not Mohawk is tied up in some very convoluted views, that continue to change mostly due to political factors.

                      I would hope that those who frequently regale us about their NA heritage will take the 23andme test and see if the results of the other tests are mirrored in one that would be accepted in any circle. As I have said, anything on the "painting" that says greater than or equal to 1% will show you what chromosome that the Asian - Native American block (in orange) appears on (I believe that it must be a haploblock of 10 million base pairs to meet the criteria). If people who are getting these 10 to 17% NA figures elsewhere get even 1% on 23andme then (and here is where genealogy comes into play) there is a very high probability of Asian or Native American ancestry is still expressed in their genome.

                      Without any doubt I am coldly logical, but in the area we are working in, this is precisely what is needed - not some tendency toward promoting romantic conceptualizations that do not accord with the frigid facts.


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by burto
                        So is decodeme suggesting that you have Asian and African ancestry but 23andme isn't? Did you get 100% European with 23andme?
                        I'm confused now-I thought 23andme was supposed to be more accurate and yet it seems that decodeme has picked up your Native American ancestry through East Asian score.
                        I would love you to please answer my question as I want a valid test that can tell me something about my ancestors within the last 200 years (well anything that's the most reliable out of any time period)-I was just curious to know which test is better at doing that-and what's the difference between testing the X haploblocks? Do you know when 23andme are introducing that?
                        Last edited by burto; 12 November 2008, 01:46 PM.


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DKF
                          Maria, we have discussed this before, based on the time period you would be at most 1/10,000 or something NA. No 21 or 176 marker test is ever going to be able to pick that up (unless by some remote chance factor). Your ABDNA scores are not consistent with your genealogy. The tests (particularly DNAT) simply gives people lots and lots of results most of which are entirely irrelevant but as long as the customer is happy or can be made happy by telling them that "your results are consistent" with this or that...........

                          21 markers versus one half a million markers - what value is the former unless it is a parlor game or just a fun exercise to see what the algorithm spits out this time. The fact remains that while 23andme might have picked up NA ancestry in me but it did not. My guess is that one must be about 1/64 NA to see any evidence of a minority ancestry otherwise it is going to be a toss up as to whether any minority "shows" or not. I have kin who are much closer generationally to our NA ancestor and can get them tested but with multiple paper sources it is really not necessary - or I can just refer to my ABDNA NA and EA results and make a claim on that basis. A real problem is that in the early 1800's my ancestor's first cousin (a chief of the Tyendinaga Mohawks) was known as John "Blue Eyed" Green - so the family was already well mixed.

                          I trust what 23andme has found. I am happy just knowing what is, not fussing about what this or that means or speculating about mysterious results as is the case with less powerful methodologies which provide unreliable and potentially invalid results.

                          Could it be maybe that Maria_W has more than one Native-American ancestor from the 1600's and that's why 10% still can show up on her DNAPrint 2.5 test?


                          • #28
                            Some thoughts...

                            Its not a matter of how many ancestors I have from the 1600's it s the 1600's time frame thats a problem...No matter how many Potowomeke ancestors I have from the 1600's they will never show up on the ABDNA test, too many generations have passed.
                            The 10% on my ABDNA test (which is only an estimate) is wrong. First off, and this alone would be enough. My families results were all over the place. I recieved 10%, mother 7%, father 0%, daughter 14%, daughter 0% and grandaughter 9%. Plus husband tested too.. I would need to be around 12.5% parents 25%, grandparent 50% and grandparent 100%. Theres no way! I just don't get it. Are they pulling numbers out of thin air! Any one else? I have removed the 10% Native American result from my signature tag. Plus I don't have any proof of recent ancestors, like a g.grandparent! I will keep the cd's that they came on for the list of markers that family shares in common. I will be advisng all of my family to disregard the ABDNA test results... To be honest I was really the only one that was that hot on testing them. Since we already have European and Native heritage we aren't losing anything...A very expensive experiment! $1400.00 dollors worth!

                            3. I am a person with Potowomeke heritage, nothing more, but nothing less either! And no matter what, that won't change. I am also a person with European heritage. But since my 10% Native American is wrong so is my 90% European becasue most of them came from the 1600's also! I will not be putting 90% European on my signature tag either! I will just put that I have European and Potowomecke heritage!

                            4. So being a scientist is an excuse for being blunt?

                            5. Alot of us play palor games, sometimes we hit the jackpot, sometimes we lose. These test are all gambling, we just need to decide how much we can afford to lose before we quite!



                            • #29
                              Hello again

                              I am going to push this a bit further than I normally would. It is not that I am spoiling for a fight. It is that I while I have an extraordinary respect for DFK and the scientists who are helping us AND think we need to be fair to them about what they can and cannot bring to the table AND I think we need to understand and be careful of each other's boundaries ... while all of that, I think the scientists need to understand that this adventure is being funded by lay money motivated by personal inquiries into that golden thread called ancestry. It is fine to be the sharpest knife in the drawer and even give into impatience on occasion when you are presented results funded by grant. But the rest of us come to the party with an agenda. Yes, it may be obsessive. But it is our cherished beliefs about ourselves. We can have a marvelous dialogue and learn from you, the scientists, and you the scientists can have the investment of our money in the cause of advancing science, and we can all understand how new all this is as, someone said, originating really in 2001, etc. We can do that IF we respect each other in what has to be a very difficult and painstaking a process of communication. I did not mean in my prior piece to criticize DFK. Far from it. I also did not mean to criticize Maria. Or Purple Flower. Or Colchaire. Or anybody. I meant to ask all of us to understand the complexity of our different starting points, styles and boundaries and exercise a little more care than we have been exercising in not hurting each other's feelings in the process. I am here to learn from the best and I know you are out there and you include DFK. On the other hand, please don't just stomp my little obsessions into the ground. Please give me information. Given that I along with the others here are funding this research it should not be too much to ask. End of rant. I will go back to lurking for awhile because I really don't like this kind of dialogue in my off duty hours. Fine when I was a political lawyer. It went with the territory. But it is not what I choose for my retirement.


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by burto
                                How could they tell if this person had NA ancestry if they don't have NA samples? Or would it come out as the elusive "East Asian"
                                I have no Idea thats why I would love to see some test results with people who have known NA ancestry close to home.