Ancestry by dna is back!

[~Elizabeth~]

I don't get HBO, but I have watched several George Lopez sitcom episodes. I don't know what channel. I just flip thru all of the few channels I get until I see something good. One episode was about George finding out that his mom had another baby but gave her up for adoption. He found out where she worked and went to meet her. But she didn't know she was adopted. She was raised Italian and she believed she was Italian. He didn't break it to her that she was adopted and Mexican/Latina.

[~Elizabeth~]

it sounds like Lopez read his own results instead of Larry's.

I don't think so. A person with 63% European will look European. David has a beige complexion, which looks as if he has a tan, but he is a New Yorker. I used to live in NYC and was always pasty white. If he lives in Southern California or Florida now, that could explain the beige tan. My NJ father is also beige like David.

My guess is that Lopez is a mix of 3 categories (probably has about 20% African).

[J. Fold]

it seems that Ancestry By Dna was licensed to this new company, and the test is now not operated by Dna Print- However- the sample population results they show on the website seem to be the same as Dna Print's population sample results. I wonder if they are using new methodology or not.

[gtc]

If he lives in Southern California or Florida now, that could explain the beige tan.

Yep, lives in California.

[~Elizabeth~]

Yep, lives in California.

ok thanks, gtc.

[Elistariel]

I took the test from the original company a few years ago.
I wonder how my results would compare if I took it now.

(I can't actually do that, don't have the money, I'm just wondering.)

[~Elizabeth~]

I took the test from the original company a few years ago.
I wonder how my results would compare if I took it now.

(I can't actually do that, don't have the money, I'm just wondering.)

I can't retake it either. I had thought it was the same test, just a different owner. I had hoped Family Tree DNA would buy AncestryByDna. But I am happy DDC has it now. Who knows, maybe they will merge someday. I wonder why 23andme and decodeme (which are supposedly superior) don't have any celebrities taking their tests on tv.

[c_thompson_68]

I had previously taken the DNAPrint Genomics AncestryByDNA 2.5, and contacted DNA Diagnostics Center (DDC) about their AncestrybyDNA test. I wanted more information on the differences between the tests, such as number of BGA (biographical ancestry markers).

Here is the response I received:


"Thank you for your inquiry. Our Ancestry by DNA test divides your entire ancestral history into four categories:

East Asian
Indo-European
Sub-Saharan African
Indigenous American

You would then get a percentage of each category that you would have in your dna. As of this moment, we cannot break it down any further. If you have any other questions, please give us a call at 1-800-514-5208."

From the Print Genomics AncestryByDNA 2.5 test my results where (2005):

• 66% European
• 29% Native American (Indian)
• 5% Sub-Saharan African
• 0% East Asian

This is not surprising since my birth-father is supposedly a Mexican citizen (I am an adoptee). So I was hoping to find more information about this company before consider another test. I could not take the EuroDNA 1.0 or 2.0 test used to determine the percentage of Mediterranean / middle-eastern as my percentage of Native American exceeded the 15% limit (see here)

FTDNA Test results:
Y-DNA: Haplogroup J2-M319 (J2a4d)
mtDNA: Haplogroup T2 (previously T3)

[rainbow]

Thanks for sharing, c_ thompson_68. I think it is the same test. The categories are the same four. They rephrased Native American to Indigenous American.

[tomcat]

...So I was hoping to find more information about this company before consider another test. ...

Did AbDNA2.5 with its 176 SNP's and have recently done a genome scan of more than 500,000 SNP's (23andMe) and consider a revised AbDNA a waste of money in comparison to the scan.

Some would say the original AbDNA2.5 was a waste, but without reprising that, we can all agree that AbDNA was a 'black box' test; you get your reading and that's as far as it goes. By contrast there is A LOT to be done with scan data. You may also be interested to know there a quite a few Hispanics on 23andMe, and that offers the potential to learn about your ancestry through matching with others with genealogy in your ethnicity.

Check it out.

[rainbow]

But I recall reading in another thread that 23andme got your mtdna wrong and told you you are an M (M5?). But FTDNA said your mtdna is C (C1 or 3?).
If 23andme can get the mtdna wrong, then how accurate can they be when interpreting admixture?
I had the 23andme test too, for the admixture result. They got my mtdna right. They listed me as H1*. FTDNA says I am H1. But what am I to believe when one company says I am 17% Native American and the other says 0%? That is a huge difference. I'm just thinking out loud. I don't want to debate about it.

[tomcat]

23andMe knows their mtDNA classification of me is wrong, but they have yet to fix it.

My AbDNA results were not so out-of-line with other BGA results as yours have been, so I have not been presented with a problem needing resolution.

I still think 23andMe is superior to AbDNA, and one needn't be content with 23andMe results as one can submit one's data to several other venues to get more info. I submitted mine to McMillan's matching and McDonald's PCA projects, sent my Y data to Squecco's project and my X to the Moscia and Powell projects. I just cross-posted to DeCodeMe and may submit to Kull's HIRopractic calculator or a relational database if it comes through.

[~Elizabeth~]

My mom thinks my 17% Native American is accurate. She always thought I was part Mongolian. She says the 17% makes sense because she says there is definitely something different about me. And she also thinks that my paternal grandmother was probably adopted.