Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Time for a formal response from FamilyTreeDNA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
    The discrepancies being reported are far beyond what was reported when previous versions of FTDNA's admixture algorithms were rolled out. I've been watching this story unfold for years.

    If the new MyOrigins is to have any credibility at all, the issues need to be answered with SCIENCE.
    Exactly.

    Comment


    • #17
      I just had an extended conversation with an FTDNA rep, and they are firmly holding to the accuracy of MO v2 results. I was referred to their new population descriptions as a defense of the results.

      Comment


      • #18
        I wonder what they mean by "accuracy"? In this context, where there does not seem to be a way to independently verify the results, I'm not at all sure there is any meaning here at all. There's also the question of how to verify whatever is said about the population descriptions. Is there any way to verify that the ancestry of the individuals who comprise the reference group actually have the ancestry that is claimed?

        Comment


        • #19
          How can they claim accuracy in a case like mine where they say I have 14% Sephardic and they say my mother has <2% and my father has zero??? One or more of the 3 results has to be inaccurate no matter how you look at it!!!

          The fact that I know which figure must be wrong (mine) doesn't make any difference. Suppose I knew absolutely nothing about my ancestors? Suppose I was a complete newbie? Suppose I was adopted and just had my own results? Wouldn't I come to the erroneous conclusion that one of my great-grandparents was Jewish???

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by vinnie View Post
            I just had an extended conversation with an FTDNA rep, and they are firmly holding to the accuracy of MO v2 results. I was referred to their new population descriptions as a defense of the results.
            Tell them next time to explain Malchik's MyOriginsStrangeResults Log with scientific arguments.

            http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=41496

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by MoberlyDrake View Post
              How can they claim accuracy in a case like mine where they say I have 14% Sephardic and they say my mother has <2% and my father has zero??? One or more of the 3 results has to be inaccurate no matter how you look at it!!!

              The fact that I know which figure must be wrong (mine) doesn't make any difference. Suppose I knew absolutely nothing about my ancestors? Suppose I was a complete newbie? Suppose I was adopted and just had my own results? Wouldn't I come to the erroneous conclusion that one of my great-grandparents was Jewish???
              Exactly. Excellent points - the real-world consequences of not only this change, but autosomal testing in general.

              One issue in my family is my father's maternal grandmother's NPE. I found her supposed father's name on her 1932 Social Security application, and the surname is likely of Spanish, not Italian, origin. My father and one of his brothers had West Central European (20% and 19%, respectively), mine had 11%, and their other two siblings showed 0%. That much WCE is highly unusual in Southern Italians, but given the nature of autosomal recombination, I was willing to accept the differences between the four full siblings. Someone in this forum knowledgeable about Iberian admixture confirmed that Iberians can have fairly high levels of WCE (backed up by FTDNA's new population Iberian population description), so the results seemed reasonable if this great-great grandfather was in fact half Spanish or so.

              My father, his brother, and I have lost all of that in MO v2. When I presented this issue to the CSR, she tried to make a case based on their new population descriptions; since WCE includes Italy it is therefore perfectly reasonable to expect that much WCE to be subsumed into Southern European! However, v2 WCE references NORTHERN Italy, not Southern Italy. Furthermore, while the new description for Southeast Europe mentions Neolithic farmers from the Fertile Crescent, it essentially ignores the tremendous influence from later Levantine and North African populations in Southern Italy and Sicily, and focuses almost entirely on the relationship between those regions and the Balkans - similar to what DNA.Land does to Sicilians - hmmm...

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by vinnie View Post
                I just had an extended conversation with an FTDNA rep, and they are firmly holding to the accuracy of MO v2 results. I was referred to their new population descriptions as a defense of the results.
                Has anyone cntacted R Khan.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by vinnie View Post
                  Exactly. Excellent points - the real-world consequences of not only this change, but autosomal testing in general.

                  One issue in my family is my father's maternal grandmother's NPE. I found her supposed father's name on her 1932 Social Security application, and the surname is likely of Spanish, not Italian, origin. My father and one of his brothers had West Central European (20% and 19%, respectively), mine had 11%, and their other two siblings showed 0%. That much WCE is highly unusual in Southern Italians, but given the nature of autosomal recombination, I was willing to accept the differences between the four full siblings. Someone in this forum knowledgeable about Iberian admixture confirmed that Iberians can have fairly high levels of WCE (backed up by FTDNA's new population Iberian population description), so the results seemed reasonable if this great-great grandfather was in fact half Spanish or so.

                  My father, his brother, and I have lost all of that in MO v2. When I presented this issue to the CSR, she tried to make a case based on their new population descriptions; since WCE includes Italy it is therefore perfectly reasonable to expect that much WCE to be subsumed into Southern European! However, v2 WCE references NORTHERN Italy, not Southern Italy. Furthermore, while the new description for Southeast Europe mentions Neolithic farmers from the Fertile Crescent, it essentially ignores the tremendous influence from later Levantine and North African populations in Southern Italy and Sicily, and focuses almost entirely on the relationship between those regions and the Balkans - similar to what DNA.Land does to Sicilians - hmmm...
                  I love acronyms... it makes everything easier to understand.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by malchik View Post
                    I love acronyms... it makes everything easier to understand.
                    Educate yourself like everyone else does.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by vinnie View Post
                      Educate yourself like everyone else does.
                      We need to go above CSRs. Do they have an estimate of the % of complaints, e.g. from pilot testing (I have no complaint personally)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Did they even do pilot testing?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
                          Did they even do pilot testing?

                          Probably not. I just find it hard to believe that they had no idea of what was going to happen.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by KATM View Post
                            I noticed that there is one new page up in the Learning Center, dated yesterday, 7 April. It doesn't say much; just titled "MyOrigins 2.0 Update - no white paper, etc. Not the answer that many are looking for.
                            I would really like to see the white paper.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by vinnie View Post
                              Educate yourself like everyone else does.
                              Aw dont get upset...

                              I am totally fine with PWE, and as I said, I do love acronyms, but if your texts has a high ANA which reduces its TRI, then you should expect some FFATR, right?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by MoberlyDrake View Post
                                How can they claim accuracy in a case like mine where they say I have 14% Sephardic and they say my mother has <2% and my father has zero??? One or more of the 3 results has to be inaccurate no matter how you look at it!!!

                                The fact that I know which figure must be wrong (mine) doesn't make any difference. Suppose I knew absolutely nothing about my ancestors? Suppose I was a complete newbie? Suppose I was adopted and just had my own results? Wouldn't I come to the erroneous conclusion that one of my great-grandparents was Jewish???
                                That is exactly my problem right now. I am a newbie to this and I don't have my history which is why I did the test! I thought it would be great to find out something about my ancestry/ethnic heritage.

                                My Haplogroup is of next to no help (there aren't many of us in it!). I have zero even slightly close matches so that's no help. I used to have a bunch of West Asian in My Origins... now, nope. But the results don't make sense with other things, like my sister having H21 as her haplogroup and we have the same mother (that's not really something even worth questioning).

                                And my My Origins doesn't really match the calculators on GEDMatch anymore, which is also odd.

                                So, yeah. Not so helpful. Also, people who don't know about these concerns keep referring me back to the "Mr Origins" findings to learn what my ethnicity is.

                                This big long rant really is the long way of saying "I so agree with you."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X