Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MyOrigins 2.0 is much better.

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Armando View Post
    The important thing is to look at the posts or results of the people that have been involved with DNA testing for a long time, have a very good understanding of it, and have a lot of family members tested and there are plenty of people like that with complaints about the myOrigins 2.0 results.

    The complaints aren't about the ethnicity results and that is the subject we are discussing.

    Just as an example, the ethnicity results give too much Iberian to northern Europeans. The tools are tangential to the topic of the ethnicity calculators.


    That has shown to be a good test so far but still in development and still not enough test results have been posted or parent-child groups compared.

    Expectations should be based on what has been accomplished. The failure rate of myOrigins is much greater than the failure rate of 23andme which is so transparent that they post the failure rate of each ethnicity on a web page that is open to everyone. The posts by people that have tested at 23andme show a close match to what that page shows. So my expectation is for myOrigins to show something much closer to what 23andme shows for people especially since 23andme has a calculator that has the highest rate of more closely matching genealogical trees than any of the calculators except maybe LivingDNA. As for the DNA results of Roberta Estes her 23andme and myOrigins results are close to each other so her myOrigins results are about as good as can be expected. However, as I have stated before. The problem isn't that myOrigins 2.0 is incorrect for everyone because it isn't. It is incorrect for about 20-30% of the customers which is too high of a percentage.
    Well said Armando and let's not forget those of us that get population matches that neither parent gets here at MyOrigins. This is the only test out of all of them to do this for me and my parents are my biological parents. That in itself has made me think this test is flawed especially as no one, not even FTDNA themselves despite me providing all the information they requested when I queried it with them, can tell me why this has happened.

    Comment


    • #17
      Wow, my new results are significantly different. I went from 35% European Coastal Islands, 35% European Northlands, and 30% European Coastal Plain to now I am at 90% British Isles and 10% Eastern Europe. Based on my known genealogy the first results seem much more accurate.

      Comment


      • #18
        Paying attention to the complaints

        Originally posted by Daragon36 View Post
        Armando,
        That could be, but a lot of people complaining do seem to have a lack of understanding when it comes to such things. Never tried 23andMe, and from everything I've read about them makes me never want to. I can't really complain about Ancestry, only thing is they are missing some useful tools like Chromosome browsers and such. I do currently have a test that is processing over at Living DNA.
        The thing is, Ethnicity tests are more of a novelty than they are for accuracy. No one should have the expectation of ethnicity results being accurate. There is an excellent post on DNA Explained about it.
        I wonder what I am missing or not understanding when neither of my parents show any Jewish in 2.0 and I am 11% Sephardic. I guess I am just one of those people who don't have your brilliant insight into generational autosomal DNA skipping. I bet for sure one of my grandparents had Sephardic and it jumped right past my parent and I inherited it! Why don't you take the time to read some of the complaints before you start insinuating things about other people's issues.

        Comment


        • #19
          All of my wife's known ancestors are from Germany and The Netherlands. On the previous version she scored Western and Central Europe 79%, Scandinavia 16%, and Finland and Northern Siberia 5%. The new version has her at: 44% British Isles, 35% Scandinavia, 20% East Europe, and less than 1% of West Middle East.

          Comment


          • #20
            My Origins

            Hello all,
            I am new to the forums, but not new to Family Tree DNA.
            I was shocked to find "My Orgins" putting all my non British Isles DNA in one lump, in Italy and Greece, or Southern Europe.
            This couldn't be more wrong and still be within Europe. My non British grandparents were Dutch, not Italian. Their names are Weiss and Wise. I have cousins in Germany and Holland, so how did our origins end up in Italy?
            When I put the raw data into GEDmatch, the results came back accurate. Why?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Josiah's Kids View Post
              Hello all,
              I am new to the forums, but not new to Family Tree DNA.
              I was shocked to find "My Orgins" putting all my non British Isles DNA in one lump, in Italy and Greece, or Southern Europe.
              This couldn't be more wrong and still be within Europe. My non British grandparents were Dutch, not Italian. Their names are Weiss and Wise. I have cousins in Germany and Holland, so how did our origins end up in Italy?
              When I put the raw data into GEDmatch, the results came back accurate. Why?
              May I ask which GEDmatch applicant you ran that gave you better information?

              Comment


              • #22
                Genetic genealogy blogger Roberta Estes has posted today an analysis of how her actual well-researched paper genealogy compares with what has been predicted by all the vendors with which she has tested (23andMe version 4, Ancestry version 2, Family Tree DNA, Geno 2, Living DNA, and MyHeritage): "Which Ethnicity Test is Best?"

                It is a worthwhile read for those unhappy with their bioethnicity results at whatever company.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Thank you for the above reply. Just today I received my report from Living DNA which showed smaller, but still visible ancestry from So. Europe and No. Turkey. I think there may be some there there.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by KATM View Post
                    Genetic genealogy blogger Roberta Estes has posted today an analysis of how her actual well-researched paper genealogy compares with what has been predicted by all the vendors with which she has tested (23andMe version 4, Ancestry version 2, Family Tree DNA, Geno 2, Living DNA, and MyHeritage): "Which Ethnicity Test is Best?"

                    It is a worthwhile read for those unhappy with their bioethnicity results at whatever company.
                    The problem with using only her DNA results and her genealogy she can't see that myOrigins 2.0 has a higher rate of not matching the genealogical record when the results of a lot of kits with well documented genealogy are used. Sufficient sample size is of utter importance for a proper review of the different companies.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      MyOrigins 2.0

                      Estimators at best work at the continental level. People get upset when there's more of British than their beloved Scandinavian, or vice versa, overlooking the fact that both groups are nearly identical, only differentiating in the past 1000 years, and British folks becoming more diverse. Angles, Saxons and Jutes were from the NW continental coast across from Scandinavia. In fact, their languages were closely related to Scandinavian languages.

                      Also, people expect to match specific countries, when the reality is that countries are political designations, not genetic boundaries. So when I show up as 8% Italy/Greece on some calculator, I don't shout - "Oh, I had no idea I was Italian or maybe Greek!!!" Instead, I think, "Hmm, some of my ancestors were similar to Italians/Greeks." I've gone back 500 years and not one Italian/Greek, but I accept the fact that some of my ancestors were genetically similar to Italians. I also show up on MyHeritage as being 0.8% Central American. You can bank on this -I'm not remotely Central American (family from Europe). However, I accept the fact that my DNA could be 0.8% similar to a Central American. We're humans, after all, there's overlap, etc etc. Besides, it's not a high amount. When I first saw an unexpected ethnicity show up, I wondered "Who done it?" Then I realized, all estimators are is a way of showing similarity, ancestry itself needs to be documented.

                      While I've learned quite a bit from Roberta Estes and genetic genealogy, I consider many of her opinions re: ethnicity estimators to be quite biased. For one thing, she's a consultant for FTDNA. Given her excessive praise for 2.0 matching her own estimates, one wonders if she was brought in to help define the ethnicities specifically to do that - match her own ethnicities.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        It's a mistake to take My Origins seriously

                        Have any other sets of several siblings compared their results? The My Origins results for me and 3 of my brothers are wildly different from each other (and yes, we really are full siblings, at least according to both Family Finder and my parents!). The results are right in some respects (for example, none of us shows any African or New World ancestry), but they are really a very, very rough estimate at best.

                        Of course, we each got different mixtures of DNA from each parent, but we all, of course, have identical ancestry. Among the four of us, our percentages range from 11% to 79% British Isles, 3% to 32% Scandinavia, 0% to 46% Western and Central Europe, and 0% to 20% Southeast Europe. All over the map, so to speak! One of us shows up with 4% Asia Minor and one with 17% Iberia; the rest of us have neither. (We are in fact predominantly Scots Irish, English, German, and Alsatian, with bits of French, Welsh, Cornish, and Swiss thrown in, going back on most lines to early Colonial times.) My Origins clearly has a very tough time distinguishing between the British Isles, Scandinavia, and the rest of Europe -- it appears to be pretty much a crapshoot.

                        On the other hand, My Origins does pick up on our 1/16 Jewish ancestry, with percentages of 0%, 3%, 4%, and 5%, though these percentages don't correlate too well with the numbers of Jewish matches each of us have.
                        Last edited by susan_dakin; 20th July 2017, 07:46 PM. Reason: typo

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X