Thinking of trying DNA testing, it's on sale

**Old Building Prof** · 29th April 18, 11:30 AM

23andme does basic Y-DNA and mtDNA tests along with the autosomal. It's probably the best overall deal for the money. As I mentioned earlier, I think their autosomal is more accurate than FTDNA's. Because I was interested in uncovering the truth about my distant paternal lineage, I did FTDNA's Big Y, and I don't think there's anything more specific than that for its purpose. It all depends what your goal is though. The nice thing about ancestry is that they identify cousin connections for you (whereas with 23andme you have to document them yourself by contacting people).

**California Highlander** · 29th April 18, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by tokareva

Ancestry DNA has a sale right now for $59. Is it worth it, what can I expect?

Remember, DNA results are a tool for a genealogist, you still need to find the context and details. There is no "magic DNA trail" back to the glen where your 5th great grandfather was born.

While not perfect, this story Wirecutter: DNA Test Review covers the basics of what you get, what you can expect to learn, and of high importance, privacy. Some of the DNA test companies allow your DNA to be used or sell your data which may or may not be traceable back to you. And it may include biomedical information, not just ancestry information. Once out on a database, how much control do you have and how much does the company have?

I'm considering doing a DNA test myself, but waiting to see how privacy is addressed by these companies, and the industry as a whole in light of both data breaches and companies continuing to monetize and sell customer data that may not be all that anonymous.

**A Hay** · 1st May 18, 04:55 PM

I would agree with others that DNA testing is worth the money if you want a better foundation on where you might have come from. I have used Family Tree, Ancestry, and Living Tree.
I would rank them in that order for the info I got back.

On the FTDNA Y test, which only tracks the male line, I had a big break through. I knew one of my female had a child out of wedlock when she was very young. No one in my generation really talked about it. After I had submitted my sample to FTDNA I got a reply of an exact match with a currently living individual. I made contact with him and even met him. He told me one of his male ancestors was know to have fathered children out of wedlock. This relative and mine were in the same area and time periods and so we agreed that the test was probably correct.

I now have a new cousin and have traced this previously dark line back several generations.

So for me it was worth it.

Tom
A Hay!

**Pressm4n** · 21st May 18, 11:35 PM

Hello, I saw this thread and thought I would reply to it. I had ancestry done last year, but, it seemed very vague as mentioned by others. It showed what I had expected after doing a lot of genealogy on my family. That being said, you will be linked to others with the same DNA markers and if they have family trees set up, it can be helpful for your research.

I spent about 100 on Living DNA after my British/Scottish and Irish made up mid 90% of my DNA. As stated before Living DNA breaks down the British Isles into a number of areas. The test took about 4 months, but, I was very impressed. The autosomal results (your personal make up) were very similar and linked to places I knew most of my family came from a long time ago (Ulster and others areas). The yDNA (paternal side, passed down to sons) was awesome. It answered some questions about my father's line I have been researching.

Overall, it was a lot of fun seeing the results.

Rob

**Me cousin Jack** · 23rd May 18, 05:47 AM

I’ve found and been in touch with 3 family members I never knew, and learned some things that would have otherwise been lost to me and my family forever, so while I’m a fan, I acknowledge the risks in administering such a test and the detriment that can go along with it, ie; possible medical claim denials, not only for myself but for family memebers for many generations to come should the information be used, hacked for purposes not of MY intended use.

Pay attention to your application settings.

**MacRob46** · 3rd June 18, 11:43 AM

I have toyed with having my DNA done but have not as yet. Most of my Scottish ancestry comes down through females in my paternal line (I know a good deal of the genealogy) with the male line most likely from Northern England and the Scottish border.

That being said, I question a lot of the promises being made by DNA testing companies, especially through their advertising. It is not likely to pinpoint the exact origins of your family nor is it going to tell you family names and places, down to the square mile. These companies rely on your relatives, whoever they may be, to have been at some point put into one or more of the data bases which they search (your relatives' DNA that is), in looking for a match to your DNA. If it is not there then you have a general idea of your family's origins and that is about it. I have seen more than one person who very enthusiastically announced that they now know who they are and, especially, what Highland Clan they belong to. The problem is they have nothing to back this up and no names or exact locations to cite for their ancestry - oh yes, no genealogy either, just a sept name and the DNA report.

I am probably wrong, but to me this is not much help and, since I know a good amount about my family origins, back to the late 17th c., I am wondering if I want to spend the money and, for me to have any hope at all of finding anything of use I will have to pony up the funds for an extensive test to get much information.

A friend recently bought a basic test kit from one of the leading providers. A percentage of his DNA indicated he is Jewish and of an Eastern European origin. Not that it is an indication of anything, but he is a retired Presbyterian minister. A previous basic kit from another vendor connected him with a man in England who had the same markers as him. They had a correspondence spanning a few weeks and neither could connect to the other with their known genealogy.

I am just not sold on the value of this testing and, remember, you are giving these companies an awful lot of very personal stuff, and just how do they safeguard it? Recent news reports indicate they are not doing a particularly good job of that at present.

**Pressm4n** · 3rd June 18, 05:52 PM

Just to be clear, the recent issues in the news had absolutely nothing to do with the DNA companies themselves. It was a 3rd party DNA matching service (if you're referring to the recent arrests of the zodiac killer). You have to physically upload your DNA information to the site and it is a shared with other users. The DNA companies released nothing to police. It was the person who downloaded their DNA profile and uploaded it later that was responsible for not reading the fine print.

I have never read anything concrete about the fears people have brought up about doctor treatment refusals because of potential preexisting conditions and such. Even just a bit of research into the matter shows that the portion of DNA tested is tiny. A YouTube channel, smarter everyday actually addressed the questions with scientists at one of the major companies. His answers made a lot of sense. (I personally did not do any of the health info portions. So that may be something different.)

**MacRob46** · 4th June 18, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Pressm4n

Just to be clear, the recent issues in the news had absolutely nothing to do with the DNA companies themselves. It was a 3rd party DNA matching service (if you're referring to the recent arrests of the zodiac killer). You have to physically upload your DNA information to the site and it is a shared with other users. The DNA companies released nothing to police. It was the person who downloaded their DNA profile and uploaded it later that was responsible for not reading the fine print.

I have never read anything concrete about the fears people have brought up about doctor treatment refusals because of potential preexisting conditions and such. Even just a bit of research into the matter shows that the portion of DNA tested is tiny. A YouTube channel, smarter everyday actually addressed the questions with scientists at one of the major companies. His answers made a lot of sense. (I personally did not do any of the health info portions. So that may be something different.)

The Charlotte Observer recently did a two part story on DNA companies. I'm only referring to that, nothing to do with the Zodiac case, which I don't think is what you are referring to either. Go to their web site, www.charlotteobserver.com and you should be able to find the story.

My primary point was that the DNA info you received, absent genealogy, is not going to be as revealing as the companies' advertising indicates. The Observer's article was more toward the preservation and protection of the data provided by their customers.