I had mine done a couple of years ago at 23 and Me. I got surprising results. Since then I have read articles on people who had their's done at all the DNA places and each one was slightly different. I think it had to do with the software they used. Makes you wonder though.

DNA Test comparison

My daughter & I both did the test through Ancestry. It identified us as immediate family, identified my niece and her paternal aunt and uncle also. But, although it has come up with over 2000 matches for me (mostly 4th-5th cousins related on my mother's side), I haven't been able to identify anyone that might be related to my father's side of the family, which is what I was hoping for. The problem is that so many have run the test but don't have family trees on the site and don't permit messaging, so there is no way to know how we may have come to share DNA, or for some, which side of the family they may be on.

The ethnicity estimates had one shortfall for us -- my daughter was curious about possible native American ancestry on her grandmother's side but that category also includes most all of central and south America, and doesn't pinpoint the North American tribes in any way (we already knew about an Hispanic ancestor).

My sister and I had our DNA done through Ancestry. Siblings will get slightly different results because each child inherits different "pieces" of DNA from each parent. So, our results are a few percentages off from each other.

We didn't have our DNA tested to find out "where we're from" as we know our heritage. Our father's ancestry is all Italian (paternal grandmother was the first generation to be born in USA -- great-grandparents and everyone before them were all born in Italy. Paternal grandfather born in Italy as well as all before him). Our mother's side were from Ireland and Germany. The DNA results will include other countries because of several reasons -- countries have changed borders over time; and at some point in time generations earlier an ancestor's country was invaded by another country...

The reason for getting our DNA tested was to try to find more people who are somehow related to us. I currently have 8,612 people on our family tree. Obviously, they are not all direct relations, but I have documentation on all of them to prove that they belong where they are. Both Ancestry and Family Tree Maker (which I use) show the relationship of each person on the tree to whomever is designated as the "home person." I've got folks on the tree whose relationship to me is, for example, "Husband of grand niece of wife of great grandfather of [me]," and "Husband of 1st great aunt of husband of 1st cousin 2x removed of [me]," and "1st great grand nephew of wife of brother-in-law of 1st cousin of husband of 1st cousin 2x removed of [me]," and "Brother-in-law of sister-in-law of 1st cousin of husband of 1st cousin 2x removed of [me]."

I have these far-flung folks on my tree because, as I said, I have found documentation on them during my research. If I can document them, I add them. If having these people with their documentation on my tree helps someone else find people they wouldn't otherwise find, well, that's a good thing.

I was never that interested in family trees, since I was adopted. It's tempting to have my DNA tested to get a closer look at my origins.

My husband and son recently had their DNA tested through Ancestry.com. My husband's results were pretty much as expected although I didn't realize as Lindsey_CA stated that siblings will differ slightly - interesting point.

My son is adopted and while the test confirmed most of what we knew - there is some additional Ancestry we weren't aware of. All in all, it's been very interesting.

I would love to have my DNA tested, but can't justify the cost of the test. Maybe I will request it as a b/day or Christmas gift!

I had quite a few additional nationalities than my sister which was interesting! Off the top of my head I was 7% irish and she wasn't irish, and I was 2% african american and she wasn't.

Just wanted to add-people on this thread would probably like the show Long Lost Family. The hosts work to connect family members separated thru adoption, They use ancestry DNA as part of the search. Its a great show!

We've watched Long Lost Family and will watch tonight's episode. The comment that I made to my husband is that it's fantastic that these people finally get to connect with their "long losts," but if I were any one of them, I would not want to be filmed when meeting the "long lost" for the first time.

One of our favorite shows is Who Do You Think You Are? A new episode will follow tonight's new episode of Long Lost Family.

Finding Your Roots, hosted by Dr. Henry Gates, is another "find your ancestors" show, and it's on PBS. He always does the DNA tests for the celebrities he profiles. I've quit watching that show, however, because I lost faith in it after the "Ben Affleck incident."

For those who haven't heard what happened... Ben Affleck was one of the celebrities who was on Finding Your Roots. But, during the course of discovering information about Ben's ancestors, it was discovered that Ben's great-great-great-grandfather, Benjamin Cole, was a wealthy land owner in Savannah Georgia. Cole was also the Sheriff of the county. And, Benjamin Cole owned 25 slaves. Apparently, when filming the episode, Ben Affleck didn't seem outraged about the slavery -- he "took it well." But, after the filming was over, he requested that this portion of the show be edited out. And Gates gave in because of Affleck's "superstar" status. Several other celebrities have been informed, both on Finding Your Roots as well as on Who Do You Think You Are? that an ancestor was a slave owner. All of them took the information with the attitude of "well, I wish it weren't true, but that was what went on at that time in history and there's nothing I can do about it now."

No, there was no German in my DNA results that 'My Heritage' I had done ... just mostly: 'British & Irish 72%', (probably of my Mother's both parent's English side), East European (? what are these?), 12%, Scandinavian only 5.7%!! Yet BOTH my paternal grandparents came to the U.S. x Sweden & the family tree I just had done by a lady in Sweden verified what I had been told by my father & it went back 5 or 6 generations of the same name in Sweden she found & no other than Swedish names on female or male families... thus, why only 5.7%?

I understand that some places like Sweden have not been doing this as long as we in the U.S. so not sure how big, old or accurate their base is for comparison of names.

I may try another site but hope my paternal nephew (my father's brother's son) will have his ethnicity done now to compare since he has the XY gene feature & I only the XX! Think most done in the U.S by all these recent DNA sites are autosomal?

I realize a lot of folks are interested in genetic relatives in recent times/generations; I just am interested in the verifying the very early genetic lines however. I find it fascinating but find so many think it is strange!

I would like to do mine....not so much for my ancestry.... I know my father's side very well, but not so much my mother's. I would hope it might help find a baby my sister put up for adoption in 1947. I would really like to do my horse, Val. Texas A&M can tell you what breed he is. I know he is a Quarter Horse...but UC Davis can tell you his bloodline and identity, if he was tested previously, which I doubt. Of the two.... his or mine, I would probably rather do his.

We had our family tree done on my mothers-fathers side. They went all the way back to Armenia. From there they settled in Turkey. Something happened and the fam moved to France. A few settled in Germany after that, then for a few generations some lived in The Netherlands (where my grandfather was born, as was my mother). I was made in The Netherlands, born in Canada. My dads side also settled in France, but we never checked before that. From France, they too went to Germany and for a few generations before my dad was born, moved to The Netherlands. I am a first generation Canadian on both sides of the family.

I used 23andMe. All European--no surprise. The only surprises were a little Scandinavian and a little Italian. I never would have guessed the Italian. Oh, and a little Neanderthal. :-)

Would someone please explain what I'm missing by having only my DNA tested without seeing a male relative's results? I've read it's important to have both male and female tested, but I've never understood why. Thanks!

I know my mother's family came to the US in the late 1800's and early 1900's. The countries they came from were Germanic. They identify as German although I don't think the places, such as Prussia, were technically known as Germany then. I was curious about the line from Luxemburg. Apparently, there are only about 1500 people in the US who identify as being Luxembourgers because they often married Germans and claim to be Germain instead. My great grandmother was born in the US, but her parents were from Luxembourg.

My dad's family claims a several different origins including Native American, but so far we haven't proved it. I'm doing my own research and looking at others. So far, I can legitimately go back seven generations on one line and there are twelve generations that have been researched on another. I see a lot of trees using wrong information because people are so desperate to go back further. I'm looking at lines, but I'm not so much interested in getting names as I am pictures and stories. I'd rather have smaller trees, but know more about the people.

I have never thought about doing DNA, but it is very interesting to me. I have so many friends that say they are 100% Dutch, Italian or whatever it may be. Really? What is on our Birth Certificates is not always the truth. Many people had children with someone other than their spouse and we never would know. All of us are "mutts" LOL

I would love to do it, not so much for the family tree stuff but just the genetic stuff. What genes do I carry for what type thing, and where did my genes come from. I find the reports are too general for me so I haven't put out the money yet LOL.

Dances.

I am currently waiting for my results from My Heritage. It should be mostly Irish, Scottish and English.

Dances_in-garden If you have your DNA done with Ancestry you can upload it to a site called Promethease.com and for $5.00 they give you a print out of all medical conditions you might be at risk for. Now it is not exact science but it can be very interesting.

Although two cousins from both sides of the family went back to 1700 for their genealogy research, I might still do a DNA. The paternal side came from Switzerland in the early 1700's and the maternal side from Germany in that same time frame.

Alisande, I think most of what you are wondering is explained in the DNA FAQs on Ancestry.

The missus gave the testing thing to me for Christmas. It took several weeks to get the results. My father's family came from Prague and my mother's family came from Ireland. The results show 60% west Europe (wherever that is), that was the biggest number by far. Ireland came in at 4%.

I have a first cousin who had his done several years ago and took an extended trip to Ireland to discover more information. He has created an extensive tree on my mother's side. My father did some searching on his own about 45 years ago. He ran into problems with all the females in the family who married and he could not find their names. His grandfather was one of 13 siblings. Big family but somewhat difficult to trace.

I asked my three sons if they wanted to do it and they all declined to be tested.

I agree with the person (above) who is less interested in genetics or large 'trees' and more interested in WHO the people WERE -- life stories, piecing together the WHY of what happened.

My DH is an adoptee. Our DS is an adoptee. I assisted many adult adoptees and birth family members in search and reunion through Truthseekers in Adoption in Chicago over twenty years ago. IMO it is a *crime* that adults cannot easily access their OWN information. There still is no protection for people being adopted today -- or being 'made to order' for the purpose.

Do others who've taken the test get access to my information if I decide to take one? If there's some related DNA?

We had ours done and I was one that was very surprised. My Dad was German, his father came over and his mother's family came over as well (although she was born here) and with genealogy that I had done, I thought I would be probably 75% German. Nope -- I wasn't even half. I was 30% British/Irish, then Scandinavian, then Finnish. And then there was my German! I am thinking that perhaps those who CAME OVER only lived in Germany that they did not have German roots! That's the only thing that made sense. My DH, however, was almost 100% what we found from doing his genealogy. Even down to the date for his Indian ancestor (Trail of Tears era rather than 1890s era).

Like I said, I haven't done the dna. I've come across two different adoption stories in the last few months. The first was a great aunt by marriage. I had heard she had given a child up for adoption when she was a teenager, but didn't have details. I saw from info on Ancestry that her child's family knew who she was. Mom and child have both passed in the last ten years. I didn't contact the biological information, but added some info and a couple of pictures I had. The biological great grandson contacted me to let me know they had found the biological family through a dna test. He told also me his grandmother had lived a good life. I was able to share that with my other relatives who had originally told me about the adoption.

The second adoption story was unexpected. I found a second cousin once removed who is looking for our shared family. Her mother died unexpectedly at age 20. I think her father must have been in the military and was unable to care for her so she went to live with another relative of her father's. The adoption has never been a secret, but the mom died so young that not much was known. My research matched her info, but the grandma had a different last name. I contacted them thinking the last name was a stage name. They didn't know. They didn't know grandma's maiden name. I asked another distant relative if he had any ideas. Meanwhile, I located this lady's uncle who is close to 80. I'm not sure where it goes from here. The uncle and his wife are in poor health. I have a few questions I would like to ask. I'm hoping they will share some photos of my great great grandfather and grandmother. I've never seen any.

mimipadv No one can access your DNA but you get a list of people who match you if you are doing Ancestry or FTDNA. The DNA itself is never shared unless you download it yourself and decide to share it with someone.

For those who are thinking about this, Ancestry is offering 10% off its DNA testing until March 19.

From what I've read, your DNA testing ends up in a government database like your fingerprints. If there's an unsolved crime, the local government agencies can access the DNA database and find someone linked genetically and question them about their otherwise "unknown" genetically linked relative whose DNA was found at a crime.

drewsmaga, either your recollection isn't accurate or the source you read was wrong.

According to information on ancestry.com's site (that I found through a Google search), it appears that DNA information is only disclosed in response to a court issued search warrant. Not otherwise. Check it out yourself.

I have an old (Great- Great Grandmother's) shadow box containing a 'wreath' inside made of many different locks of hair from members of my Mother's family! I find it rather strange/odd to look at those locks different shades of color... but guess it was popular to do these things back then?! What a mix of NA in there!!! Actually, it would be helpful DNA- wise if we all would/ had save something of 'us' ... a lock of hair, nail clippings, etc. for many reasons for later DNA search! Nor sure if sample age is important or not ...

Is interesting to find some reports from a couple different DNA places our family has done ... some quite different form others too!!

I just got my results today. The part about South Europe is a surprise.

Europe

100.0%

North and West Europe

79.9%

British and Irish

49.8%

Scandinavian

19.4%

North and West European

10.7%

South Europe

20.1%

Iberian

11.1%

Sardinian

6.5%

Italian

2.5%

Lindy, how do they explain the fact that those percentages add up to 200%?

It looks like there's an overall group breakdown, and then percentages within the group

North and West 79.9 + South 20.1 = 100

South : Iberian 11.1+Sardinian 6.5 + Italian 2.5 = 20.1

So the total would be 200% if you add the group subtotals plus the individual percentages.

49.8+19.4+10.7=79.9 N & W Europe + 11.1+6.5+2.5=20.1 South

79.9+20.1=100% European

Elmer you are adding the numbers twice. My #s might be more clear if there were bold or colored totals for each category.

No, I was quickly illustrating the math. Just as you, with the same answer, except I labeled the individual numbers.

79.9 and 20.1 are the subtotals that add to 100%

The second line of my comment was to show the individual components that add to the 20.1 South Subtotal. I used that as it was shorter. I didn't duplicate the illustration by showing the individual items that added to the North and West subtotal of 79.9.

If you add together the individual components, and add to that the two subtotals (which themselves are separate sums including all the individual components), you get 200%. Because each item when doing that is counted twice. That was the answer to alisande's question.

Yes, sample age can be important. Samples can deteriorate over time, especially if left in conditions that are "hostile" to them.

How convinced are people that the test results are accurate (or at least partially accurate)? I guess I'm a bit skeptical. Everyone seems so surprised (not just here but other people I've talked to) about the results. And, although I understand that siblings can be slightly different, how could someone (above) have 7% French and a sibling zero?

Please understand that I'm very, very interested and would love to have mine done, just out of curiosity, but am wondering if it'll turn out that it's partially bogus. I'm not meaning to doubt anyone here at all.

I wonder if anyone has had their DNA tested by two or more different companies. It'd be interesting to know if the results came out the same.

I've been thinking about giving a DNA test to my husband for his birthday and am hoping that it's valid.

I am convinced that the results are accurate. What is not accurate is the Ethnicity estimates. They are just approximations of your ethnicity. They are based on samples collected now in modern times. DNA is great for connecting you to your matches and combined with old fashioned genealogy it is a great tool in helping to add to your family tree. I have tested with two different companies and yes the results are the same..not ethnicity but matches to children, grandchildren, cousins etc.

I think they are accurate. DH's was 100% the way his genealogy showed. Well, except for the 2% Italian and way back when one of his European ancestors must have married an Italian girl and we didn't realize that (like late 1600s). But just because someone lived in a country and was considered "Irish" or "German" doesn't mean that they actually were of that stock.

Like Suzieque, I do not doubt the results, but I'm wondering if one service is better to use than another. DH and I have been thinking of having ours tested. From what I read about the services provided I wonder if the extra services are worth the extra $$?

I would expect a few surprises. DH's ancestry is at least a big part German and mine is pretty mixed (English, Scotch, American Indian), so who knows what may be mixed in with all of that.

When I had my test done several years ago, 23andMe said it looks at where our ancestors lived 500 years ago. I never quite understood that, especially with the Neanderthal genes showing up. Did Neanderthals even exist 500 years ago?

Yesterday I saw an ad for National Geographic's Helix that said their test looks back as far as 200,000 years. Perhaps some of you have read up on this stuff and can interpret it better than I.

I had my DNA done b 'My Heritage.com ' with a strange result of ancestors! I convinced hubby to take one so this time I chose 'Ancestry.com' & decided to take this one also to compare to the first one I had done on myself! Will see how they compare... or if they do?!

DNA tests might reveal something different from what we expect, but it doesn't necessarily mean somebody was running around on their spouse back in 1725 LOL. In a book called The Madonnas of Leningrad, set at the Hermitage Museum during World War II, there was a chapter in which a young girl who was on watch for incendiaries on the museum's roof was raped by a German paratrooper. She did not realize that she had conceived until the museum was liberated early in the spring. When her husband returned from war after a number of years away, she and her toddler greeted him. She told him "this is our child." He never questioned her, and the couple raised the child. Although this is a fictional account, I bet it happens a lot.

I saw a blurb for a piece on a "news" program saying they tested identical triplets and "you won't believe the results". I didn't see the segment, but I did find a write-up of what appears to be that segment.
http://www.insideedition.com/investigative/21784-how-reliable-are-home-dna-ancestry-tests-investigation-uses-triplets-to-find-out

The results reported differed across a set of identical triplets, but less than I would have guessed: e.g. One triplet was 6% Scandinavian the other two were 0%

I would also have liked for them to have done an "across companies" test where they send the same triplets' DNA samples to three different testing companies, and compare the results across the companies. But being a "news" program, they aren't especially versed in scientific rigor.

Another post I found, asserts that there are three big reliable testing companies, and a bunch of other companies that have sprung up to tap into this burgeoning market, whose results are more dubious.
https://dna-explained.com/2016/01/22/genealogy-and-ethnicity-dna-testing-3-legitimate-companies/

Very interesting, bob. What I found most interesting, at the end of the segment, was the comment that the confidence level of the results is 50%. That essentially says the results aren't highly reliable. That isn't something that those who provide this service make as clear as perhaps they should. And it's something that those who have done the test, or are considering doing so, should consider.

Ok, thanks. I guess I'll wait a few more years until this thing proves itself out more.