independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 22nd Nov 2017 11:31pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > General Discussion > AncestryDNA - yay or nay?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 08/08/17 9:44pm

PurpleJedi

avatar

AncestryDNA - yay or nay?

How do you all feel about AncestryDNA?

For those of you unfamiliar with them...you send them a vial of saliva, and they tell you where your ancestral lineage is from.

I just saw that they have a special - $69 for the DNA report.

But I am weary about giving my DNA to a company that may be hoarding/collecting all of this DNA data.

Also it irks me that while they can isolate European tribes (Irish, Scottish, Northern Italian, Greek, etc.) when it comes to the Americas it's all "Native American".
confused

Anyway...has anyone here done it???

What say you, Org?

By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 08/08/17 9:46pm

luv4u

Moderator

avatar

moderator

I'm wary of anything like that.

I do not believe it would be authentic nor would it really tell you where your ancestors are from. Just some companies way of making $$$.

I prefer to do my own family research smile

Edmonton, AB - canada

Ohh purple joy oh purple bliss oh purple rapture!
REAL MUSIC by REAL MUSICIANS - Prince
"I kind of wish there was a reason for Prince to make the site crash more" ~~ Ben
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 08/08/17 9:49pm

PurpleJedi

avatar

luv4u said:

I'm wary of anything like that.

I do not believe it would be authentic nor would it really tell you where your ancestors are from. Just some companies way of making $$$.

I prefer to do my own family research smile


thumbs up!

By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 08/09/17 12:49am

morningsong

avatar

I've read you have to be careful about which company.


Maybe this will help.

https://isogg.org/wiki/Li..._companies



the beware site

http://www.genealogyjunki...links.html
[Edited 8/9/17 1:15am]
“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 08/09/17 5:51am

uPtoWnNY

I've used AncestrybyDNA & African Ancestry. The results were eye-opening.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 08/09/17 6:38am

PennyPurple

avatar

My brother did it, the results didn't come out like we expected. Our oral family history says we have a lot of Cherokee in us. His DNA came back as NO native american. My son also did it and NO native american.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 08/09/17 8:36am

PurpleJedi

avatar

Is anyone worried about a company "owning" your DNA?

hmm

By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 08/09/17 8:45am

purplethunder3
121

avatar

I'm curious what the results would be if someone sent a sample to AncestryDNA and compared it to a sample processed by a private lab.

Find strength in that which remains...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 08/09/17 9:36am

morningsong

avatar

PurpleJedi said:

Is anyone worried about a company "owning" your DNA?

hmm




I think there is a element of that. But personally I've already signed a waiver with one company years ago allowing them to use my DNA, so I'm already in somebody's database.

And since DNA is in ever cell, someone beinging shady could still collect from people without them knowing, if there are neferious intentions that is, so I don't see how not taking the test "protects" one from aHoles.
“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 08/09/17 9:38am

Empress

PurpleJedi said:

luv4u said:

I'm wary of anything like that.

I do not believe it would be authentic nor would it really tell you where your ancestors are from. Just some companies way of making $$$.

I prefer to do my own family research smile


thumbs up!

Co-sign! Just a way to make money and I wouldn't trust the results they sent me.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 08/09/17 10:43am

deebee

avatar

I start to turn into a paranoid conspiracy theorist when it comes to my data. I don't even go near any of these health apps that track your fitness and tell you what to do, as I imagine these as a ruse to gather and illicitly sell a wealth of actuarial data that will surely damn me somewhere along the line. grandpa (Starting with the moment they realise I don't actually have an exercise regime....)

Same with the DNA thing. I'd be afeared that they'd take my genetic code and clone me as a sex doll or something. (And, if they didn't, I'd want a good explanation why not.) batting eyes

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 08/09/17 11:30am

morningsong

avatar

purplethunder3121 said:

I'm curious what the results would be if someone sent a sample to AncestryDNA and compared it to a sample processed by a private lab.



That's my thing I'm leery about getting bs results, plus you have to make up your mind what you want to know, do you want your ancestry in the last 100 years, 500 years, 10,000 years. I don't think I care about 10,000 years ago, on the fence about 500 years ago.

“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 08/09/17 12:07pm

XxAxX

avatar

Until the day that DNA cannot be copyrighted by anyone other than the DNA holder, I'll wait on sending in my sample. Too weird providing such personal info to a corporate entity that might one day misuse the info embedded in DNA, imo
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 08/09/17 12:14pm

morningsong

avatar

XxAxX said:

Until the day that DNA cannot be copyrighted by anyone other than the DNA holder, I'll wait on sending in my sample. Too weird providing such personal info to a corporate entity that might one day misuse the info embedded in DNA, imo



I know they can't trademark DNA sequencing, at least for now. But every possible outcome, I have no idea.

“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 08/09/17 12:28pm

fortuneandsere
ndipity

avatar

Hmm... does DNA dictate personality? How much can be predicted. To what extent nature vs nurture. hmmm


Things aren't always what they seem. One example. Lots of people call me racist. Even though my best friends are Mo Rocco, Al Geria and Ken Ya! I'll never understand it disbelief



  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 08/09/17 4:06pm

XxAxX

avatar

morningsong said:

XxAxX said:

Until the day that DNA cannot be copyrighted by anyone other than the DNA holder, I'll wait on sending in my sample. Too weird providing such personal info to a corporate entity that might one day misuse the info embedded in DNA, imo



I know they can't trademark DNA sequencing, at least for now. But every possible outcome, I have no idea.

sorry! i misspoke myself - the applicable word is patent, not copyright. it seems like a very murky issue right now and it makes me uneasy. i guess i'm not ready to voluntarily submit this kind of specifically personal DNA information to an entity for the purposes of an ancestry report. it's a blueprint for me and i am the only copy. you're right, thre high courts have been overturning patent claims on naturally occurring genes which is great news for us paranoiacs lol

http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/landmark-high-court-ruling-on-brca1-gene-patent-as-pensioner-wins-legal-case-20151006-gk2wvu.html A 69 year-old pensioner from Queensland has succeeded in a David-and-Goliath battle against a multinational corporation that claimed a patent over the "breast cancer" gene. Australia's highest court has unanimously ruled that a mutated gene that causes cancer cannot be subject to a patent, or the right to control use of the gene. The decision has been hailed as a "revolution in intellectual property" and a victory for public health and medical research. The case is a massive win for cancer survivor and grand...nne D'Arcy and the law firm that represented her, Maurice Blackburn, which took the case all the way to the High Court after repeated losses in the Federal Court. It argued that mutations in the so-called "breast cancer gene" BRCA1 were naturally occurring component of the human body that had been discovered, rather than an invention that could be patented.

http://www.preservearticles.com/2011120618179/patenting-of-human-genes-moral-and-ethical-issues.html INTRODUCTION “If you have got at least one kidney, a company called biogen owns the patent for atleast (sic) one of your genes, it’s called the KIM gene, and the kidney uses it in the process of self-repair. And if we can taste things with our tongue, the university of California owns the rights to three of our genes, called TCP-1, 2 and 3: it’s not clear in the patent application what the owners plan to do with their rights to these genes”.

The conflicts between science and the law prevails from centuries and have greatly intensified with rapid progress and has shaped our world reliable on technologies to make our lives more efficient. In the early days, science and law came into conflict because scientific theories and the prevailing concepts of law were highly divergent and different. The conflict we face today is not whether scientific postulates that are contrary to rule of law should prevail, but it’s whether and to what extent law, or government, should or should not influence scientific progress. People, in their mind need to keep society under control, and this will continue to strive towards establishing a balance between the extremes of scientific innovation and the established rules of law.

continued at link above

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 08/09/17 11:49pm

morningsong

avatar

shrug I know when a company wants to do something they do it so I not banking it's a forever thing.

On June 13, 2013, in the case of the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that human genes cannot be patented in the U.S. because DNA is a "product of nature." The Court decided that because nothing new is created when discovering a gene, there is no intellectual property to protect, so patents cannot be granted. Prior to this ruling, more than 4,300 human genes were patented. The Supreme Court's decision invalidated those gene patents, making the genes accessible for research and for commercial genetic testing.

The Supreme Court's ruling did allow that DNA manipulated in a lab is eligible to be patented because DNA sequences altered by humans are not found in nature. The Court specifically mentioned the ability to patent a type of DNA known as complementary DNA (cDNA). This synthetic DNA is produced from the molecule that serves as the instructions for making proteins (called messenger RNA).

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/p...enepatents


All laboratories that perform health-related testing, including genetic testing, are subject to federal regulatory standards called the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) or even stricter state requirements. CLIA standards cover how tests are performed, the qualifications of laboratory personnel, and quality control and testing procedures for each laboratory. By controlling the quality of laboratory practices, CLIA standards are designed to ensure the analytical validity of genetic tests.
“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 08/11/17 3:23pm

uPtoWnNY

PennyPurple said:

My brother did it, the results didn't come out like we expected. Our oral family history says we have a lot of Cherokee in us. His DNA came back as NO native american. My son also did it and NO native american.

I always thought I had more Indigenous American than European DNA, but it's the opposite:

64% sub-Saharan African

18% European

16% Indigenous American

2% Asian

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 08/11/17 3:32pm

morningsong

avatar

Oh, yeah how could I let my memory lapse so. I just watched the doc on this a few months ago. smh


Henrietta Lacks (born Loretta Pleasant; August 1, 1920 – October 4, 1951)[2] was an African American woman whose cancer cells were the source of the HeLa cell line, the first immortalized cell line and one of the most important cell lines in medical research. An immortalized cell line will reproduce indefinitely under specific conditions, and the HeLa cell line continues to be a source of invaluable medical data to the present day.[3]

Lacks was the unwitting source of these cells from a tumor biopsied during treatment for cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. in 1951. These cells were then cultured by George Otto Gey who created the cell line known as HeLa, which is still used for medical research.[4] As was then the practice, no consent was obtained to culture her cells, nor was she or her family compensated for their use.


Not exactly DNA per se, but cause for people being cautious.

“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 08/12/17 11:43am

Lammastide

avatar

I've purchased an Ancestry subscription and have been satisfied with the value so far.

The company offers not only DNA testing kits, but a family tree-building platform and access to Ancestry-owned databases compiling something like 16 billion global historical records. In my case, the mix of services has largely corroborated my family's oral history and has helped me fill out gaps in genealogical research I'd already begun, in some cases calling out points of connection with family branches estranged for centuries.

As commercial DNA testing services go, Ancestry is forthright about the constant evolution of the field. It's only been about 2.5 years since autosomal testing methods have been offered, exploring subscribers’ genomes at 700,000 points across any and all descendant lines (vs. older mitochondrial or Y-chromosomal testing methods, which traced only single matrilineal or patrilineal lines, respectively). To put it plainly, stuff like this takes time to perfect. That said, in surveying commercial DNA testing company results, I generally have encountered differences in interpretations rather than raw data. (And Ancestry does provide raw data, which customers are at liberty to shop around to other labs.)

Morningsong suggested that a potential subscriber should know what they before spending their money. She's correct. Ancestry is arguably the industry leader in family genealogical info, whereas competitor 23andMe is known for offering superior health-related genetic analyses. Both companies, as others in the field, are capitalizing on the interest in ethnic research. But customers need to use a bit of common sense in this area, too...

Because each subscriber's DNA markers are compared to those of reference samples already on hand, the breadth and context of information available to subscribers will only improve as the library of submitted DNA grows. That is to say, yes, subscribers currently will have more nuanced European ethnic information available to them than, say, Indigenous American information, because to date commercial DNA testing companies' clientele has been largely European descended.

Another thing to remember where ethnic research is involved is that humans are an extraordinarily migratory species, and the world has rarely seen altogether discrete, static human populations or geographic borders that have existed as much more than undulating sociopolitical whims. It should make sense, then, that ethnic assessments vis-a-vis the more mathematic study of genes bear some degree of subjectivity, may vary slightly from one company to the next, and may turn up occasional surprises. As an example, it shouldn’t raise much concern if one company churns out regional results suggesting a subscriber has, say, 75% Iberian heritage and 25% North African; while another company parses nationally at 65% Spanish or Portuguese, 15% Moroccan/Algerian/Tunisian, perhaps 12% Malian, and maybe even 8% British (as Gibraltar, a part of Iberia along with Spain and Portugal, has been a British territory since the early 1700s with plenty horny Englishmen. smile ) Part of the fun of genealogy, for me at least, is hitting oddball data and figuring if/out how it squares with the broader picture I’ve been able to construct of my family and global history. Services like Ancestry’s are good for helping in the process, even if they can't answer every single lingering question a subscriber might have.

[Edited 8/26/17 7:57am]

Ὅσον ζῇς φαίνου
μηδὲν ὅλως σὺ λυποῦ
πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶ τὸ ζῆν
τὸ τέλος ὁ χρόνος ἀπαιτεῖ.”
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 08/12/17 11:59am

Lammastide

avatar

morningsong said:

Oh, yeah how could I let my memory lapse so. I just watched the doc on this a few months ago. smh


Henrietta Lacks (born Loretta Pleasant; August 1, 1920 – October 4, 1951)[2] was an African American woman whose cancer cells were the source of the HeLa cell line, the first immortalized cell line and one of the most important cell lines in medical research. An immortalized cell line will reproduce indefinitely under specific conditions, and the HeLa cell line continues to be a source of invaluable medical data to the present day.[3]

Lacks was the unwitting source of these cells from a tumor biopsied during treatment for cervical cancer at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. in 1951. These cells were then cultured by George Otto Gey who created the cell line known as HeLa, which is still used for medical research.[4] As was then the practice, no consent was obtained to culture her cells, nor was she or her family compensated for their use.


Not exactly DNA per se, but cause for people being cautious.


I've heard of this case. Definitely interesting.

Still, unless I'm being framed for a crime, I don't think I much care who's got access to my DNA. It's not like I scripted it. I'm not exactly collecting billions now for having kept it (mostly) to myself. And if my genome could be used for life-saving research or the manufacture of a Lammastide sex toy... well, happy to oblige. batting eyes Besides that, I'm of a similar mind as you: If some interest is shady and powerful enough to do truly diabolical stuff with my genome, I don't think there's much I could do to stop them.

Ὅσον ζῇς φαίνου
μηδὲν ὅλως σὺ λυποῦ
πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶ τὸ ζῆν
τὸ τέλος ὁ χρόνος ἀπαιτεῖ.”
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 08/12/17 12:36pm

Lammastide

avatar

uPtoWnNY said:

PennyPurple said:

My brother did it, the results didn't come out like we expected. Our oral family history says we have a lot of Cherokee in us. His DNA came back as NO native american. My son also did it and NO native american.

I always thought I had more Indigenous American than European DNA, but it's the opposite:

64% sub-Saharan African

18% European

16% Indigenous American

2% Asian


I've come across a decent amount of commentary that touches on this phenomenon among non-Indigenous American -- and definitely African American -- families. So many of us relay oral histories suggesting some nondescript relative was a "full-blooded" Cherokee, Blackfoot, Navajo, etc. smile It's romantic, and often called on to explain the occurrence of certain not-so-obvious hair textures or skin and eye colours in our families, but it is unfortunately often untrue. The majority of us either have no such ancestry, or hints of it much smaller or more distant that our stories suggest.

I'd been told for years that some recent female ascendant in my dad's line was a "full-blooded" Cherokee (whatever that means). My DNA analysis uncovered nothing to that effect. Everything else, though, was quite affirming of what I'd known to be my family history:

21% Ivory Coast/Ghana

17% Nigeria

13% Cameroon

13% Ireland

9% UK

...With traces of other West African and Mediterranean European markers.

Ὅσον ζῇς φαίνου
μηδὲν ὅλως σὺ λυποῦ
πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶ τὸ ζῆν
τὸ τέλος ὁ χρόνος ἀπαιτεῖ.”
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 08/12/17 8:52pm

Dalia11

My sister recently did it and a few of my other family members. I will be getting the kit eventually.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 08/12/17 9:07pm

PennyPurple

avatar

I was beginning to think that maybe there was a mailman or milkman somewhere down the line, that my Momma didn't tell us about. lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 08/13/17 6:53pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

XxAxX said:

Until the day that DNA cannot be copyrighted by anyone other than the DNA holder, I'll wait on sending in my sample. Too weird providing such personal info to a corporate entity that might one day misuse the info embedded in DNA, imo



yeahthat

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's paladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 08/14/17 12:59pm

jaimestarr79

PurpleJedi!!! you should definitely do it. I did it and it's pretty cool. I think everyone should do it. Especially if you are Black. Most black people have so many gaps in their family tree. I've learned a lot about my family. I also confirmed who my father was. His family actually contacted me when it was discovered we were a dna match. I've found out that I was related to some major historical figures in my tree on my white side of my family. I found some long lost photos of long lost descendents and some interesting stories. Be prepared for some surprise in your family tree. You can choose your friends but not who you are related to.

For those of you who are paranoid about releasing your dna. Which i totally understand. You can always buy a credit card gift card and use that to buy your dna kit. You can use a fake name. You can also send your kit to a family member, friend, or a P.O. Box if your are concerned with privacy.

When doing your dna just remember your inherit half of your dna from your mother and half from your father. Your siblings don't always inherit the same portions of their parents dna. For example you may find native american in your dna and your full sibling may not. So if you are specifically looking for native american dna you may want to test both parents if they are living. If your parents arent available test all of your siblings and older aunts and uncles or grandparents.

The dna part is definitley cool, but you may have to atleast get a basic 6 month membership to get full access to alot of information. You can always cancel after 6 months. If you are tracing family in foreign countries you may need a world wide membership which is a little more. But with a basic membership often times you can get alot of info and photos of other people from looking at their family trees. you can compare your tree to other people that you are distantly related to.

Lastly, you can load your ancestry dna information on to GED match and compare your dna to people who used other testing companies like 23andme and heritage. GED match is 100% free. Good luck everybody on the org who is interested. Make sure you share your findings.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 08/14/17 8:31pm

PurpleJedi

avatar

cool

By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 08/15/17 6:44am

kitbradley

avatar

I've been curious about this but something in the back of my mind always told me it was probably a scam. I always said if I had some extra money to throw away, I would send in my cat's DNA and see what kind of results come back. lol

"It's not nice to fuck with K.B.! All you haters will see!" - Kitbradley
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 08/15/17 6:56pm

PurpleJedi

avatar

kitbradley said:

I've been curious about this but something in the back of my mind always told me it was probably a scam. I always said if I had some extra money to throw away, I would send in my cat's DNA and see what kind of results come back. lol


spit

By St. Boogar and all the saints at the backside door of Purgatory!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 08/16/17 11:18am

morningsong

avatar

Ok, you've motivated me. This weekend, I'm going to start, I'm doing both 23&me and AncestryDNA.

Looks like a lot of work tracking and filling out stuff on line but I'll try and be consistant. But don't bank on it.

But I'll give you my results in a couple of months.

“Do I dare Disturb the universe?”
― T.S. Eliot

“Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it”
― T.S. Eliot
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > General Discussion > AncestryDNA - yay or nay?