GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-01 > 1073160481


From: "Lucy Hubrich" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DNAPrint Test Worked for Me
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 14:19:11 -0600
References: <23454-3FF5C41D-6778@storefull-3137.bay.webtv.net>


Ah, yes Ray, I forgot to mention that after both my uncle's tests came back
and I realized that I had the potential to have Native American ancestry in
me from both sides of my family. I therefore had the DNAPrint test
performed on myself and it came back 20% Native American. I do not consider
this out of line since siblings can inherit differing amounts of the
combined DNA, and I could not directly test either of my parents. So, my
question to you is, how big of a percentage does a person need before you
consider it indicative of Native American ancestry, or do you not trust the
test at all??

This, of course, is turning into a "religious" war and neither of us are
going to change the other's mind, but I was just wondering if there was a
threshold where you actually thought it might be worth looking into?

Lucy Hubrich

----- Original Message -----
From: "Raymond Whritenour" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 1:18 PM
Subject: [DNA] DNAPrint Test Worked for Me


> Lucy:
>
> With all due respect, if you had asked your uncle for the pictures,
> during the normal course of genealogical research, you would have found
> the pictures of your ancestor who "looks Native American," anyway. Your
> uncles' DNAPrint 2.0 BGA test results don't prove anything about your
> minority ancestry. The fact that a small MLE percentage of NA showed up
> on their tests merely provided a catayst which prompted you to look for
> more information. If people start looking for NA ancestors based on a
> small percentage NA MLE from this test, there's going to be an awful lot
> of disappointed people out there!
>
> Ray Whritenour
>
> ______________________________

This thread: