GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1109692196


From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Genealogy and DNA LIMITATIONS: Understanding exactly how tests reinforce folk ideologies.
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:49:56 +0000


Peter:

Mentioning OA (which sells 10 markers for the same price as FTDNA charges for 37) and their Viking certificate makes my blood boil so I am far from objective. However, if based on the 10 markers below they came to the conclusion that you are of Viking descent, then I strongly suggest that you ask for your money back. It is clear that all they have done is looked at (as John said) DYS392 and since it is 11 you are an instant Viking. This is about about as close the the "f" word (the one applying to business) as I can imagine. They are wrong. Your haplotype, while needing to be confirmed by SNP testing, is very likely J2 not R1a (old Hg 3). The two are as different as night and day and not once have I ever seen a J2 DNA signature in any of the Norse colonies such as Orkney, Shetland, Faroes or Iceland.

Since in addition to R1a, I1a and R1b are found in abundance in Norway and Sweden then there is no possible way to tell a person whose ancestors are from Britain that they are or are not Viking based on a haplogroup signature. While R1a in Britain is probably Viking, I1a is also Viking but more likely Anglo - Saxon, and R1b is also Viking, but more likely Anglo - Saxon and even more likely native Briton.

I took the Viking test and have a certificate somewhere indicating that I am not of Viking ancestry but probably of native Celtic descent. I paid 25 pounds for them to look at DYS392 and see it is 13 and send me an authoratative framable certificate that is nothing more than guesswork and in essense fleece me of good money for a bad product. They never divulged their methods but now it is clear to all - your signature proves it - if you are an DYS392=11 you are a Viking. Fortunately I passed on the opportunity of having them look at my maternal uncle's Shetland R1a Viking signature, see the magic 11, and congratulate me on the obvious - that my grandfather was of Viking descent.

I admit to being a bit naieve (as were we all) two years ago and trusted that OA was doing some special test on my DNA sample (which I now know that they destroy), or using some powerful algorithm developed at Oxford. Even then I knew about the DYS392 "trick" thanks to academic publications but thought that no company with anything remotely resembling business ethics would ever just look at one marker. I was ripped off in the most egretious fashion. I can't believe they are still selling this product. Of course it gets worse now with the Ghengis Khan "test" (information also freely available in the research literature). How many of their customers are from Mongolia or places "visted" by Khan or his kin - I can answer that, zero to 1%. I wonder if they have ever even once found someone with the published signature of Khan. But I don't need to wonder if they are laughing all the way to the bank.

David F.



-------------- Original message --------------

> In thanking John for his comments, and admitting to being a distinct newbie
> on this list, I report my results from OA as:
>
> DYS19 = 14
> DYS388 = 12
> DYS390 = 22
> DYS391 = 10
> DYS392 = 11
> DYS393 = 13
> DYS389i = 10
> DYS389ii-i = 17
> DYS425 = 12
> DYS426 = 12
>
> I understand that others use different conventions for the 389 markers and
> 425 seems not to be used.
> This said, I would much appreciate a deduction of my Haplogroup and, if
> probably of non-Viking descent, shall ask OA for my 30 back!
>
> With gratitude for the forbearance of all
>
> Peter Bailey

This thread: