GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1269728638


From: John Carr <>
Subject: [DNA] 23andme cousin results
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:27:18 -0700


David,

Are you referring to a published study or your own family study below?

Were you a participant in the 'known cousins' study 23andme is conducting? With all the testing that you have done with known cousins, your results would seem relevant to the 23andme study. If everyone who tested believed known cousins pointed this out to 23andme and 23andme compiles these into a study, it would probably do a lot to add confidence or discredit the family finder results. So far, I have not had anyone from Family Finder that can show a shared lineage to my own, despite numerous potential matches at very low fractional percentage match levels. Many people do not even respond to requests for contact. I have a known cousin whose test sample should be available for the lab soon, I am excited to see the level of match between us. My paternal great grand 'father and mother' are his paternal great great grand 'father and mother'.

FTDNA should provide results from a similar study of known cousins if they want to validate their new test.

John Carr



On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, <> wrote:
>
> On the up side I am jazzed at what 23andMe has been about to say about the
> amount of sharing between the various cousins in the study compared with
> predicted percentages. It has also helped to clear up a genealogical
> mystery about one branch being descendants of a half sibling to my line.
> The numbers help immeasurably, assuming that the sample size is reasonably
> large - we have had a few anomalies which to this day I still cannot explain
> - and "cousins" out there with more sharing than my known cousins, but
> nothing in the paper trail to explain it. Chaos rules supreme.
>
> David K. Faux.



This thread: