How Accurate is Genetic Testing 23 and Me?

[DisneyDebbie]

But they can only match to those in their database. If some long/lost relative hasn't also submitted their DNA, they clearly they can't be identified as a match.

Yes, they only match to those that have submitted their DNA to the same database. But there is no way to match a percentage of DNA and not be related (as in someone saying it’s a scam) If your DNA matches with them, you share a common ancestor. It could be back generations or it could be closer- depends on how much DNA is shared.

 

[tony67]

It is about 5 years ago now and about half the extended family now have a relationship with this woman and half see her as the devil.

This is the problem with these things - and from what I read its pretty common - the fallout can be bad.

 

[tvguy]

This is the problem with these things - and from what I read its pretty common - the fallout can be bad.

And that can be so sad because so often, the "event" that prompted the fallout happened before most of those folks were born.

 

[tzolkin]

The idea of matching to a single specific other person would depend on how large of a database they have. Law enforcement organizations have private networks of DNA from individuals and would seem to be more relevant to that sort of individual matching.

Why would law enforcement DNA samples be "more relevant"? I thought CODIS only has information on individuals involved in crimes. Wouldn't it be more likely to find relatives among the millions of people who have done tests like Ancestry or 23andMe?

I'd always be a bit iffy on trusting there services.

How did they even get in touch with you - don't you have to agree to it? I guess in the end only one family member has to. That is specifically to not cause these sort of family issues. I'm pretty sure I've heard stores of this type of thing and they are not all that accurate.

We had a similar situation where a niece showed up out of nowhere.
Well not nowhere, one of our family members is very involved in this type of stuff for religious reasons and reached out to her.

Anyway - for some reason we got saddled with meeting this person - and I was a bit concerned it was going to be a scam or looking for money. Funny thing is they thought the exact same thing.

We were lucky and it turned out really well, but it does not look like this one will from what you are saying.
If you are going to take it further (or they force it) it in anyway I'd recommend getting a professional one done, not 23 and me or whatever.

What do you mean they are "not all that accurate"? If you have a DNA match, it's because they are related to you. There's nothing really "iffy" about it.

As for the part in red, that seems fairly enlightening about your opinions on discouraging people from using DNA sites. Many people would be excited about having the opportunity to meet a relative that they didn't know existed rather than being "saddled" with meeting "this person".

 

[LoveDaisy]

They are accurate, if you have a DNA match, it’s a match. A co-worker found her birth father through them. It’s not why she did it, she was hoping to fill in some medical history and her half sister reached out. It’s been an amazing journey for her, they had been looking for her, her whole life!

 

[hertamaniac]

If someone gives up a child for adoption through anonymity, and then has that alleged child claim to have found their birth parent through 23 and Me decades later, what was the purpose of anonymity? And how is it protected?

And then if that alleged child refuses to go through a professional lab service for saliva testing of each themself and the potential birth parent, what does that say? It's <$400 for this service and wouldn't each party want to have more conclusive data since the potential anonymity breach?

 

[_19disnA]

Law enforcement databases have been built up over the years and likely have way more data to reference. Any database for 'matching' is only good if it has a large enough base to compare to. The first day one of these DNA companies sets up shop, they likely are starting from scratch.

 

[bdrex28]

A relative got one of those test kits as a joke at Christmas. They sent it in and got several pages of what I would describe as 'boiler plate' information and a lot of 28% of this or 47% of that. Only a very small amount of information was specific to him. The whole thing seemed more like a scam than anything else. Perhaps your experience was different. I would personally would never use those things and think it is safer to treat your DNA much like your SS# and never send it around to some random company. You have NO idea what they actually do with your information regardless of what they might say.

The idea of matching to a single specific other person would depend on how large of a database they have. Law enforcement organizations have private networks of DNA from individuals and would seem to be more relevant to that sort of individual matching.

The DNA houses such as ancestry.com for example are very accurate. I understand hesitation, but it's not something I was too worried about as a former Marine and Intelligence Officer. The government has my DNA and so much stuff on me that me doing the testing doesn't matter, LOL.

So many people don't want to think their parents or grandparents may have been promiscuous but it's part of life and the DNA sites have exposed a lot of "family history".

For example: I knew my Father was adopted and so did he. But he never had any desire to know about his biological family. I had done ancestry many years ago and got a message. I had forgotten about it but a few months later I remembered the notice and went and read it. Ends up it was from my father's biological niece, her grandmother is my dad's mom. They had ZERO idea that their grandmother had a child (my father) . She (my biological grandmother) was 99 at the time and told her family the story. But, obviously in 1943 the perception was much different than today so she never told anyone she had a child, etc.

The great part is it was really interesting learning and meeting the family, etc.

But again, not everyone wants to know and if that's the case then I'd highly recommend not getting tested. However, if your child or your sibling or parent or any semi-close relation does then law enforcement can connect that to people they have identified as a suspect, and once they do get a court ordered DNA sample even if the suspect is unaware they can connect this. They used this on the Idaho murder case with Bryan Kohberger.

 

[tony67]

Why would law enforcement DNA samples be "more relevant"? I thought CODIS only has information on individuals involved in crimes. Wouldn't it be more likely to find relatives among the millions of people who have done tests like Ancestry or 23andMe?


What do you mean they are "not all that accurate"? If you have a DNA match, it's because they are related to you. There's nothing really "iffy" about it.

As for the part in red, that seems fairly enlightening about your opinions on discouraging people from using DNA sites. Many people would be excited about having the opportunity to meet a relative that they didn't know existed rather than being "saddled" with meeting "this person".

There are many reason why people would not want to meet with these folks.
This can cause all sorts of strife and issues for the family as the OP alluded to .

If you go looking for it its one thing.. if its just thrust upon you that someone is going to be in your town next week and they are your niece can you meet them. We don't really get that choice to decide if we want to do that. To add to it - her mother was not someone we got along with or even knew - she was 25 years older than us and had left the country before we were born - so we had little to tell the daughter.

In our case we were very lucky....my BIL was not so lucky. There were a total of 4 kids that turned up in this quest to find anyone related to us. Two of them were a problem and ended up stealing cash from someone's purse at a family event he had invited them to. The police also showed up more than once at his house looking for them because they gave his address when they arrived in the country. The fourth kid was a very successful business man and after meeting the two half brothers wanted nothing more to do with them.. but they still are reaching out to him trying to get money.

There were also some other folks that were related and again they were good people, but I'm just not all that interested in meeting them. When we go home for a family get together we have limited time with the people we want to see and we don't need it taken up by more people we have no real connection to or interest in.
Of the 11 bothers and sisters in the family there is just the one who keeps pushing this things - no one else is interested - but not a lot we can do - she continues to dig into it - and yes we have told her to leave us out if it.
She is a very nice person and have very good intentions, but just cant understand its of no interest to anyone else.

As for the DNA stuff - Id want an official one for legal reason in case there is a claim against an estate etc.. later.
We had a guy show up and claim to be my grandfathers son long before all these services - looking for a piece of the estate - its cost us a fair amount of money to deal with and in the end he was not what he claimed to be - so yeah I am a bit jaded.

My accuracy comment was more about when they say you are from this village in that country.
That is what is not always accurate and changes as they collet more data.
I agree if the DNA says your related most likely you are.

 

[bdrex28]

If someone gives up a child for adoption through anonymity, and then has that alleged child claim to have found their birth parent through 23 and Me decades later, what was the purpose of anonymity? And how is it protected?

And then if that alleged child refuses to go through a professional lab service for saliva testing of each themself and the potential birth parent, what does that say? It's <$400 for this service and wouldn't each party want to have more conclusive data since the potential anonymity breach?

This is a tough one, how can an adoption agency from the 1940s or even up to the 60s and into the 70s guarantee anonymity over a technology that wasn't even available especially to the public at the time?

Not to mention it's not really an anonymity breach. Technically the adoption agency hasn't revealed any records and the DNA results/testing is beyond their scope. As long as the adoption agency didn't reveal any records or personal information then it's not their issue.

 

[Disneylover99]

I get why people would be sceptical of relatives approaching them due to DNA matches. I’d be sceptical too. But I feel for those who get shut out and rejected when they find someone and try to reach out

 

[hertamaniac]

Not to mention it's not really an anonymity breach. Technically the adoption agency hasn't revealed any records and the DNA results/testing is beyond their scope. As long as the adoption agency didn't reveal any records or personal information then it's not their issue.

But couldn't someone make the case that 23 & Me should be held liable since they didn't cross-check the adoption agencies database thereby triggering a flag?

 

[tony67]

This is a tough one, how can an adoption agency from the 1940s or even up to the 60s and into the 70s guarantee anonymity over a technology that wasn't even available especially to the public at the time?

Not to mention it's not really an anonymity breach. Technically the adoption agency hasn't revealed any records and the DNA results/testing is beyond their scope. As long as the adoption agency didn't reveal any records or personal information then it's not their issue.

Part of this is you do opt into 23 and me or whatever service

They only have the DNA of people who join - but it only takes one family member to join to be an issue.

They also don't just share the info - both parties have to agree when there is a match

 

[bdrex28]

Part of this is you do opt into 23 and me or whatever service

They only have the DNA of people who join - but it only takes one family member to join to be an issue.

They also don't just share the info - both parties have to agree when there is a match

I understand the opt in or opt out of contact, etc. However, none of that would have anything to do with an adoption agency and anonymity. I guess that's my point when someone talks about an "anonymity breach"

 

[bdrex28]

But couldn't someone make the case that 23 & Me should be held liable since they didn't cross-check the adoption agencies database thereby triggering a flag?

No. That would actually then be a breach by the adoption agency. Because they would have to put out the DNA for a DNA service to cross check. Make sense?

The Adoption agency in anonymity, can only guarantee the information it controls. They will not, therefore, have DNA records available for cross check.

 

[tony67]

No. That would actually then be a breach by the adoption agency. Because they would have to put out the DNA for a DNA service to cross check. Make sense?

The Adoption agency in anonymity, can only guarantee the information it controls. They will not, therefore, have DNA records available for cross check.

Agree the adoption agency really does not come into play at all.

Two people shared their DNA - my issue is all the folks in the family that did not and get this thrust upon them without any real choice.

 

[Moliphino]

Law enforcement databases have been built up over the years and likely have way more data to reference. Any database for 'matching' is only good if it has a large enough base to compare to. The first day one of these DNA companies sets up shop, they likely are starting from scratch.

The large database is really only needed for the ancestral composition to be more accurate, not for matching specific people to each other.
For a person to person DNA match it's comparing your DNA to theirs and telling you how much is shared. No database needed. More family matches can help determine the exact relationship, but it has no effect of the actual % DNA shared.

 

[Memorymakerfor4]

I trust the science. My husband's family has been deeply disrupted by someone contacting us through it. FIL unknowingly got a girlfriend pregnant before marriage and the baby was adopted out in secret. The woman contacted basically the entire family before making contact with bio dad and now wants in. People have done their best to be kind, but she's been very pushy and has made it known she's fallen out with her adoptive family. My husband and I are sympathetic but suspicious of her motives, especially after she hinted at needing money.

I do not like that confidentiality has basically been blown to pieces here. I expect there to be regulation here someday, but not before a lot of damage has been done.

 

[hertamaniac]

No. That would actually then be a breach by the adoption agency. Because they would have to put out the DNA for a DNA service to cross check. Make sense?

The Adoption agency in anonymity, can only guarantee the information it controls. They will not, therefore, have DNA records available for cross check.

Makes sense. So, the condition of anonymity is only true for the adoption agency and can be bypassed by other family members that subscribe to 23 & Me (or similar services). I don't like it one bit.

 

[mjkacmom]

But couldn't someone make the case that 23 & Me should be held liable since they didn't cross-check the adoption agencies database thereby triggering a flag?

No, the adoption agency offered anonymity, not 23 and me.