This is a forwarded message From: Walter J Freeman Date: Monday, May 16, 2011, 9:34:23 PM Subject: [Int-Gen] Re: [AIF] National Geographic genealogy This program is at least six or seven years old at this point. It is being lead by Dr. Spencer Wells, a well-known population geneticist, who set out to map the DNA distributions of the worlds people, preferably the people indigenous to an area. At the same time, the test was offered to the public through the auspices of Family Tree DNA which handled the marketing of the tests. It is no bargin for genealogical purposes, since genealogy is not the primary issue of the study. So the number of SNPs and other items measured are bare bones, just enough to determine crude haplogroupings. One can have the results transferred in to an FTDNA project if one has done the NatGeo test, but invariably one has to add considerable more testing to the base data in order to get anything useful. For example, for $100 I may have learned that I am R1b haplotype in my paternal line and possibly that I am H haplotype in my maternal line. Well as interesting as that might be, there are probably without exageration tens upon tens of millions of others who have the same very, very crude haplotypes distinctions. In actuality, I am R-M222 (Northwest Irish) or R1b1b2a1a2f2 <http://www.isogg.org/wiki/NW_Irish> and H2a2 mtDNA, <http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Haplogroup_H_%28mtDNA%29> which narrows it down to only millions of other people who share the same two classifications. No, to do anything meaningful in terms of genealogy, one needs more discrimination, which means more extensive testing such as Y-DNA 37 or 67 STR marker profiles instead of SNPs as the NatGeo project gives you. As far as the right price, well, you get what you pay for, I suppose. And it would be cheaper in the short and long run just to order the proper tests from FTDNA to start with instead of detouring through the NatGeo project where you will waste both time and money in the process of determining something useful. Of course, one can also pay a small fee and have a subset of one's data from more conventional genetic genealogy testing transferred to the NatGeo project, which would be my recommendation, if you wanted to be represented in that database. An even bigger waste of time and money would be to buy your DNA testing through Ancestry.com, which is almost useless in terms of finding anything meaningful on a genealogical search. FTDNA is the only game in town for genealogy. They are good, they have 600,000 tests under their belt and the worlds largest data base of its type, they are fair, they protect one's privacy so that you only share what you want to share, and they have excellent customer service and support. Not so Ancestry. Not so NatGeo. Walter On 5/16/2011 6:53 PM, ElaineTM wrote: > Walter especially, > > Did you all see that National Geographic is doing > dna and that they are doing both men and women for > the different results. I believe it is just under > $100 to obtain the test kit. > > Walter, I think that is about the right price for > the two different tests isn't it? > > Elaine >