DNA testing for ancestral in Thailand

[Satcommlee]

The post is nothing to do with Paternity, but just wondering if anyone had ordered one of these DNA testing kits from the West and it applied and provided info regarding South East Asia ancestry.

 

Any recommendations welcome.

 

Thanks.

 

 

[Oxx]

Those tests are completely bogus.  Different results for identical twins.  Different results from each testing company used.  Don't waste your money.

 

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/01/31/ancestry-results-for-identical-twins-illustrate-flaws-in-consumer-genetic-testing/

[connda]

8 hours ago, Oxx said:

Those tests are completely bogus.  Different results for identical twins.  Different results from each testing company used.  Don't waste your money.

 

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2019/01/31/ancestry-results-for-identical-twins-illustrate-flaws-in-consumer-genetic-testing/

And the company that test you will forward the results to their country's intelligence agencies. 
Honestly.  Who cares. 

[atyclb]

15 hours ago, Satcommlee said:

The post is nothing to do with Paternity, but just wondering if anyone had ordered one of these DNA testing kits from the West and it applied and provided info regarding South East Asia ancestry.

 

Any recommendations welcome.

 

Thanks

 

 

not a bad idea hoping to show thai ancestry to overcome the visa dilemma.  keep us posted

[dinga]

Bah - Humbug to the naysayers.  Of course the DNA tests are a bit of fun, and the results are indicative NOT 100% conclusive.

 

My Thai wife's Myheritage test reported:

*  67.3% Thai & Cambodian

*  21.4% Chinese & Vietnamese

*  11.3% Filipino/Indonesian/Malaysian

*  Shared DNA matches with 48 people in 13 countries (top ones being 25 in US; 6 in Netherlands and 3 in "Great" Britain).

 

Certainly recommend the test provided you have a realistic approach.   

[Oxx]

18 minutes ago, dinga said:

Certainly recommend the test provided you have a realistic approach.   

 

Why would you recommend something that's pure bunkum? Might as well go to a local soothsayer or some other totally meaningless quack.  Almost certainly cheaper, and every bit as reliable.

[emptypockets]

Gee I thought we were all related to Atilla the Hun.

[Oxx]

30 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

Gee I thought we were all related to Atilla the Hun.

 

Not Adam and Eve?

[dinga]

1 hour ago, Oxx said:

 

Why would you recommend something that's pure bunkum? Might as well go to a local soothsayer or some other totally meaningless quack.  Almost certainly cheaper, and every bit as reliable.

Absolute rubbish.  Suggest you do at least a little research.  

 

Insofar as the shared DNA - that is indeed conclusive.

[Oxx]

26 minutes ago, dinga said:

Absolute rubbish.  Suggest you do at least a little research.  

 

Insofar as the shared DNA - that is indeed conclusive.

 

You clearly didn't bother checking the link in my first post.

 

Identical twins have identical DNA.  That individual companies gave different "heritages" shows that the tests are worthless.  And that fact that different companies indicated different "heritages" simply underlines that fact.

 

(Oh, and for what it matters, I have a Ph.D. in genetics, so I do know what I'm talking about.)

[dinga]

12 minutes ago, Oxx said:

 

You clearly didn't bother checking the link in my first post.

 

Identical twins have identical DNA.  That individual companies gave different "heritages" shows that the tests are worthless.  And that fact that different companies indicated different "heritages" simply underlines that fact.

 

(Oh, and for what it matters, I have a Ph.D. in genetics, so I do know what I'm talking about.)

'course I scanned the article - and it pretty well confirmed my understanding.

 

Pity you didn't as the article states facts that are contrary to your claims (which also challenges the PH.D claim):

* DNA of twins is NEARLY exactly the same.

* Minor variations can lead the algorithm to assign SLIGHTLY different ancestry estimates 

* the results are statistical estimates only 

 

For me - was a bit of fun, as I said.  If not for you, 'up to you'!

 

The OP was looking for comments and the experiences of folks who had actually used the tests  ie.  me.  If he'd like further comment I'd be delighted to provide.  

 

[lassebasse]

We have tested ourselves, my wife, who is from around Udon Thani is 50% Thai and 50% Vietnamese. My wife thought that was very funny and has no clues where the Viet connection comes from.

[atyclb]

i'd be afraid to take the test and find out i am pocahontas 

[Chimp]

23&Me, wife is Southeast Asian, Chinese, Korean, Southwest Asian, and Ashkenazi Jew. Although you take these tests with a grain of salt, if you speak to family members it appears to be fairly accurate with the exception of Ashkenazi Jew and Korean.

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Chimp

[Skallywag]

Wow - who would have thought that after 200,000 years human DNA shows that our heritage includes different cultures/ethnicities/countries all over the world.  It is almost like we are all related in some way - 555 (sarcasm) 

[dinga]

8 hours ago, Chimp said:

23&Me, wife is Southeast Asian, Chinese, Korean, Southwest Asian, and Ashkenazi Jew. Although you take these tests with a grain of salt, if you speak to family members it appears to be fairly accurate with the exception of Ashkenazi Jew and Korean.

 

Similar experience to me.  My 1st Ancestry results were pretty well as expected, with the exception of 1% Amazonian!!!  Crazy - but prompted me to consult Prof Google.  For some unknown reason (with perhaps the exception of Ph.D Oxx) it seems 5 tribes in the Amazon share DNA with Australian Aboriginals.  That made far more sense, but sadly this indication disappeared when the Ancestry algorithm was refined (which is an on-going process) - leaving me with Scot/Irish & Scandinavian (thanks to the Viking visitors).  

 

Perhaps her indicated Jewish and Korean roots may disappear with the next iteration.  

 

Bit of fun though, eh!

[rickudon]

As i understand it, they randomly select genes from a number of known markers. This means that 2 tests from the same person may actually compare different genes and therefore give different results .......

[Oxx]

30 minutes ago, rickudon said:

As i understand it, they randomly select genes from a number of known markers. This means that 2 tests from the same person may actually compare different genes and therefore give different results .......

 

That really makes no sense.  Different companies may use different markers.  However, an individual company would be expected to use the same markers.  And that's why it's so shocking that companies testing identical twins should give different results for the twins concerned.  Putting aside the science behind what they are claiming to do, it just means that their technique is absolutely dire.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Oxx

[partington]

6 hours ago, Oxx said:

 

That really makes no sense.  Different companies may use different markers.  However, an individual company would be expected to use the same markers.  And that's why it's so shocking that companies testing identical twins should give different results for the twins concerned.  Putting aside the science behind what they are claiming to do, it just means that their technique is absolutely dire.

Only if it is the results of the markers from identical twins that differs.

 

If it is the interpretation of the same results that differs , that is more understandable, and indeed expected, as these interpretations are statistical.

 

One only has to look at results over the past two decades looking at association of genetic markers with various disease states to realise this is a very approximate business, with studies looking at the same markers showing significant or zero association with the disease in different studies.

 

However, as regards ancestry, a very generalised association of various genetic markers with particular ethnic populations, and a probability that these populations contributed to the genetic makeup of any particular individual is not absolute nonsense, it's just approximate.

[marcusarelus]

I was adopted and my daughter made contact with one of my birth mothers sisters granddaughters as a result of DNA tests.  They confirmed that my daughter and this other woman from 3000 miles away were 1st cousins and the lady was my niece.  She called me up via facebook and we confirmed in fact something neither of them knew but I did that we were all related. 

 

The service confirmed that both women shared a grandparent.  Nothing to do with twins.  The service lets related people know they are related which may or may not be a good thing. 

 

I have two other daughters who don't want to give DNA samples.  Ha ha ha.  They are worried I'm not really their father and momma was playing around with my best friend. 

 

Name of the service is https://www.23andme.com/en-int/dna-ancestry/

 

Does not come to Thailand as far as I know. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by marcusarelus

[Oxx]

7 minutes ago, partington said:

Only if it is the results of the markers from identical twins that differs.

 

If it is the interpretation of the same results that differs , that is more understandable, and indeed expected, as these interpretations are statistical.

 

Sorry, but that's <deleted>.

 

The results of the markers from identical twins should be identical.  (We're talking chromosomal DNA here, not mtDNA.)  If they're not, then the DNA testers are incompetent.

 

And the interpretation of identical DNA should be identical.  Whilst the interpretations are indeed pseudoscience statistical, identical DNA should produce identical interpretations.  It doesn't.  Consumers are being conned by shoddy pseudoscience.

This is really little different from the failed company Theranos and its pseudoscientific scam.

 

It's just amazing how scientifically illiterate and utterly gullible the American public is.

[marcusarelus]

But this service is mainly for Caucasians and very little information is available for people of Asian decent.

Edited March 13, 2019 by marcusarelus

[Bang Bang]

I've just got my test result. It says I'm a first cousin of Prayut. I'm done. This is the final indignity. Worse than getting drunk last weekend and bringing home a tall well-built "woman" who insisted on doing me rather than the other way around. Good bye, world.

 

Do not try to stop me as I climb a 14th floor balcony. Aaaaaaaaah...

[partington]

On 3/13/2019 at 1:38 PM, Oxx said:

 

Sorry, but that's <deleted>.

 

The results of the markers from identical twins should be identical.  (We're talking chromosomal DNA here, not mtDNA.)  If they're not, then the DNA testers are incompetent.

 

And the interpretation of identical DNA should be identical.  Whilst the interpretations are indeed pseudoscience statistical, identical DNA should produce identical interpretations.  It doesn't.  Consumers are being conned by shoddy pseudoscience.

This is really little different from the failed company Theranos and its pseudoscientific scam.

 

It's just amazing how scientifically illiterate and utterly gullible the American public is.

I don't think you got my meaning. I am agreeing with you.

 

I was saying that the company is technically incompetent if they got different results for the markers from identical twins,  because as you say, they must be identical. Thus  they must get identical readouts for the polymorphisms they test.

 

However looking at a set of say 100 polymorphisms  and giving a percentage contribution for say South East Asia, of 10%, and western Europe of say 30%, is  statistical and open to different interpretations.

Edited March 14, 2019 by partington

[dinga]

12 hours ago, partington said:

I don't think you got my meaning. I am agreeing with you.

 

I was saying that the company is technically incompetent if they got different results for the markers from identical twins,  because as you say, they must be identical. Thus  they must get identical readouts for the polymorphisms they test.

 

However looking at a set of say 100 polymorphisms  and giving a percentage contribution for say South East Asia, of 10%, and western Europe of say 30%, is  statistical and open to different interpretations.

Sorry - ALMOST identical but NOT identical it seems

 

https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/do-identical-twins-have-identical-genes/

[partington]

16 hours ago, dinga said:

Sorry - ALMOST identical but NOT identical it seems

 

https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/do-identical-twins-have-identical-genes/

While it is true that mutations in DNA occur at a specific rate, so that if you sequenced the entire genome of two identical twins it is possible to find some single base differences (but not by any means certain, or even likely: DNA replication mistakes are mostly corrected ), this is not relevant to the subject under discussion (assessing ethnic origins of an individual by genotyping markers).

 

This is because these markers are very short defined regions of DNA, thus the chances of identical twins showing differences in these exact areas are infinitesimally low. (You may spot a base change if you look at 3 billion bases, but are not likely to if you only examine 300 bases.)

 

The markers studied are termed AIMs (ancestry informative markers) and as few as 46 markers can give useful information about the contribution of different ethnic groups to the ancestry of an individual .

 

See following paper (which is simply the first simple one that came up on a search) which emphasises that while the markers are easy to genotype, the information they give about ethnicity is an inferred estimate:

 

 PLoS One. 2012;7(1) Epub 2012 Jan 17.

Straightforward inference of ancestry and admixture proportions through
ancestry-informative insertion deletion multiplexing.

Pereira R(1), Phillips C, Pinto N, Santos C, dos Santos SE, Amorim A, Carracedo
Á, Gusmão L.

(1)IPATIMUP-Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of the University of 
Porto, Porto, Portugal.

Ancestry-informative markers (AIMs) show high allele frequency divergence between
different ancestral or geographically distant populations. These genetic markers 
are especially useful in inferring the likely ancestral origin of an individual
or estimating the apportionment of ancestry components in admixed individuals or 
populations. [ ...] This work presents a set of 46 ancestry-informative insertion deletion
polymorphisms selected to efficiently measure population admixture proportions of
four different origins (African, European, East Asian and Native American)[...]

HGDP-CEPH diversity panel samples from the four groups,together with 
Oceanians, were genotyped to evaluate the efficiency of the assay
in clustering populations from different continental origins and to establish
reference databases. In addition, other populations from diverse geographic
origins were tested using the HGDP-CEPH samples as reference data.

 The results revealed that the AIM-INDEL set developed is highly efficient at inferring the
ancestry of individuals and provides good estimates of ancestry proportions at
the population level. In conclusion, we have optimized the multiplexed genotyping
of 46 AIM-INDELs in a simple and informative assay, enabling a more
straightforward alternative to the commonly available AIM-SNP typing methods
dependent on complex, multi-step protocols or implementation of large-scale
genotyping technologies.

Edited March 15, 2019 by partington

[Satcommlee]

On 3/11/2019 at 8:54 PM, Oxx said:

 

You clearly didn't bother checking the link in my first post.

 

Identical twins have identical DNA.  That individual companies gave different "heritages" shows that the tests are worthless.  And that fact that different companies indicated different "heritages" simply underlines that fact.

 

(Oh, and for what it matters, I have a Ph.D. in genetics, so I do know what I'm talking about.)

I may try dog DNA and see what comes up ????.....  thanks all for the great responses.

[Satcommlee]

2 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

This is fascinating. I'm interested in different groups in Northern Thailand. Historically we know that different groups of people were assimilated over around 900 + years of Northern Thai history. From Burma, Southern China, Cambodia populations were moved around. Areas with sparse populations were vulnerable to outsiders. Battles were for populations not land. And victors would relocate populations.  People were needed to produce food and contribute to building the muang. This is also true in Isaan where populations were relocated from mostly Laos. 

Unfortunately I don't think science is ready yet to identify Mun, Lue, Shan (Thai Yai) and many other groups. It will be someday, hopefully soon. 

 

Fred, I think you will like the map I attach here.

Thai Ethnic Map.kmz

Edited March 17, 2019 by Satcommlee
attached google Earth file

[marcusarelus]

Today it happened.  After almost 80 years I found out who my birth father was.  He was Swiss and died in 1995.  Engineer and PhD, I knew him and his two children well.  I went to college with his daughter (my half sister and never knew) .  We even went out once.  He and his family are rich.  I missed out.  Oh well.  I don't know how it happened but the DNA does not lie.  A lady 9,000 miles away with no connection to me confirmed it.  I wonder what else I'll discover.  Poppa was a rolling stone. 

[sikishrory]

On 3/11/2019 at 6:27 PM, dinga said:

Bah - Humbug to the naysayers.  Of course the DNA tests are a bit of fun, and the results are indicative NOT 100% conclusive.

 

My Thai wife's Myheritage test reported:

*  67.3% Thai & Cambodian

*  21.4% Chinese & Vietnamese

*  11.3% Filipino/Indonesian/Malaysian

*  Shared DNA matches with 48 people in 13 countries (top ones being 25 in US; 6 in Netherlands and 3 in "Great" Britain).

 

Certainly recommend the test provided you have a realistic approach.   

Which test did you get and was it shipped to Thailand?

 

On 3/11/2019 at 11:48 PM, Chimp said:

23&Me, wife is Southeast Asian, Chinese, Korean, Southwest Asian, and Ashkenazi Jew. Although you take these tests with a grain of salt, if you speak to family members it appears to be fairly accurate with the exception of Ashkenazi Jew and Korean.

 

Was yours shipped here? On their website it says they don't recommend shipping to Thailand but it looks like maybe you could.

The myheritage ones are cheapest then 23and me are like 200usd but I found a place in Thailand that does them for 16000+ baht which is ridiculous.