[pinkypinky]

All the major contributors to the field agree that it's only accurate on a continental level at the moment.
I do believe it will improve with time.

Here's Roberta Estes' take on it.
https://dna-explained.com/2018/12/28...te-yes-really/

Here's another article quoting Debbie Kennett and Adam Rutherford
https://eu.freep.com/story/life/2018...cy/1517018002/

[srmf5]

Originally Posted by pinkypinky

All the major contributors to the field agree that it's only accurate on a continental level at the moment.
I do believe it will improve with time.

Here's Roberta Estes' take on it.
https://dna-explained.com/2018/12/28...te-yes-really/

Here's another article quoting Debbie Kennett and Adam Rutherford
https://eu.freep.com/story/life/2018...cy/1517018002/

Trace regions can probably be ignored even at the continental level. My dad gets <1% South America with FTDNA despite being Irish . The estimates can provide some entertainment.

[VirginiaB]

I agree there is less to it than the kit sellers claim but more to it than some here say. I am speaking particularly of Ancestry.com because of their very large database. It also makes a huge difference if the person's ancestry is from a country where Ancestry.com has many DNA customers, a critical distinction. DNA results are most helpful, of course, in conjunction with a well researched tree. The few hard-core mysteries I've solved have all come via matches with good trees that go back far enough.

A full and intelligent reply to the objections here would require too much space. Of course, I could write something short and dumb but maybe some think I already did!

[pinkypinky]

There is a huge difference to the value of ethnicity estimates (slim to none) versus matching, which is the gold of DNA testing.

This topic is headed "Ancestry ethnicity updates" so all responses were presumably tailored to that aspect.

We're going around in circles, so locking the thread.