Apparently Geno 2.0 goes back only 5-6 generations

[Missouri1455]

A month ago i talked to a person who worked for Geno and he told me straight up in terms of ethnic percentages geno 2.0 only goes back 5-6 generations; their biggest focus is the subclades; which got me thinking that the company calculates the ethnic percentages differently from 23ndme/ftdna; so what i noticed is geno 2.0 basically inflates any minority admixtures you might have, thats why Europeans sometimes score around 50% european and 40% meditreanean when in other tests(ftdna/23ndme) they will be given a more accurate results of 90% european or more.

I believe the calculation differs significantly between geno 2.0 and 23andme/ftdna but to me 23ndme/ftdna seems more accurate when it comes to ethnicity results.

I just wanted to share this with people who were not aware of this.

Thank you

[jpb]

Isn't the ethnicity on age Geno 2.0 NG the same pretty much as MyOrigins?

[Missouri1455]

Isn't the ethnicity on age Geno 2.0 NG the same pretty much as MyOrigins?

Tbh all i know is that ethnic results from ftdna/23ndme are more reliable than geno 2.0; and the reason for that is the calculations between ftdna, 23ndme, and even ancestry tend to be very close and similar in terms of ethnic results.

[Missouri1455]

I feel i've been ripped off in terms of my ethnicity results(Geno 2.0); but anyways i have already applied a ftdna kit so hopefully that will settle things down asap

[kingjohn]

i saw some results of members here and other forum
and there ftdna my origins and geno2 next generation components % are almost the same ...
best regards
adam

[Missouri1455]

i saw some results of members here and other forum
and there ftdna my origins and geno2 next generation components % are almost the same ...
best regards
adam

Ill post my ftdna results here and compare it with my geno 2.0 as soon as possible

[Cofgene]

Be careful in your use of terms "accurate" and "reliable". There are not ethnically pure representatives, or definitions thereof, for reference populations in these calculations. They are sets of results which have been grouped and labeled for having characteristics of the region attributed to them. A result cannot be considered "accurate" but should be considered a "similar to." For reliable the calculations are done based upon similar mathematical models and different datasets. Reliability is considered within a framework of repeated measurements/calculations. So it would be more appropriate to state that the results exhibit more concordance or similarity than to infer improper methodology between the models. There is no gold reference standard so differences should be expected and results should be referenced in a manner that supports the lack of reference standards.

[Missouri1455]

Be careful in your use of terms "accurate" and "reliable". There are not ethnically pure representatives, or definitions thereof, for reference populations in these calculations. They are sets of results which have been grouped and labeled for having characteristics of the region attributed to them. A result cannot be considered "accurate" but should be considered a "similar to." For reliable the calculations are done based upon similar mathematical models and different datasets. Reliability is considered within a framework of repeated measurements/calculations. So it would be more appropriate to state that the results exhibit more concordance or similarity than to infer improper methodology between the models. There is no gold reference standard so differences should be expected and results should be referenced in a manner that supports the lack of reference standards.

I agree i might have misused the word accuate/reliable but ill use the word similarities; from what i have seen the similarities i found in the different calculation results; ftdna, 23ndme, and ancestry results tend to be much closer than geno 2.0.

In my case i do believe geno 2.0 inflated my minority admixtures and the reason for such claim is based on my ethnic results geno 2.0 gave me 20% for east african; yet in gedmatch when it came to population distances i barley found any east african groups listed; at most ill find 1(east african) out of 20 and in some cases ill find none; which i believe reveals how much geno 2.0 tends to inflate with ethnic admixtures but with time we'll know; so at the moment i do believe a company like ftdna/23ndme will help me shed light on this issue.

[kingjohn]

test with ftdna
it is not expensive now
there autosomal test..... only 79$much less than geno2 ....
best regards
adam

p.s
geno2 have there things
in the clades as you say the y dna and mtdna + the neaderthall %

[Missouri1455]

test with ftdna
it is not expensive now
there autosomal test..... only 79$much less than geno2 ....
best regards
adam

p.s
geno2 have there things
in the clades as you say the y dna and mtdna + the neaderthall %

Thank you; the kit is on its way im hoping it arrives as soon as possible.
About the neanderthal i scored around 0.6%; i was wondering what do ethiopians, egyptians, levantines score on their neanderthal %?

Thank you in advance