EGN111522: More 23andMe Hogwash

Failure.

I’ve commented on this before, but let’s dive deeper into the details. I’m in a critical mood today (as opposed to my more typical cheerful and forgiving devil-may-care attitude).

Excerpts, emphasis added:

Every now and then, I’m aghast when I look at a product and wonder how the devil it ever escaped the lab. Is there no quality control? And who thought it was a good idea, anyway, and why?

23andMe’s new Ancestry Timeline, released last week, is one of those.

Not only is it incorrect, but it deceives people into believing something that isn’t true.

Let’s take a look.
My Ancestry Timeline at 23andMe is shown above. I notice that my Middle Eastern/North African is missing from the timeline. It’s less than 1%, but then so is my Native American which is included.
You can see in the text underneath the timeline that 23andMe says this timeline reflects how long ago my MOST RECENT ancestor in that geographic location was born.

Let’s compare this with reality. You may recall that I recently wrote the article, Concepts – Calculating Ethnicity Percentages. In that article, I utilized my known and proven genealogy for my 64 great-great-great-great-grandparents to calculate what my ethnicity results should look like. I’m referring to the same chart of my 64 ancestors for this exercise as well, since I’ve already done a great deal of the work. Let’s see how reality stacks up to the 23andMe timeline.

On the chart below, I’ve shown the geographic category, the dates from the 23andMe timeline reflecting my most recent ancestor’s birth, my most recent ancestor from that location, and the accuracy of the 23andMe estimate.

Category 23andMe Dates My Most Recent Ancestor Birth 23andMe Accuracy
British and Irish 1900-1930 1759 – Henry Bolton Utter hogwash
French and German 1840-1900 1854 – Hiram Ferverda Close
Scandinavian 1750-1840 No ancestor More hogwash
Eastern European 1720-1810 No ancestor Hogwash
Italian 1690-1810 No ancestor Hogwash
Native American 1690-1790 Uncertain, mother’s side – early 1600s, father’s side – unknown Not verifiable, reasonable
The part of this equation that I find extremely upsetting is the sheer magnitude of how misleading the 23andMe timeline is. It’s not just wrong, it’s horribly deceptive – massively inaccurate by any measure possible.

For a beginner or someone with unknown parentage, this timeline is horribly, horribly midleading and will cause novices to make massively incorrect assumptions. A British or Irish ancestor born between 1900-1930? Seriously? This timeline combined with the 39.8% British/Irish suggests a parent. Think about what an adoptee would take away from this timeline – and how their research could be derailed as a result. Without parents available to DNA test, this erroneous information could make someone question their parentage.

I’m not alone either. This, from another long-time genealogist: “I am dumbstruck. It couldn’t be further from the truth for me. I am very colonial on both sides. Most recent immigrant ancestor was 1797.” And from another: “No. Just no. Not accurate.”

So let me say this again.

You. Can. Have. No. Confidence.

23andMe, you should be ashamed of yourself for perpetrating genetic hogwash on your unsuspecting, believing and often vulnerable customers. Climb down out of your ivory tower, buy a vowel and get a clue. Statistics in an academic environment and reality sometimes just don’t mesh – and you, 23andMe, have the wherewithal and the customer base to discern the difference. You are supposed to be a science company. You have no excuse.

Labels: 23andme, Counter Currents, population genetics, testing