Talk:Genealogical DNA test

African American Ancestry
There are a few caveats. The Zulu and their related people moved all the way to Tanzania, and set up similar kingdoms in Zimbabwe (Ndebele), Zambia (Kololo, Ngoni), Malawi/Mozambique/Tanzania (Ngoni, Shangani), after the 1820s; this process was called the Mfecane or 'scattering'. Secondly, the Portuguese were busy slavers as well, and many of the slaves they bought came through ports in Angola and Mozambique, often from far within the interior; any slaves from Malawi or Zambia, would have likely been brought to Mozambique, and from there on, to Central and South America and the Caribbean. And lastly, there is the accuracy of DNA testing at this point in time; anyone with Zulu or related ancestry ending up in Brazil or Cuba for instance, wouldn't be that far fetched. Our understanding of both DNA and the human genome is only starting.

Also, I dislike the usually patronizing intonation when white people catch African Americans reclaiming their ancestry and history - as if they have something to hide. Why wouldn't Oprah Winfrey's ancestry include Zulus?

Lastly, perhaps unknown to the writer, but the Zulus are Bantus too. Bantu is simply a general name for people who speak a Bantu related language. Which is virtually everyone in Southern, Central and much of West Africa. The Zulus are Bantus, although because of their defeat of the English and Lord Chelmsford's batallion, they are sometimes thought of as 'Hamites'. Anything to deny the obvious.

"Why wouldn't Oprah Winfrey's ancestry include Zulus?"

- Because it ain't there. From the wikipedia article on Oprah: "For the 2006 PBS program, African American Lives, Winfrey had her DNA tested. The genetic test determined that her maternal line originated among the Kpelle ethnic group, in the area that today is Liberia. Her genetic make up was determined to be 89% Sub-Saharan Africa. She is part Native American (about 8% according to the test) and East Asian (about 3% according to the test)." No Zulus. - GUEST

- Me.

Suggest Merge from Genetic genealogy
I suggest that the content of Genetic genealogy should be merged into this article. The purpose of the two articles are highly overlapping. This is already suggested by another user at the discussion page of that article. (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Closing, given the lack of support here and the uncontested objection at Talk:Genetic genealogy with stale discussion. Klbrain (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Web page "Understanding genetic testing"
The reference links to a version in the Web Archive. However, there is https://www.ucl.ac.uk/biosciences/understanding-genetic-ancestry-testing-0, probably the current version of this source. I did not want to make a mistake so I did not change the reference myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:A61:34D3:E201:1946:EF9C:F565:77DE (talk) 10:16, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Haplogroups europe.png

Eve
Is it necessary to assert the prejudice of primordial Eve?

I seem to recall recent research indicating that it's wrong, but has there ever been any evidence for it. I think someone thought it a good idea. I thought it a bad idea when I met it and ever since, on the basis that mutations happen with high frequency and a successful one would probably be reproduced more than once. All of which is speculation, so I have no objection to its mention as a hypothesis, but at this moment it is asserted here as if it is certain knowledge. Alkhowarizmi (talk) 09:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC)