17 differences between a normal mom and a Polish mom



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

1.

A normal mom will let you eat frozen foods on occasion.
A Polish mom will spend time cooking naleśniki, gołąbki, bigosz, fasolówkę and biały barszcz or żurek.

2.

A normal mom will compliment you on your outfit.
A Polish mom will tell you everything that is wrong with it, and only when you change or cover up the offending item, will she say, “A tak dobrze wyglądasz.”

3.

A normal mom will not give you a refill of food if you don’t ask for it.
A Polish mom will fill your plate whether you like it or not.

4.

A normal mom will let you eat certain foods with your hands.
A Polish mom will hand you a fork, knife, and spoon with your meal, and expect that you use them.

5.

A normal mom will not bring anything for the guests if they say that they do not want anything.
A Polish mum will put the babka, sernik, makowiec, chruściki and jabłecznik on the table anyway, along with the tea or coffee.

6.

A normal mom will ask your teacher why you’re failing.
A Polish mom will get on your case to do better.

7.

A normal mom will let you stay indoors at times.
A Polish mom will drag you outside for a walk or to help her garden.

8.

A normal mom will set automatic sprinklers to water her garden.
A Polish mom will spend three hours hand-watering everything.

9.

A normal mom will take you to the doctor.
A Polish mom will give you Amol, put on olej kamforowy, and only when you feel half dead, take you to the doctor.

10.

A normal mom drives according to the laws in the state.
A Polish mom is one third street drag racer, one third NASCAR racer, and one third normal driver, and she chooses the driving persona depending on the situation or her mood.

11.

A normal mom will give you pointers when you begin driving and then stay silent.
A Polish mom will constantly tell you how to drive, and will press on the invisible brake on the passenger’s side while simultaneously yelling “ZWOLNIJ!” two miles away from the red light even though you still have time to slow down.

12.

A normal mom will treat your boyfriend as your boyfriend.
A Polish mom starts asking where is the engagement ring or when you’re moving in together when you first announce you have a boyfriend.

13.

A normal mom will let you text on your phone or chat on Facebook.
A Polish mom will lean over your shoulder and ask who you’re talking to, and why.

14.

A normal mom asks questions , well, like a normal person.
A Polish mom is the KGB interrogator whom you should fear — and if she is not satisfied with your answers, she will continue to do so until you’re completely worn out and worn down.

15.

A normal mom will talk to you a few times a week.
A Polish mom needs to talk to you every single day at least once by phone, and the rest of the day she needs to constantly keep in touch by text.

16.

A normal mom says she loves you and leaves you alone.
A Polish mom shows she loves you by constantly butting into your life.

17.

A normal mom will bring you antibiotics and let you sleep.
A Polish mom will bring you antibiotics, a heaping plate of food, and tea with lemon before helping you change your PJs so you have dry clothes while you sleep.

Photo: David Goehring


St. John Paul II

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

St. John Paul II, Latin Johannes Paulus, original name Karol Józef Wojtyła, (born May 18, 1920, Wadowice, Poland—died April 2, 2005, Vatican City, beatified May 1, 2011, canonized April 27, 2014, feast day October 22), bishop of Rome and head of the Roman Catholic Church (1978–2005), the first non-Italian pope in 455 years and the first from a Slavic country. His pontificate of more than 26 years was the third longest in history. As part of his effort to promote greater understanding between nations and between religions, he undertook numerous trips abroad, traveling far greater distances than had all other popes combined, and he extended his influence beyond the church by campaigning against political oppression and criticizing the materialism of the West. He also issued several unprecedented apologies to groups that historically had been wronged by Catholics, most notably Jews and Muslims. His unabashed Polish nationalism and his emphasis on nonviolent political activism aided the Solidarity movement in communist Poland in the 1980s and ultimately contributed to the peaceful dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. More generally, John Paul used his influence among Catholics and throughout the world to advance the recognition of human dignity and to deter the use of violence. His centralized style of church governance, however, dismayed some members of the clergy, who found it autocratic and stifling. He failed to reverse an overall decline in the numbers of priests and nuns, and his traditional interpretations of church teachings on personal and sexual morality alienated some segments of the laity.

What is St. John Paul II known for?

John Paul II was the first non-Italian pope in 455 years. He travelled abroad extensively in an effort to promote greater understanding between countries and religions, and he campaigned against political oppression, violence, and materialism. He survived an assassination attempt in 1981.

What were St. John Paul II’s accomplishments?

John Paul II’s private conversations with Polish and Soviet leaders contributed to the peaceful end of the Soviet regime in eastern Europe, and his worldwide outreach brought greater visibility to the church. He engaged in acts of interfaith reconciliation with Judaism and Islam, promulgated a new catechism (1992), and canonized nearly 500 saints.

What was St. John Paul II’s legacy?

John Paul II was the first globally oriented pope, and he increased the global prestige of the papacy. His emphasis on religious and national freedom was unprecedented. He also centralized control over Catholic educational institutions and maintained traditional church positions on gender and sexual issues.


17 African Cultural Values (To Know Before You Travel to Africa)

African Cultural Values – Democratic Republic of Congo

In Africa, actions speak louder than words, especially if there is a barrier between languages.

In an effort to contextualize and be mindful of a complex mindset and worldview, here are a few African cultural values to be aware of when traveling in Africa!

1. Greeting – Hello and a Handshake

Greeting people in Africa is one of the most important things you can do. A quick “hello,” paired with a handshake is a sufficient way to make a positive first impression with anyone.

2. Show Respect to Elders

African cultural values are based on a foundation of the past and present, a leading reason why elders are so well respected. Always acknowledge an elder, let them ask questions, and during mealtime elders should be served first.

3. Pointing At Things

Pointing at something or someone with the index finger is usually considered rude or just straight offensive – it’s not something you want to do. Different ethnic groups have different ways of pointing, but the method I usually employ is poking my chin in the right direction and widening my eyes.

4. Overhand Motion Calling

Avoid motioning to call a person with an upwards palm. The preferred method is to call someone over with the palm faced down and pulling the fingers inwards.

5. Sole of the Foot

Just like in many cultures around the world, the very bottom of your foot is the very dirtiest part of your body. Try not to directly point your foot sole towards anyone.

6. Eat with the Right Hand

You might have heard this before, the right hand is for eating food and the left hand is reserved for the unsanitary task of what happens afterward. Whatever you do, don’t touch African food with your left hand!

7. Hissing and Kissing Sounds

To call the attention of someone is often performed with a hissing or loud smack of the lips. If you are not expecting it, the sounds might come as a surprise, but it’s totally acceptable and very common.

8. Silence is an African Value

Don’t be alarmed or nervous with spans of silence during African conversation. When there’s something to be said, it will be said, when there’s nothing to be said, silence is perfectly fine. There’s no need to feel uneasy during a period of silence in Africa, take the time just to enjoy the presence of others.

9. Time – A Little Less Important

Despite the use of clocks to tell “what time it is,” African clocks work differently, things fall into place as they unfold. An African worldview does not focus far into the future, but dwells more on past events and whatever is happening currently. Future scheduled times can’t be rushed and thinking so will only make one more and more frustrated.

10. Use Flexibility

Africa will teach you to be flexible. Closely relating to how future-time is of less importance, schedules aren’t always at the forefront of lifestyle. If a plan gets shut down or changes drastically, there’s not always something you can do besides accept it and continue with a positive attitude.

11. Do NOT Publicly Show Anger, Frustration, or Impatience

Though circumstances have potential to become frustrating, it’s highly important to NOT publicly display any sort of negative feeling in public. Africans have incredible self control, being careful not to offend or shame anyone in public.

12. Positive Communication

Positive communication is a key African cultural value. Along with not displaying public negativity there are countless ways to express “good,” or “ok.” Don’t immediately get into a discussion about a hardship or struggle, these topics can be gradually be brought forth.

13. Relationships Matter

With future-time a little less important, current time is of extreme value. Meeting people and spending time with others to develop lasting relationships is an aspect of African culture that is truly cherished.

14. Don’t Talk Too Much During a Meal

Simple small talk is permissible, but don’t try to talk too much business or seriousness during a meal. Serious issues are handled after the meal.

15. Receive a Gift With Both Hands

If someone graciously gives you a gift, a non-verbal way to show extreme thankfulness is to accept it with both hands outstretched.

16. The Un-Stated – “Sorry We’re Out”

There will inevitably be a circumstance in Africa where you go to a restaurant, order a dish, and a totally different dish is served to you – no questions asked. You will naturally complain, saying “this is not the dish I ordered.” The waiter will shyly back away and simply tell you that what you ordered was not available. It can be a bit frustrating to say the least (remember #10, 11, and 12, and that African flexibility!).

17. Personal Space

It might seem odd (or even drive you crazy) when you are the only person on an empty bus and another person gets on and sits down right next to you. Imagine growing up in a single room with 10 people living together, or living with a clan of extended family, your idea of personal space might be a little different thinking in African terms.

African Cultural Values – Rwanda

In the end, remember that Africans are extremely gracious and caring people, ready to go the extra mile to respect and service others. Hopefully if we can understand a bit of African cultural values when we travel to Africa, we can make a positive impression, showing respect that will leave lasting memories!


What's the difference between acetone and non-acetone nail polish remover?

Have you ever stood in the drugstore with chipped nails and stared blankly at all your options for nail polish remover? You're not alone.

The main decision you have to make is whether you want acetone or non-acetone nail polish remover. Here's the simple secret: While acetone will work faster at getting the polish off of your nails, non-acetone removers will be gentler to them.

So what's in these removers, anyway? Acetone is a clear, harsh-smelling and highly flammable liquid. It's a solvent, capable of disintegrating even plastic. This explains why it works so quickly breaking apart and removing your nail polish. Isopropyl alcohol is typically used in the making of acetone.

The key active ingredient in non-acetone removers is usually ethyl acetate. Made from ethanol and acetic acid, ethyl acetate is colorless and also flammable. In addition to also being used as a solvent, its fragrant smell has led to its use in perfumes.

Most of your nail polish removers are going to include solvents as ingredients. If you can remember your lesson about polymers from high school chemistry class, think of it like this: Your nail polish remover is an organic liquid solvent. Nail polish is a hardened organic polymer. When the remover is applied to the polish, the molecules of the solvent will force their way through the polymer molecules, causing the polish to disintegrate.

Because of acetone's strength as a solvent, it shouldn't be used on your fake nails. The solvent in the polish remover will weaken your extensions and cause them to separate from your natural nail. One of the reasons non-acetone nail polish removers were created was to be used on nail extensions.

But for removing sparkly, glitter nail polish, it's best to go with the big guns -- acetone polish remover. The chemicals in glitter nail polish make it more difficult than other polishes to break down.

If you have strong health concerns about the chemicals used in both acetone and non-acetone polish removers, you should consider switching to a nail polish remover that doesn't use toxic ingredients. There are also many polish removers on the market today that boast of being fully "natural" and biodegradable.

Need more on nail care? Head on over to the next page.


Ethnicity results from DNA testing. Fascinating. Intriguing. Frustrating. Exciting. Fun. Challenging. Mysterious. Enlightening. And sometimes wrong. These descriptions all fit. Welcome to your personal conundrum! The riddle of you! If you’d like to understand why your ethnicity results might not have been what you expected, read on!

Today, about 50% of the people taking autosomal DNA tests purchase them for the ethnicity results. Ironically, that’s the least reliable aspect of DNA testing – but apparently somebody’s ad campaigns have been very effective. After all, humans are curious creatures and inquiring minds want to know. Who am I anyway?

I think a lot of people who aren’t necessarily interested in genealogy per se are interested in discovering their ethnic mix – and maybe for some it will be a doorway to more traditional genealogy because it will fan the flame of curiosity.

Given the increase in testing for ethnicity alone, I’m seeing a huge increase in people who are both confused by and disappointed in their results. And of course, there are a few who are thrilled, trading their lederhosen for a kilt because of their new discovery. To put it gently, they might be a little premature in their celebration.

A lot of whether you’re happy or unhappy has to do with why you tested, your experience level and your expectations.

So, for all of you who could write an e-mail similar to this one that I received – this article is for you:

“I received my ethnicity results and I’m surprised and confused. I’m half German yet my ethnicity shows I’m from the British Isles and Scandinavia. Then I tested my parents and their results don’t even resemble mine, nor are they accurate. I should be roughly half of what they are, and based on the ethnicity report, it looks like I’m totally unrelated. I realize my ethnicity is not just a matter of dividing my parents results by half, but we’re not even in the same countries. How can I be from where they aren’t? How can I have significantly more, almost double, the Scandinavian DNA that they do combined? And yes, I match them autosomally as a child so there is no question of paternity.”

Do not, and I repeat, DO NOT, trade in your lederhosen for a kilt just yet.

Lederhosen – By The original uploader was Aquajazz at German Wikipedia – Transferred from de.wikipedia to Commons., CC BY-SA 2.0 de, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2746036 Kilt – By Jongleur100 – Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7917180

This technology is not really ripe yet for that level of confidence except perhaps at the continent level and for people with Jewish heritage.

  1. In determining majority ethnicity at the continent level, these tests are quite accurate, but then you can determine the same thing by looking in the mirror. I’m primarily of European heritage. I can see that easily and don’t need a DNA test for that information.
  2. When comparing between continental ethnicity, meaning sorting African from European from Asian from Native American, these tests are relatively accurate, meaning there is sometimes a little bit of overlap, but not much. I’m between 4 and 5% Native American and African – which I can’t see in the mirror – but some of these tests can.
  3. When dealing with intra-continent ethnicity – meaning Europe in particular, comparing one country or region to another, these tests are not reliable and in some cases, appear to be outright wrong. The exception here is Ashkenazi Jewish results which are generally quite accurate, especially at higher levels.

There are times when you seem to have too much of a particular ethnicity, and times when you seem to have too little.

Aside from the obvious adoption, misattributed parent or the oral history simply being wrong, the next question is why.

Ok, Why?

Part of why has to do with actual population mixing. Think about the history of Europe. In fact, let’s just look at Germany. Wiki provides a nice summary timeline. Take a look, because you’ll see that the overarching theme is warfare and instability. The borders changed, the rulers changed, invasions happened, and most importantly, the population changed.

Let’s just look at one event. The Thirty Years War (1618-1648) devastated the population, wiped out large portions of the countryside entirely, to the point that after its conclusion, parts of Germany were entirely depopulated for years. The rulers invited people from other parts of Europe to come, settle and farm. And they did just that. Hear those words, other parts of Europe .

My ancestors found in the later 1600s along the Rhine near Speyer and Mannheim were some of those settlers, from Switzerland. Where were they from before Switzerland, before records? We don’t know and we wouldn’t even know that much were it not for the early church records.

Who or where is the reference population that you would use to represent Germans?

If you match against a “German” population today, what does that mean, exactly? Who are you really matching?

Now think about who settled the British Isles.

Where did those people come from and who were they?

Well, the Anglo-Saxon people were comprised of Germanic tribes, the Angles and the Saxons. Is it any wonder that if your heritage is German you’re going to be matching some people from the British Isles and vice versa?

Anglo-Saxons weren’t the only people who settled in the British Isles. There were Vikings from Scandinavia and the Normans from France who were themselves “Norsemen” aka from the same stock as the Vikings.

See the swirl and the admixture? Is there any wonder that European intracontinental admixture is so confusing and perplexing today?

Reference Populations

The second challenge is obtaining valid and adequate reference populations.

Each company that offers ethnicity tests assembles a group of reference populations against which they compare your results to put you into a bucket or buckets.

Except, it’s not quite that easy.

When comparing highly disparate populations, meaning those whose common ancestor was tens of thousands of years ago, you can find significant differences in their DNA. Think the four major continental areas here – Africa, Europe, Asia, the Americas.

Major, unquestionable differences are much easier to discern and interpret.

However, within population groups, think Europe here, it is much more difficult.

To begin with, we don’t have much (if any) ancient DNA to compare to. So we don’t know what the Germanic, French, Norwegian, Scottish or Italian populations looked like in, let’s say, the year 1000.

We don’t know what they looked like in the year 500, or 2000BC either and based on what we do know about warfare and the movement of people within Europe, those populations in the same location could genetically look entirely different at different points in history. Think before and after The 30 Years War.

As an example, consider the population of Hungary and the Slavic portion of Germany before and after the Mongol invasion of Europe in the 13 th century and Hun invasions that occurred between the 1 st and 5 th centuries. The invaders DNA didn’t go away, it became part of the local population and we find it in descendants today. But how do we know it’s Hunnic and not “German,” whatever German used to be, or Hungarian, or Norse?

Now, think about how much we don’t know. There is no reason to believe the admixture and intermixing of populations on any other continent that was inhabited was any different. People will be people. They have wars, they migrate, they fight with each other and they produce offspring.

We are one big mixing bowl.

Software

A third challenge faced in determining ethnicity is how to calculate and interpret matching.

Population based matching is what is known as “best fit.” This means that with few exceptions, such as some D9S919 values (Native American), the Duffy Null Allele (African) and Neanderthal not being found in African populations, all of the DNA sequences used for ethnicity matching are found in almost all populations worldwide, just at differing frequencies.

So assigning a specific “ethnicity” to you is a matter of finding the best fit – in other words which population you match at the highest frequency for the combined segments being measured.

Let’s say that the company you’re using has 50 people from each “grouping” that they are using for buckets.

A bucket is something you’ll be assigned to. Buckets sometimes resemble modern-day countries, but most often the testing companies try to be less boundary aligned and more population group aligned – like British Isles, or Eastern European, for example.

How does one decide which “country” goes where? That’s up to the company involved. As a consumer, you need to read what the company publishes about their reference populations and their bucket assignment methodology.

For example, one company groups the Czech Republic and Poland in with Western Europe and another groups them primarily with Eastern Europe but partly in Western Europe and a third puts Poland in Eastern Europe and doesn’t say where they group The Czech Republic. None of these are inherently right are wrong – just understand that they are different and you’re not necessarily comparing apples to apples.

Two Strands of DNA

In the past, we’ve discussed the fact that you have two strands of DNA and they don’t come with a Mom side, a Dad side, no zipper and no instructions that tell you which is Mom’s and which is Dad’s. Not fair – but it’s what we have to work with.

When you match someone because your DNA is zigzagging back and forth between Mom’s and Dad’s DNA sides, that’s called identical by chance.

It’s certainly possible that the same thing can happen in population genetics – where two strands when combined “look like” and match to a population reference sample, by chance.

In the example above, you can see that you received all As from Mom and all Cs from Dad, and the reference population matches the As and Cs by zigzagging back and forth between your parents. In this case, your DNA would match that particular reference population, but your parents would not. The matching is technically accurate, it’s just that the results aren’t relevant because you match by chance and not because you have an ancestor from that reference population.

Finding The Right Bucket

Our DNA, as humans, is more than 99.% the same. The differences are where mutations have occurred that allow population groups and individuals to look different from one another and other minor differences. Understanding the degree of similarity makes the concept of “race” a bit outdated.

For genetic genealogy, it’s those differences we seek, both on a population level for ethnicity testing and on a personal level for identifying our ancestors based on who else our autosomal DNA matches who also has those same ancestors.

Let’s look at those differences that have occurred within population groups.

Let’s say that one particular sequence of your DNA is found in the following “bucket” groups in the following percentages:

  • Germany – 50%
  • British Isles – 25%
  • Scandinavian – 10%

What do you do with that? It’s the same DNA segment found in all of the populations. As a company, do you assume German because it’s where the largest reference population is found?

And who are the Germans anyway?

Does all German DNA look alike? We already know the answer to that.

Are multiple ancestors contributing German ancestry from long ago, or are they German today or just a generation or two back in time?

And do you put this person in just the German bucket, or in the other buckets too, just at lower frequencies. After all, buckets are cumulative in terms of figuring out your ethnicity.

If there isn’t a reference population, then the software of course can’t match to that population and moves to find the “next best fit.” Keep in mind too that some of these reference populations are very small and may not represent the range of genetic diversity found within the entire region they represent.

If your ancestors are Hungarian today, they may find themselves in a bucket entirely unrelated to Hungary if a Hungarian reference population isn’t available AND/OR if a reference population is available but it’s not relevant to your ancestry from your part of Hungary.

If you’d like a contemporary example to equate to this, just think of a major American city today and the ethnic neighborhoods. In Detroit, if someone went to the ethnic Polish neighborhood and took 50 samples, would that be reflective of all of Detroit? How about the Italian neighborhood? The German neighborhood? You get the drift. None of those are reflective of Detroit, or of Michigan or even of the US. And if you don’t KNOW that you have a biased sample, the only “matches” you’ll receive are Polish matches and you’ll have no way to understand the results in context.

Furthermore, that ethnic neighborhood 50 or 100 years earlier or later in time might not be comprised of that ethnic group at all.

Based on this example, you might be trading in your lederhosen for a pierogi or a Paczki, which are both wonderful, but entirely irrelevant to you.

Real Life Examples

Probably the best example I can think of to illustrate this phenomenon is that at least a portion of the Germanic population and the Native American population both originated in a common population in central northern Asia. That Asiatic population migrated both to Europe to the west and eventually, to the Americas via an eastern route through Beringia. Today, as a result of that common population foundation, some Germanic people show trace amounts of “Native American” DNA. Is it actually from a Native American? Clearly not, based on the fact that these people nor their ancestors have ever set foot in the Americas nor are they coastal. However, the common genetic “signature” remains today and is occasionally detected in Germanic and eastern European people.

If you’re saying, “no, not possible,” remember for a minute that everyone in Europe carries some Neanderthal DNA from a population believed to be “extinct” now for between 25,000 and 40,000 years, depending on whose estimates you use and how you measure “extinct.” Neanderthal aren’t extinct, they have evolved into us. They assimilated, whether by choice or force is unknown, but the fact remains that they did because they are a forever part of Europeans, most Asians and yes, Native Americans today.

Back to You

So how can you judge the relevance or accuracy of this information aside from looking in the mirror?

Because I have been a genealogist for decades now, I have an extensive pedigree chart that I can use to judge the ethnicity predictions relatively accurately. I created an “expected” set of percentages here and then compared them to my real results from the testing companies. This paper details the process I used. You can easily do the same thing.

Part of how happy or unhappy you will be is based on your goals and expectations for ethnicity testing. If you want a definitive black and white, 100% accurate answer, you’re probably going to be unhappy, or you’ll be happy only because you don’t know enough about the topic to know you should be unhappy. If you test with only one company, accept their results as gospel and go merrily on your way, you’ll never know that had you tested elsewhere, you’d probably have received a somewhat different answer.

If you’re scratching your head, wondering which one is right, join the party. Perhaps, except for obvious outliers, they are all right.

If you know your pedigree pretty well and you’re testing for general interest, then you’ll be fine because you have a measuring stick against which to evaluate the results.

I found it fun to test with all 4 vendors, meaning Family Tree DNA, 23andMe and Ancestry along with the Genographic project and compare their results.

In my case, I was specifically interesting in ascertaining minority admixture and determining which line or lines it descended from. This means both Native American and African.

You can do this too and then download your results to www.gedmatch.com and utilize their admixture utilities.

At GedMatch, there are several versions of various contributed admixture/ethnicity tools for you to use. The authors of these tools have in essence done the same thing the testing companies have done – compiled reference populations of their choosing and compare your results in a specific manner as determined by the software written by that author. They all vary. They are free. Your mileage can and will vary too!

By comparing the results, you can clearly see the effects of including or omitting specific populations. You’ll come away wondering how they could all be measuring the same you, but it’s an incredibly eye-opening experience.

The Exceptions and Minority Ancestry

You know, there is always an exception to every rule and this is no exception to the exception rule. (Sorry, I couldn’t resist.)

By and large, the majority continental ancestry will be the most accurate, but it’s the minority ancestry many testers are seeking. That which we cannot see in the mirror and may be obscured in written records as well, if any records existed at all.

Let me say very clearly that when you are looking for minority ancestry, the lack of that ancestry appearing in these tests does NOT prove that it doesn’t exist. You can’t prove a negative. It may mean that it’s just too far back in time to show, or that the DNA in that bucket has “washed out” of your line, or that we just don’t recognize enough of that kind of DNA today because we need a larger reference population. These tests will improve with time and all 3 major vendors update the results of those who tested with them when they have new releases of their ethnicity software.

Think about it – who is 100% Native American today that we can use as a reference population? Are Native people from North and South American the same genetically? And let’s not forget the tribes in the US do not view DNA testing favorably. To say we have challenges understanding the genetic makeup and migrations of the Native population is an understatement – yet those are the answers so many people seek.

Aside from obtaining more reference samples, what are the challenges?

There are two factors at play.

Recombination – the “Washing Out” Factor

First, your DNA is divided in half with every generation, meaning that you will, on the average, inherit roughly half of the DNA of your ancestors. Now in reality, half is an average and it doesn’t always work that way. You may inherit an entire segment of an ancestor’s DNA, or none at all, instead of half.

I’ve graphed the “washing out factor” below and you can see that within a few generations, if you have only one Native or African ancestor, their DNA is found in such small percentages, assuming a 50% inheritance or recombination rate, that it won’t be found above 1% which is the threshold used by most testing companies.

Therefore, the ethnicity of any ancestor born 7 generations ago, or before about 1780 may not be detectable. This is why the testing companies say these tests are effective to about the rough threshold of 5 or 6 generations. In reality, there is no line in the sand. If you have received more than 50% of that ancestor’s DNA, or a particularly large segment, it may be detectable at further distances. If you received less, it may be undetectable at closer distances. It’s the roll of the DNA dice in every generation between them and you. This is also why it’s important to test parents and other family members – they may well have received DNA that you didn’t that helps to illuminate your ancestry.

Recombination – Population Admixture – the “Keeping In” Factor

The second factor at play here is population admixture which works exactly the opposite of the “washing out” factor. It’s the “keeping in” factor. While recombination, the “washing out” factor, removes DNA in every generation, the population admixture “keeping in” factor makes sure that ancestral DNA stays in the mix. So yes, those two natural factors are kind of working at cross purposes and you can rest assured that both are at play in your DNA at some level. Kind of a mean trick of nature isn’t it!

The population admixture factor, known as IBP, or identical by population, happens when identical DNA is found in an entire or a large population segment – which is exactly what ethnicity software is looking for – but the problem is that when you’re measuring the expected amount of DNA in your pedigree chart, you have no idea how to allow for endogamy and population based admixture from the past.

This example shows that both Mom and Dad have the exact same DNA, because at these locations, that’s what this endogamous population carries. Therefore the child carries this DNA too, because there isn’t any other DNA to inherit. The ethnicity software looks for this matching string and equates it to this particular population.

Like Neanderthal DNA, population based admixture doesn’t really divide or wash out, because it’s found in the majority of that particular population and as long as that population is marrying within itself, those segments are preserved forever and just get passed around and around – because it’s the same DNA segment and most of the population carries it.

This is why Ashkenazi Jewish people have so many autosomal matches – they all descend from a common founding population and did not marry outside of the Jewish community. This is also why a few contemporary living people with Native American heritage match the ancient Anzick Child at levels we would expect to see in genealogically related people within a few generations.

Small amounts of admixture, especially unexpected admixture, should be taken with a grain of salt. It could be noise or in the case of someone with both Native American and Germanic or Eastern European heritage, “Native American” could actually be Germanic in terms of who you inherited that segment from.

Have unexpected small percentages of Middle Eastern ethnic results? Remember, the Mesolithic and Neolithic farmer expansion arrived in Europe from the Middle East some 7,000 – 12,000 years ago. If Europeans and Asians can carry Neanderthal DNA from 25,000-45,000 years ago, there is no reason why you couldn’t match a Middle Eastern population in small amounts from 3,000, 7,000 or 12,000 years ago for the same historic reasons.

The Middle East is the supreme continental mixing bowl as well, the only location worldwide where historically we see Asian, European and African DNA intermixed in the same location.

Best stated, we just don’t know why you might carry small amounts of unexplained regional ethnic DNA. There are several possibilities that include an inadequate population reference base, an inadequate understanding of population migration, quirks in matching software, identical segments by chance, noise, or real ancient or more modern DNA from a population group of your ancestors.

Using Minority Admixture to Your Advantage

Having said that, in my case and in the cases of others who have been willing to do the work, you can sometimes track specific admixture to specific ancestors using a combination of ethnicity testing and triangulation.

You cannot do this at Ancestry because they don’t give you ANY segment information.

Family Tree DNA and 23andMe both provide you with segment information, but not for ethnicity ranges without utilizing additional tools.

The easiest approach, by far, is to download your autosomal results to GedMatch and utilize their tools to determine the segment ranges of your minority admixture segments, then utilize that information to see which of your matches on that segment also have the same minority admixture on that same chromosome segment.

I wrote a several-part series detailing how I did this, called The Autosomal Me.

Let me sum the process up thus. I expected my largest Native segments to be on my father’s side. They weren’t. In fact, they were from my mother’s Acadian lines, probably because endogamy maintained (“kept in”) those Native segments in that population group for generations. Thank you endogamy, aka, IBP, identical by population.

I made this discovery by discerning that my specifically identified Native segments matched my mother’s segments, also identified as Native, in exactly the same location, so I had obviously received those Native segments from her. Continuing to compare those segments and looking at GedMatch to see which of our cousins also had a match (to us) in that region pointed me to which ancestral line the Native segment had descended from. Mitochondrial and Y DNA testing of those Acadian lines confirmed the Native ancestors.

That’s A Lot of Work.

Yes, it was, but well, well worth it.

This would be a good time to mention that I couldn’t have proven those connections without the cooperation of several cousins who agreed to test along with cousins I found because they tested, combined with the Mothers of Acadia and the AmerIndian Ancestry out of Acadia projects hosted by Family Tree DNA and the tools at GedMatch. I am forever grateful to all those people because without the sharing and cooperation that occurs, we couldn’t do genetic genealogy at all.

If you want to be amused and perhaps trade your lederhosen for a kilt, then you can just take ethnicity results at face value. If you’re reading this article, I’m guessing you’re already questioning “face value” or have noticed “discrepancies.”

Ethnicity results do make good cocktail party conversation, especially if you’re wearing either lederhosen or a kilt. I’m thinking you could even wear lederhosen under your kilt……

If you want to be a bit more of an educated consumer, you can compare your known genealogy to ethnicity results to judge for yourself how close to reality they might be. However, you can never really know the effects of early population movements – except you can pretty well say that if you have 25% Scandinavian – you had better have a Scandinavian grandparent. 3% Scandinavian is another matter entirely.

If you’re saying to yourself, “this is part interpretive art and part science,” you’d be right.

If you want to take a really deep dive, and you carry significantly mixed ethnicity, such that it’s quite distinct from your other ancestry – meaning the four continents once again, you can work a little harder to track your ethnic segments back in time. So, if you have a European grandparent, an Asian grandparent, an African grandparent and a Native American grandparent – not only do you have an amazing and rich genealogy – you are the most lucky genetic genealogist I know, because you’ll pretty well know if your ethnicity results are accurate and your matches will easily fall into the correct family lines!

For some of us, utilizing the results of ethnicity testing for minority admixture combined with other tools is the only prayer we will ever have of finding our non-European ancestors. If you fall into this group, that is an extremely powerful and compelling statement and represents the holy grail of both genealogy and genetic genealogy.

Let’s Talk About Scandinavia

We’ve talked about minority admixture and cases when we have too little DNA or unexpected small segments of DNA, but sometimes we have what appears to be too much. Often, that happens in Scandinavia, although far more often with one company than the other two. However, in my case, we have the perfect example of an unsolvable mystery introduced by ethnicity testing and of course, it involves Scandinavia.

23andMe, Ancestry and Family Tree DNA show me at 8%, 10% and 12% Scandinavian, respectively, which is simply mystifying. That’s a lot to be “just noise.” That amount is in the great-grandparent or third generation range at 12.5%, but I don’t have anyone that qualifies, anyplace in my pedigree chart, as far back as I can go. I have all of my ancestors identified and three-quarters (yellow) confirmed via DNA through the 6 th generation, shown below.

The unconfirmed groups (uncolored) are genealogically confirmed via church and other records, just not genetically confirmed. They are Dutch and German, respectively, and people in those countries have not embraced genetic genealogy to the degree Americans have.

Genetically confirmed means that through triangulation, I know that I match other descendants of these ancestors on common segments. In other words, on the yellow ancestors, here is no possibility of misattributed parentage or an adoption in that line between me and that ancestor.

Barbara Mehlheimer, my mitochondrial line, does have Scandinavian mitochondrial DNA matches , but even if she were 100% Scandinavian, which she isn’t because I have her birth record in Germany, that would only account for approximately 3.12% of my DNA, not 8-12%.

In order for me to carry 8-12% Scandinavian legitimately from an ancestral line, four of these ancestors would need to be 100% Scandinavian to contribute 12.5% to me today assuming a 50% recombination rate, and my mother’s percentage of Scandinavian should be about twice mine, or 24%.

My mother is only in one of the testing company data bases, because she passed away before autosomal DNA testing was widely available. I was fortunate that her DNA had been archived at Family Tree DNA and was available for a Family Finder upgrade.

Mom’s Scandinavian results are 7%, or 8% if you add in Finland and Northern Siberia. Clearly not twice mine, in fact, it’s less. If I received half of hers, that would be roughly 4%, leaving 8% of mine unaccounted for. If I didn’t receive all of my “Scandinavian” from her, then the balance would have had to come from my father whose Estes side of the tree is Appalachian/Colonial American. Even less likely that he would have carried 16% Scandinavian, assuming again, that I inherited half. Even if I inherited all 8% of Mom’s, that still leaves me 4% short and means my father would have had approximately 8%, which is still between the great and great-great-grandfather level. By that time, his ancestors had been in America for generations and none were Scandinavian. Clearly, something else is going on. Is there a Scandinavian line in the woodpile someplace? If so, which lines are the likely candidates?

In mother’s Ferverda/Camstra/deJong/Houtsma line, which is not DNA confirmed, we have several additional generations of records procured by a professional genealogist in the Netherlands from Leeuwarden, so we know where these ancestors originated and lived for generations, and it wasn’t Scandinavia.

The Kirsch/Lemmert line also reaches back in church records several generations in Mutterstadt and Fussgoenheim, Germany. The Drechsel line reaches back several generations in Wirbenz, Germany and the Mehlheimer line reaches back one more generation in Speichersdorf before ending in an unmarried mother giving birth and not listing the father. Aha, you say…there he is…that rogue Scandinavian. And yes, it could be, but in that generation, he would account for only 1.56% of my DNA, not 8-12%.

So, what can we conclude about this conundrum.

  • The Scandinavian results are NOT a function of specific Scandinavian genealogical ancestors – meaning ones in the tree who would individually contribute that level of Scandinavian heritage. There is no Scandinavian great-grandpa or Scandinavian heritage at all, in any line, tracking back more than 6 generations. The first “available” spot with an unknown ancestor for a Scandinavian is in the 7th generation where they would contribute 1.56% of my DNA and 3.12% of mothers.
  • The Scandinavian results could be a function of a huge amount of population intermixing in several lines, but 8-12% is an awfully high number to attribute to unknown population admixture from many generations ago.
  • The Scandinavian results could be a function of a problematic reference population being utilized by multiple companies.
  • The Scandinavian results could be identical by chance matching, possibly in addition to population admixture in ancient lines.
  • The Scandinavian results could be a function of something we don’t yet understand.
  • The Scandinavian results could be a combination of several of the above.

It’s a mystery. It may be unraveled as the tools improve and as an industry, additional population reference samples become available or better understood. Or, it may never be unraveled. But one thing is for sure, it is very, very interesting! However, I’m not trading lederhosen for anything based on this.

The Companies

I wrote a comparison of the testing companies when they introduced their second generation tools. Not a lot has changed. Hopefully we will see a third software generation soon.

I do recommend selecting between the main three testing companies plus National Geographic’s Genographic 2.0 products if you’re going to test for ethnicity. Stay safe. There are less than ethical people and companies out there looking to take advantage of people’s curiosity to learn about their heritage.

Today, 23andMe is double the price of either Family Tree DNA or Ancestry and they are having other issues as well. However, they do sometimes pick up the smallest amounts of minority admixture.

Ancestry continues to have “a Scandinavian problem” where many/most of their clients have a significant amount (some as high as the 30% range) of Scandinavian ancestry assigned to them that is not reflected by other testing companies or tools, or the tester’s known heritage – and is apparently incorrect.

However, Ancestry did pick up my minority Ancestry of both Native and African. How much credibility should I give that in light of the known Scandinavian issue? In other words, if they can’t get 30% right, how could they ever get 4 or 5% right?

Remember what I said about companies doing pretty well on a comparative continental basis but sorting through ethnicity within a continent being much more difficult. This is the perfect example. Ancestry also is not alone in reporting small amounts of my minority admixture. The other companies do as well, although their amounts and descriptions don’t match each other exactly.

However, I can download any or all three of these raw data files to GedMatch and utilize their various ethnicity, triangulation and chromosome by chromosome comparison utilities. Both Family Tree DNA and Ancestry test more SNP locations than does 23andMe, and cost half as much, if you’re planning to test in order to upload your raw data file to GedMatch.

If you are considering ordering from either 23andMe or Ancestry, be sure you understand their privacy policy before ordering.

In Summary

I hate to steal Judy Russell’s line, but she’s right – it’s not soup yet if ethnicity testing is the only tool you’re going to use and if you’re expecting answers, not estimates. View today’s ethnicity results from any of the major testing companies as interesting, because that’s what they are, unless you have a very specific research agenda, know what you are doing and plan to take a deeper dive.

I’m not discouraging anyone from ethnicity testing. I think it’s fun and for me, it was extremely informative. But at the same time, it’s important to set expectations accurately to avoid disappointment, anxiety, misinformation or over-reliance on the results.

You can’t just discount these results because you don’t like them, and neither can you simply accept them.

If you think your grandfather was 100% Native America and you have no Native American heritage on the ethnicity test, the problem is likely not the test or the reference populations. You should have 25% and carry zero. The problem is likely that the oral history is incorrect. There is virtually no one, and certainly not in the Eastern tribes, who was not admixed by two generations ago. It’s also possible that he is not your grandfather. View ethnicity results as a call to action to set forth and verify or refute their accuracy, especially if they vary dramatically from what you expected. If it’s the truth you seek, this is your personal doorway to Delphi.

Just don’t trade in your lederhosen, or anything else just yet based on ethnicity results alone, because this technology it still in it’s infancy, especially within Europe. I mean, after all, it’s embarrassing to have to go and try to retrieve your lederhosen from the pawn shop. They’re going to laugh at you.

I find it ironic that Y DNA and mtDNA, much less popular, can be very, very specific and yield definitive answers about individual ancestors, reaching far beyond the 5th or 6th generation – yet the broad brush ethnicity painting which is much less reliable is much more popular. This is due, in part, I’m sure, to the fact that everyone can take the ethnicity tests, which represent all lines. You aren’t limited to testing one or two of your own lines and you don’t need to understand anything about genetic genealogy or how it works. All you have to do is spit or swab and wait for results.

You can take a look at how Y and mtDNA testing versus autosomal tests work here. Maybe Y or mitochondrial should be next on your list, as they reach much further back in time on specific lines, and you can use these results to create a DNA pedigree chart that tells you very specifically about the ancestry of those particular lines.

Ethnicity testing is like any other tool – it’s just one of many available to you. You’ll need to gather different kinds of DNA and other evidence from various sources and assemble the pieces of your ancestral story like a big puzzle. Ethnicity testing isn’t the end, it’s the beginning. There is so much more!

My real hope is that ethnicity testing will kindle the fires and that some of the folks that enter the genetic genealogy space via ethnicity testing will be become both curious and encouraged and will continue to pursue other aspects of genealogy and genetic genealogy. Maybe they will ask the question of “who” in their tree wore kilts or lederhosen and catch the genealogy bug. Maybe they will find out more about grandpa’s Native American heritage, or lack thereof. Maybe they will meet a match that has more information than they do and who will help them. After all, ALL of genetic genealogy is founded upon sharing – matches, trees and information. The more the merrier!

So, if you tested for ethnicity and would like to learn more, come on in, the water’s fine and we welcome both lederhosen and kilts, whatever you’re wearing today! Jump right in.

I receive a small contribution when you click on some of the links to vendors in my articles. This does NOT increase the price you pay but helps me to keep the lights on and this informational blog free for everyone. Please click on the links in the articles or to the vendors below if you are purchasing products or DNA testing.

DNA Purchases and Free Transfers


Watch the video: If My Mom Runs the Restaurant. 14 Funny Situations


Comments:

  1. Linford

    Congratulations)))

  2. Gherardo

    I believe that you are wrong. I'm sure. I can prove it. Email me at PM, we will talk.

  3. Domhnull

    It seems to me it is excellent idea. I agree with you.

  4. Malazahn

    I apologise, but, in my opinion, you commit an error. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM.

  5. Diogo

    Sorry, but this option was not suitable for me. Maybe there are options?



Write a message


Previous Article

Camping in the Great Smoky Mountains, NC

Next Article

Be happier when you travel. Here are 40 simple ways.