Ancestral DNA. Has anyone had theirs done?

Legal protections aside (re my earlier reply to Iain), I think that the current - and potential future - ownership of any given holder of your sequenced DNA is irrelevant in the sense that similar risks still apply.

Even without providers being acquired or owned by businesses with other interests, customers' data could still be sold or rented to any number of interested parties. (Whilst it's obviously important to check providers' privacy policies, whatever they say only applies at that time and could change).

Consumer protection legislation can also change.

And even if a provider has no plans to ever use its customers' data for any undesirable purposes, there's still the risk of data being hacked or stolen and sold or published to the world - for example:

"he later learned of a hacker ... who had offered to sell the names, addresses and genetic heritage reportedly belonging to 1 million 23andMe customers with similar Ashkenazi Jewish heritage on a shadowy dark web forum. Suddenly ... worried his own flippant decision to catalog his genes could put him and his family at risk."

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/feb/15/23andme-hack-data-genetic-data-selling-response

Ultimately, when thinking about having our DNA sequenced, we need to make our own, individual assessments of risks vs rewards as we each personally perceive them (besides just considering the known financial cost).

Personally, I feel that the benefits that I've received - including around ancestry tracing and understanding my genetic predispositions to having / developing certain health conditions - have very much been worth it. But time may prove me wrong! :)

I did consider these things before having my tests done and thought I was old enough for most of the consequenses to things like insurance or employment to not apply to me.

Does the section of DNA that these companies test show everything that people fear? Whilst DNA testing is becoming cheaper, it's still an expensive and labourious process to sequence an entire genome.

Whilst scientists believe/know there are things that are inheritied, they're often not attached to one gene, but a variety of them, so something like a serious mental health disorder, might have markers across half a dozen genes. Nuture still palys a big role, recent studies on psychopaths, show that not all are serial killers waiting to happen, or sick, they may have certain traits that make them successful, particulalry in business, but its not an entirely negative picture.

The other thing I thought about was cloning and then decided if they cloned me then it would serve them right for releasing multiple versions of me on the world!

Ditto. I have loads of cousins who have cropped up on facebook in recent years who I never really knew when I was growing up. So many of them seem interested in me, even entitled to a piece of me (as it were). I mean, I don't mind finding out a little about them, or them knowing a bit about me. Mostly I don't want to relate to them unless I happen to have something in common with them apart from a genetic link.

Iain said:

What are the consequences? It does not require much of a stretch to consider:

1 - insurance companies under their ownership using this ti assess you for any health related issues so they can void your insurance in the event of a claim.

In the UK, under the Code on Genetic Testing and Insurance - an agreement between the government and the Association of British Insurers (ABI) on the use of genetic test results in underwriting insurance policies:

• An insurer should not require or pressure an applicant to undertake a predictive or diagnostic genetic test in order to obtain insurance
• The results of a predictive genetic test can only be considered in insurance applications if the Code states that the specific predictive genetic test may be considered and the sum assured exceeds the financial limits set out in the Code

At present, the only exception where insurers may ask for, and consider, the result of a test is where a person has had a predictive genetic test for Huntington’s disease and is applying for life insurance which totals over the financial limit of £500,000. Any predictive test results obtained through participation in research do not need to be disclosed.

Big apology for not replying earlier. I've only just seen your question . Tier I has a set of additional  tools that requires a monthly or other length payment to use.

I read about this on X a couple of days ago. I see it as being an inappropriate decision by Ancestry(the company) but accept I may be wrong in thinking that.

I read an article today that reminded me of this thread as it is quite relevant.

Ancestry (the company) has been bought by a company called Blackstone, one of the largest investment companies in the world.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201204005567/en/Blackstone-Completes-Acquisition-of-Ancestry%C2%AE-Leading-Online-Family-History-Business-for-4.7-Billion

I imagine they have quite a diverse portfolio of businesses but what struck me is that a massive investment company like this now has access to your already sequenced DNA.

What are the consequences? It does not require much of a stretch to consider:

1 - insurance companies under their ownership using this ti assess you for any health related issues so they can void your insurance in the event of a claim.

2 - Law enforcement being able to access the database to identify you if you left DNA evidence at a crime scene

3 - employers screening you for risk factors that would make you a risky hire (conditions with high absence rate, psychological issues such as autism etc).

etc

I'm not suggesting this will all happen but the potential is there, especially where there is money to be made / saved from it.

Oh and the deal was copleted 2 years ago - it was just an article I read with an update.

I'm not sure who the best is. I guess it depends on the individual and their experience. I like Ancestry they also had a free trial which I found useful. Using such things can be difficult, often over complex IMO. I'm not sure about how accurate it all is but it's a very intriguing thing to think it.

I think Ancestry is one of the most popular people use, but it does cost, but I did look at Familysearch which is free but I found it really difficult to use. 

I'll be looking in to it deeper though and hopefully I'll find one which is easy to use.

Sorry I didn't understand your last paragraph again, far to technical for me. Who or what are Gedmatch's Tier 1?

You have more biological ancestors than ancestors you receive DNA from (genetic ancestors). Gedmatch's Tier 1(have to pay) has something called 'My evil twin'.

'Generate alternate phased maternal and paternal data files. You must provide the Child's kit number, and at least one of the parents' kit numbers. Alternate phased data is the data that the parent(s) did NOT pass on to the child. It still represents DNA from the child's ancestors, but the child did not inherit that DNA.'

Who do you think are the best cocmpanies for DNA testing, I did My Heritage and Mum did her's on Ancestry, I think Ancestry have a bigger database, but none of them seemed that easy to use to me. I didn't understand why we kept getting matches where we had only 1% of shared DNA, surely that would mean we're related to half the country? None of the suggested matches shared either of the two unusual surnames in the family which made dubious about how good a match they were?

Has anyone got any recomendation for deep ancestry testing?

It's the whole of the last paragraph that confuses me, the date range, who the person who's not updated their ? even though you've offered to pay. I feel like I walked into a conversation and only heard the last bit.

Yeah my whole family did this when my mum went through this thing where she was super interested in our family history. Most of my DNA is mostly English, French and Irish. Next I want to look in to the family tree and try to go back as far as I can to find out more about my family and roots.

Yes, and no surprises.  Ancestors from each country of the British Isles (I'm Australian) including both parts of Ireland.  Also Scandinavian and German.  If there was some Tibetan or Uzbek I'd have a few questions but nothing unsual in the test results.

Is it just the very wide date range, or something additional to that, that confuses you?

I'm confused about what you say about Ydna matches, it seems like a very wide date range? I never bother with private tree's and as far as I know nobodies ever asked to see ours. My instinct is to deny anyone else access.

very interesting.

I did mine a year or so ago and I was expecting a large % of by DNA being from England, but I found actually mainly Scottish… which explains my love for black pudding and Irn Bru. I also have some Norway and Denmark dna, which I never knew. 
My mum did her DNA too, and not surprisingly, it said I shared 50% of her DNA. Who knew lol

For what it's worth, I don't find that odd at all - I share the same feelings on the subject.

It's an interesting, but at times very frustrating, thing to get into. DNA and genealogy that is. There is so much bad research out there, and an increasing number of private trees. Yes you can ask to see a private tree, but  quite a few people with such trees don't bother to reply to you.

My biggest frustration is a same surname y DNA match I've had since 2011. He's tested up to 37 markers and is a genetic distance of 2 away from me. That indicates we're related, with our common ancestor being born between 1250-1850. Most likely date = 1650. He's never upgraded to get a better idea of how well we're related . That includes my offering to pay for the upgrade.