
Lana (second from right) with her brother Joey, mum Georgia, sister Elly and dad, Lucky.
As some of you will know, I recently had my DNA tested.
Well, I got my results back, and I had a Jessica Alba moment. I’m officially whiter than Larry David.
I am laughing all the way back to northern and southern Europe. My DNA tested French, Italian, Serbian, English and Portuguese. No traces of Oceania at all! My ancestral homeland: Europe.
I’m whiter than the milkman.
All jokes aside, the results are absurd. There was no trace at all of my Samoan father’s bloodline.
And in case you’re wondering. Yes, my dad’s really my dad. I know because I have his not-so-straight teeth, as my mum assured me when I asked her what of Dad I’d inherited, if not his ancestral homeland.
She was the first person I told my results to. Her eyes bulged, and then she roared with laughter. Her first words were: “Your dad is definitely your dad.” And then she continued laughing.
Dad was the most confused of all. He was hoping my test was going to give him his DNA Detectives moment, like David Fane, the Samoan actor. Instead, he just asked: “How?” All this giving him more fuel to convince Mum he needs his own DNA test.
I can’t help but feel ripped off. The results seem to confirm what we know of my mother’s bloodline, but how is it possible to not find a single trace of my father’s ancestry?
According to the information I got with my test, “individuals that are known or suspected to be multiracial may show a stronger linkage to a particular Regional Affiliation due to the statistical odds of genetic inheritance.”
So, if an entire strain of my ancestors can’t be read by a $500 DNA test, then what actually is DNA?
There are many companies like Easy DNA (the one I used), which claim that, for a few hundred dollars and a swab of your inner cheek, they can reveal your family tree and ancestral homeland. According to one study, more than 46,000 tests have been purchased in America alone over the past six years.
But scientists say that “recreational genetics”, as they call it, has significant scientific limitations and rely on our own misconceptions about race and genetics.
In other words, it’s mostly hype.
The biggest misconception is that DNA testing can reveal information about an individual’s ancestry. Apparently not. These types of tests analyse only about one percent of a person’s genome. This means that only snippets of DNA that are passed down only through the mother, or only through the father, are analysed.
As Deborah Bolnick, of the University of Texas, explains in this online article: “If you take a mitochondrial DNA test, you learn something about your mother’s mother’s mother’s lineage. If you go back 10 generations, that’s telling you something about only one out of more than a thousand ancestors.”
Using DNA and blood quantum to define who we are has a dubious history. The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 under the Nazi administration legally classified a Jewish person, not by religious affiliation or self-identification, but as someone with at least three Jewish grandparents. A person with two Jewish grandparents was also legally considered to be Jewish, but a number of other criteria were applied to decide the degree of “Jewishness”.
Blood quantum laws are still in place in the US to define membership of Native American nations. Some tribal nations forgo blood quantum altogether, requiring only that members be able to document descent from a recognised ancestor. But most tribes have a minimum level of blood quantum, ranging from five-eighths (the highest) to one-sixteenth (one great-great-grandparent).
An artist friend pointed me in the direction of a branch of biology called Epigenetics. Turns out that when the human genome was sequenced in 2003, scientists thought they could prove that inherited DNA was the primary architect of living systems. They were surprised to find that only around one-third of genetic material was inherited. The other two-thirds was “uncoded” — malleable genetic material that needed environmental information before they could take form.
A lot of science babble, I know. But the upshot is that human beings are changeable and not fixed by inherited DNA. Even more interesting is that the genetics that we code ourselves — through our own lived experiences — then become a part of the genetics we pass on through reproduction.
So we’re the products of our genes, environment and experiences — nature and nurture.
I am a granddaughter of migrants and labourers. My grandparents, Joe and Sala, pregnant and newly married, migrated from Samoa to New Zealand in 1970 to find the land of milk and honey. Joe’s father migrated from Niue to Samoa to work on the roads, hence my Niuean last name. Sala’s great-grandfather was a coolie who sailed down from southern China to work in Samoa under the German administration. And, ultimately, my Samoan ancestry, like those of other Pacific people, including Māori, stems from the Austronesian peoples now associated with indigenous Taiwanese.
My DNA test told me none of that. I learned it through the Samoan tradition of oratory. The idea that I could have learned who I really am through DNA testing was nonsense.
The greatest cultural learning — the basis of identity and belonging — comes from those who are around you. The grandmother who does your fōfō (massage) and the cousin who has better fa’a-Samoa.
I took the test for a bit of fun, and I have no regrets. But my advice? Don’t waste your money.
Thank you for reading E-Tangata. If you like our focus on Māori and Pasifika stories, interviews, and commentary, we need your help. Our content takes skill, long hours and hard work. But we're a small team and not-for-profit, so we need the support of our readers to keep going.
If you support our kaupapa and want to see us continue, please consider making a one-off donation or contributing $5 or $10 a month.
I am afakasi, my father is samoan and my mother is white. I did a DNA test and just like you, it showed no trace of polynesian descent. It did however say I was 30% japanese, in which I am assuming, must/should be my samoan DNA.
I only happened upon this page because of a search, so maybe it’s irrelevant now?
Anyway: maybe you just choose a bad test? This does not mean that all tests are like this!
The best ancestry tests are those which have data you can download and upload to web based analysis such as WeGene and GEDmatch. I’m not up-to-date on that, but AFAIK the best in that context are FTDNA, 23andMe, AcenstryDNA and MyHeritage (which has similar data as FTDNA).
Check this out: https://blog.genomelink.io/posts/the-17-best-dna-upload-sites-for-additional-analysis-on-raw-dna-data-file-in-2019-including-free-ones-for-23andme-ancestrydna-myheritage-users
I’ve never heard of Easy DNA. when I look at their web page it seems they focus on paternity tests! It’s claimed they’re one of the biggest DNA companies, but I’ve never seen them mentioned in reviews of genetic ancestry tests. The fact that they cannot show your Polynesian ancestry, but the other tests would have been be able to, makes that test rather useless for that purpose. Personally, I think the ability to upload the data to GedMatch is the most important aspect of the tests I mentioned.
I read the fine print and thought no way am I agreeing for my DNA to be potentially used for genetic engineering the future.
I had my ancestry done
I had my ancestry done through Ancestry.com and found it amazing. With DNA you receive a full set from both parents but one set is dormant. So brothers and sisters can get a different DNA set to yourself.
Information back from Ancestry.co also gave me names that they felt were 4th or less relatives and suggested that I contact some of the names if I wanted to find out and tell them the Surnames to find the link.
I did this and have found my relatives from Youghal in Ireland that were on my mothers fathers side it has been lovely seeing photos of my Great Great Grand parents who came to New Zealand in the 1800’s from Ireland that I did not know I had. And there are family resemblances as well.
So Make sure you have a reputable company doing your DNA and you do not know what you will find.
Very interesting
Aloha from Hawaii! Yes, I
Aloha from Hawaii! Yes, I recently got my results from AncestryDNA and downloaded my raw data to triangulate with GEDmatch. My dad is white, so I wasn’t surprised to find out I was 48% European, but my mother is from Hawaii, which is basically a melting pot of Pacific Rim cultures. I was pleased to find that I was 35% Asian and 16% Polynesia. Through GEDmatch, I was able to confirm these results and even discovered that 2-4% of my Polynesian ancestry is Melanesian/Oceanic (Australian Aborigine). I think AncestryDNA is a better choice because they sampled populations in Tonga and Samoa in order to generate a Proto-Polynesian genetic profile. So Easy DNA must not have sampled Polynesian people to include in their genomic database. 🙁 Perhaps, pay the $99 for AncestryDNA and see what you get? They usually have specials during Holidays and even Father’s Day (6/18) it was $79.
Kia ora/talofa! I know this
Kia ora/talofa! I know this post is over a year old, but just in case you still get notices of new comments…depending on where you did the testing, you can upload your results to gedmatch.com (it’s a free site for genetic genealogy research). They have “admixture” calculators there that should be more accurate than the one that the testing company used for your sample. Admixture or “ethnicity” calculation is still in its infancy, but your test should certainly have shown somewhere around 50% Polynesian/Oceanian descent (give or take 10% perhaps, if some of your Polynesian ancestors were admixed (even so, I’d be shocked if it showed up as less than 30-35%). It could very well be that they did not even have Polynesians in their populations samples to measure your sample against (since the Polynesian population is comparatively small vs. say Caucasians, Africans, or East Asians, we often get short shrift). I have only a tiny bit of Polynesian ancestry (from Samoan great-great-grandparents), and it does not show up at all on some testing sites, but does on others, and it does on various gedmatch admixture calculators–if my 3% shows up, your much higher percentage should! I have been researching Polynesian DNA admixture for quite some time. In general, a person who is 100% Polynesian will usually show up as about 1/4 Oceanian and 3/4 East Asian (which makes some sense…the original population was from Taiwan and then mixed with Melanesians). So if you are 50% Polynesian, you should expect to see around 12% Oceanian and 38% East Asian (again, it will vary slightly just because of the nature of inheriting DNA, and because of other admixture you may have). Also note that you may also see South Asian, Beringian, and even Native American show up, because our Polynesian ancestors shared ancestors with these populations (i.e., ancient DNA from the people who eventually became East Asians, South Asians, Siberians, and Native Americans still survives in us to this day). Good luck!
I got my DNA tested with
I got my DNA tested with MyHeritage. It wasn’t expensive but I was annoyed when I got my results to find that most of the Pacific, including NZ & Australia, was not included in the “supported ethnicities”. So the whole point of the exercise (to see if I had at least a drop of Màori blood) turned out to be pointless. Also, my results were suddenly presented as “estimations”.
My family all have had both
My family all have had both family tree DNA plus ancestry.com. We have aboriginal plus have kids that also have moari and all we got from it was appereantly my kids are from south east Asia. My kids that are moari the relatives we have on there are all moari polynesian or Hawaiian all them test south east Asia. The test do not show most aboriginal or moari culture as they are have difficulties distinguishing this as I was told when I contacted the company. So for people indeginous to New Zealand and Australia we have to wait until American company’s in DNA testing figure it out
I agree with the others that
I agree with the others that said Ancestry.com’s test, their’s is reputable, 23andMe also. Ancestry.com especially, because they actually have a Polynesian component, my results from them were accurate right down to the percentage. I don’t think that company Easy DNA is legit and charging $500 is over the top, Ancestry.com is roughly $150 plus shipping.
Well, DNA itself, when a
Well, DNA itself, when a child is conceived, is random. You will receive a different amount of genes than your siblings. So they should also be tested. I had mine done at Ancestry.com which was valid. I thought I was 5/8 Chinese, 1/8 Hawaiian and 1/4 Portuguese. My DNA came out with 56% Chinese (close enough to be valid), 10% European (broken down to 8% Portuguese and 2% Irish) 24% Polynesian with 2% Black and 1% Arab. I can only guess that the Irish must have raided Portugal and its islands a lot when they were Celts. And it cost me $108.00. I would say that the company you chose wasn’t very good.
Try Ancestry.com. Have had
Try Ancestry.com. Have had my dna done by them which turned out as true.
One or 2 races came as a surprise eg Russian Finn 2per cent but then I knew we had a forebear from Scandinavia. However I’m not parting with any more money to find out which sides the European races came from. I know as I’d done prior to the test that I am 63 per cent Polynesian and have found relatives from all over Polynesia something I really didn’t need science to tell me. What that fascinating test has proved to me is to have faith in my intuition.
Regardless of what race you
Regardless of what race you are, your culture comes from how you are nurtured. A DNA test cannot show that. Feel like a Māori? Live culturally as one? The dilution of the bloodline should not matter. It’s where your heart and soul are that is important.
A lot of the commercially
A lot of the commercially available tests only analyse mitochondrial DNA which will only give a reading for your maternal line.
Family Tree DNA and the
Family Tree DNA and the Oxford University do both. You can get both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA from a male sample, but only mitochondrial from a female sample because that’s the way DNA is inherited.
Autosomal testing does both x
Autosomal testing does both x and y. And even if a male gets his DNA done, he can inherit different percentages than a brother. Or even not inherit an ethnicity at all. It’s a roll of the dice within the limitations of the dice.
I wish I’d read this before I
I wish I’d read this before I spent the money. Still waiting for the results. I know about the mother side of things (tested me, a wahine) but not that ALL of my mum’s side wouldn’t so up (i.e mother, mother, mother only). However, it’s on her side we’re wanting the confirmation of our Māori ancestry. Dad’s Irish all the way and we have that detail. The tamariki (like ours) who pop out with Māori markings only found via Indian, Aboriginal, PI are what has driven me to see if there’s any truth to the kōrero passed down that one of the nanas was Ngati Porou.
Mitochondriall (I.e. Female
Mitochondriall (I.e. Female line) DNA won’t give you information as detailed as you’re looking for about your mother’s ancestors, because that’s not how mDNA works. It can trace your female ancestry all the way back to Africa, and can tell you which haplogroup of the original ancestors your female line belongs to, but it can’t give you the detail you want. Nuclear Y -male line) DNA gives more detail, but only about your father’s line, as females don’t inherit it. You might get some relevant info about your mother’s ancestry via her father’s DNA, but that’s about it, I’m afraid. DNA can only do what it can do, despite what shows like DNA Detective might imply.
Did you ever find out if you
Did you ever find out if you had Maori ancestry through the test?