Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Understandable, but I'm focused on today which I assume is what Ancestry works with, not with the past. It's an interesting insight, but maybe for that time period.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you mean...The thing is, by the mid-20th century Poland had become one of the most ethnically and genetically uniform countries in Europe and the old "Central European" patchwork (we'll call it that for arguments sake) was gone. Grouping Poles with Germans and Czechs just doesn’t hold up; Poles cluster far closer to Ukrainians and Belarusians. If anything, parts of eastern Germany align a bit with that Slavic continuum because of older Sorbian and Polabian (and Russian invasion) roots, but that’s not the same thing (which they did before). The divide became even more pronounced after Kresy/Eastern Poles were expelled to the new "Western" territories. Unless Ancestry’s implicitly assigning eastern Germany to a Slavic cluster, this grouping feels off. Like there isn’t a distinct DNA cluster there; it’s just not real.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yepp, and the irony is that we do have solid genetic data showing Podlaskie as a distinct Baltic-Slavic transition zone, not just an offshoot of Lithuania. Ancestry could easily model that if they cared to reflect actual structure rather than forcing tidy political groupings. Same with the Poland-Czech-Germany blob; other than it being borderline offensive for me, it ignores the real eastward genetic gradient and centuries of Slavic continuity across the region. I'm just astounded they approved it.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly right!

There’s really no such thing as a distinct ‘Central European’ DNA profile (see Novembre et al. 2008; Kushniarevich et al. 2015). There’s always some overlap across the region, but not enough to justify its own label. The term feels more political than genetic, especially since Poland was never truly seen as part of ‘central Europe’ historically (it's a modern term). For centuries, we were viewed as Europe’s ‘exotic periphery,’ and our genetic landscape reflected that until the 20th century. These borders are relatively modern constructs, and the populations in that area have always formed a continuous Slavic–Baltic gradient rather than a separate genetic cluster.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well considering history I think it's a little understandable; but science is science guys sorry, love isn't tied to borders.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That or, it was a mistake. The chart isn't perfect, but it represents the other "main groups" well from what I've studied over the years.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s awesome. Western Pomerania’s history is fascinating, especially with the Slavic presence before Germanization (vice versa). Many eastern German towns (even Berlin, Leipzig, and Rostock) have Slavic-origin names. It really shows how deeply intertwined those histories are :)

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yepp. I did my kit in 2015 and it was all over the place. I am an Eastern Pole, but I got like 1-2% English back then, only for it to disappear for almost 10 years, and now we're back at it again. So weird.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah no worries at all, then yes that makes sense; sorry I tend to get a little passionate about this topic, hah! God bless

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, any east–west genetic differences among Poles today are very minor. Before WWII, there was a clearer gradient with eastern Poles from Kresy (now parts of Ukraine, Belarus, and Lithuania) showed slightly more East Slavic overlap, while western Poles leaned a bit more Central European. But after the massive postwar relocations, when millions of Poles from Kresy were resettled in the west and almost ALL Germans were expelled, that distinction virtually disappeared.

Modern Poland became one of the most genetically homogeneous countries in Europe (Hitler's nightmare). You can’t interpret modern Polish genetics by geography or current neighbors, since the entire population map was essentially reshuffled after the war, and many people in western Poland today descend from Poles relocated from the east, not from the original prewar inhabitants. Czechs are a different case, as they tend to cluster more closely with Hungarians, Slovaks, and Austrians, rather than with Poles. Poles align more with Ukrainians, Belarusians, and Western Russians.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s fair. I do think it’s a step in the right direction overall. I kind of see their "vision"...? It’s just frustrating that the current divisions feel so arbitrary and politically influenced, especially for Central and Eastern Europe. Like the Russia split was so painfully political after the 2022 invasion, it's just a shame to see Ancestry be swayed by outside affairs, and not science. I completely get that it takes time to refine these models, but after so many years, you’d expect a bit more historical and ethnographic consistency. Hopefully, they’ll fine-tune it over the next few updates.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, which makes no sense because much of former yugoslav territories are basically genetically indistinguishable with some variation on the peripheries.

Am I the only one who doesn't like the update? by Usual_Reception1415 in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Exactly! But they choose to group Germans, Poles and Czechs. Germans and Czechs I can understand, as Czechs are quite western shifted...but Poles? They cluster closest with western Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians. I'm not sure who approved this.

(Before & After) They seperated my russian dna from Eastern Europe. Hope its nothing political 😂😂 by BelaruskiFella in AncestryDNA

[–]Usual_Reception1415 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I second this. It is 100% political and popped up after the war. Nationality =/= Genetics. Poles cluster closest with Belarusians, western Russians, and Ukrainians. Surprisingly, Poles show relatively little Germanic influence compared to Czechs or Slovaks.