What i find funny on these subreddits is how some Mexicans get too attached to their results like they're set in stone, when they are just estimates due to limited reference samples, algorithm changes and flawed methodologies.
https://twitter.com/Bob247874/status/1934523439773282616
I've seen blatant criollos, castizos and harnizos labeled as having less white blood than they have, especially in sites like Ancestry. And on the contrary, blatant harnizos and mestizos labeled as castizos on 23&me. It can be pretty inconsistent
Percentages of 1% or less sometimes are just noise. In Northern Mexico and the Bajío region usually there were way less Black slaves. Sephardic and North African percentages are more believable but still should be taken with a grain of salt.
There is no historical record of great Sephardic or Moorish migrations to the Americas. Maybe that percentages could be residual DNA from the Spanish Middle ages or just noise, or in the case of North African DNA, old traces of pre-Roman/Roman times.
iT'S not just the DNA test; it should be coupled with genealogy and phenotypical analyisis if there are photos available from the ancestors.
I mean, it's true that phenotype not always match genotype, but it's not as undefined as some of those redditors want to believe; for example, there are like four castizo phenotypes, which are more or less consistent with the commercial DNA test results.
The four types of castizos are roughly these: MENA looking, Mestizo looking, Spaniard Looking, Celt/Nordid looking. The Mestizo looking types are the least common, but they do exist. 
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
