Depends. How friendly was the milkman? 
Mine was ages ago before they did the country charts and all but its basically Siberian/Central Asian with some Georgian, German and a little other stuff mixed in. I have considered doing a “retest” but its one of those things down the page on the to-do list.
How Kinky! 
99.7% northern European, which shocked me, given that most of my people have been in America since 17xx. It’s hard to grok that nobody bonked a differently-colored person in all that time, but it’s so. The other .3% is southern European and “broadly European,” except for <.1% west African.
I would suggest that anything less than 1% is noise, and should be ignored. Your G-G-G-G-Grandparent contributed a bit more than 1% of your DNA, on average, but may very well have contributed 0.
Careful – if you’re one of those dirty Slavs, you can kiss your ass goodbye.
Yeah, Hitler was like a genocidal Honey Badger. He takessss what he wants. He don’t give a fuck!
I took the FTDNA Family Finder test in hopes that it would link me to someone who we think is a 3rd cousin. Sadly, it did not. But the results themselves were no surprise - 100% European, with 80% of that from the British Isles and the rest split between southern and eastern Europe. So the ancestry fits even if the specific DNA doesn’t with this one other person. Unfortunately we’ve got no older generation to help us confirm/rule out anything by taking the test - they’ve all passed on.
Is this clear? Certainly the offspring of a marriage between pure A and pure B can be distinguished from an individual in a population where A and B have been interbreeding for generations, even if the portion of A and B genes in that population is 50-50. More generally, couldn’t the duration of that interbreeding be estimated with quantitative assessments of the genetic linkage between one’s various A and B alleles?
I know little about the Ftdna or Ancestry algorithms, but I assume it starts with self-identification: If your DNA is similar to those who identify themselves as “Mestizo” it would be natural for that description to apply to you. One would hope they wouldn’t let any “political correctness” influence their classifications.
I got my wife and I 23 & me for Xmas. I already sent mine in. My wife didn’t seem very excited by it and maybe I’ll have my eldest do it instead.
My father’s side is white trash sharecroppers from Arkansas. I expect to get back Welsh (thru one great grandfather), mixed European, probably Ashkenaz (grandma sorta kinda admitted we might be part Jewish on her deathbed), probably no native American, a decent percentage there’s African genes as well. Dunno. Interested in seeing the results.
My wife’s DNA interests me more than her. She believes she is 100% Han Chinese. Methinks it is more than likely there is a Mongolian in the woodpile.
I did the DNA test through Ancestry a few years ago. A friend who was adopted asked me to try Ancestry, since we know my mom was from Italy. Can’t believe I didn’t figure out in advance that of COURSE my DNA wouldn’t be 50% Italian, as those Italians, like most other people on the planet, really got around. I had a strong percentage of “Iberian peninsula,” which makes sense, since Italy, Portugal, and Spain traded a great deal. And I had a goodly amount of Scandinavian genes, whether from my father’s side or my mother’s, I don’t know, given the far-wandering Vikings. I wasn’t surprised to see Saharan African genes, but I was surprised to see “Middle Eastern Jewish” because I don’t understand how a result could be as specific as “Jewish” but as vague as “Middle Eastern.”
It’d be interesting to see if anyone had results that were similar between different testing sites.
I had my DNA analyzed by Ancestry.com a few years ago. It came out:
[ul]
[li]47% Western Europe (Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, and Austria)[/li][li]28% Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark)[/li][li]17% Ireland/Scotland/Wales[/li][li] 3% Great Britain[/li][li] 2% Iberian Peninsula[/li][li]<1% Southern Europe[/li][li]<1% Central Asia[/li][li]<1% Middle East[/li][/ul]
Given that all of the people on the mother’s side of my family were from Norway, I was surprised the percentage for Scandinavia was only 28%. I would’ve thought it would at least around 50%. Also, I found out from researching my family tree that many branches on my father’s side go back to England. However, only 3% of my DNA is from Britain.
I believe there are a lot of Viking genes in England. Are they speaking of contemporary English, or Anglo-Saxon?
While filling out a lengthy questionnaire for 23 & me, I was tempted to type, “No, you tell me.”
28% Native American; 25% Russian, and the rest a combination of European ancestry. We figure the first two must have come from our father, whose family and background we have been unable to trace at all.
Oh, horrors - what is she turns up a bit Denisovian or Neanderthal?
Serious question for those that have done this (in no way wish to Threadshit):
What is the motivation for doing a test like this? What is it going to tell you that would make any possible difference in your day-to-day lives?
I just don’t “get it”. There is very little else I could care less about than what my DNA could tell me.
Please enlighten me. What is the point? What am I missing? 
It is interesting. Do I have Neanderthal genes? My Grandfather told me that his family was from Ireland; he told my Uncle Scotland. Which is true? My maternal Grandmother was “accused” of being Jewish. Maybe I didn’t have to convert after all! 
That 2% represents a horrible story lost to history no doubt.
My results were unsurprisingly 100% European. I know all my ancestry (barring intentional or unintentional errors in records) back to the early 1800s. It’s mostly in Norway with a few immigrants from Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany.
An important point is that the ethnicities shown by these tests are based on the data collected by them (+ I assume any publicly available high quality data), which means any ethnicities with few submissions will have lower accuracy and specificity.
To some extent it also means some providers are better than others, and if you’re interested in say possible native American ancestry you might do some research and find out which provider has the best database on those genes and pick them. Which improves their data further and “deprives” other providers from the benefit of your data.
There’s also a question of accuracy. 23andme for instance by default shows you your ethnicity decomposition at a 50% confidence level and you might not notice the option to increase the required confidence.
My report shows at the 50% level:
Northwestern European 98.4%
---Scandinavian 79.5%
---British & Irish 7.4%
---French & German 1.9%
---Finnish 0.9%
Broadly Northwestern European 8.7%
Eastern European 1.3%
Broadly European 0.3%
And at a 90% level
Northwestern European 87.0%
---Scandinavian 36.7%
---British & Irish < 0.1%
---Broadly Northwestern European 50.3%
Eastern European 0.3%
Broadly European 12.2%
Unassigned 0.6%
Now I believe the Finnish, which disappears at the 90% confidence level, is actually correct, while the British & Irish is a result of a much broader sample size from British stock Americans. And examining the intermediate confidence intervals seem to support that.
I also just realized that it shows which DNA segments your various ethnicity markers are located on, so I could combine that with the DNA-relative results and specifically look for the relatives I share those markers with and attempt to figure out where they came from.
For many of us Americans, we don’t really know what our ancestry is. I know it on my father’s side, because he was first generation, but on my mother’s side, it goes back a long way in the Americas, and could be any number of things. And I only knew my grandparents on that side, so I don’t know much past that. But it’s just curiosity, mostly. I’m not going to do anything differently because of the knowledge.