If 1st cousins keep mating generation after generation ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the Pakistani population in the UK.

Yes, the rate of birth defects is alarming.

This article is from 2011 so the numbers are even worse now.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394119/Its-time-confront-taboo-First-cousin-marriages-Muslim-communities-putting-hundreds-children-risk.html

"While British Pakistanis account for three per cent of the births in this country, they are responsible for 33 per cent of the 15,000 to 20,000 children born each year with genetic defects."

Yes, this, one random first cousin marriage probably won't result in anything, but when you have generation after generation marrying and producing children, then you get frequent birth defects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Saudi Arabia, high incidence of inherited conditions.


Yep. Saudi has very high Down Syndrome rates. And around two-thirds of marriages are blood relatives.

PP from the hemophilia correction here. More basic genetics knowledge is really needed on this thread!

Down syndrome is not heritable in almost all cases- it is a trisomy (ie triplicate) of one of the chromosomes. A trisomy occurs spontaneously at a very low rate after cell division. There are a few rare genes that can increase your risk of having a child with Down syndrome (because you tend to produce such trisomies more often) but those are believed to be implicated in only a tiny percentage (<5%) of Down syndrome cases.

Also, from another thread a recessive gene cannot become dominant. It is that you get two copies of the recessive gene, one from each parent, and then you start to express the recessive trait. Inbreeding increases the chance that you will get two copes of a mutant or unusual gene because both your parents originally got it from the same place.

This thread is a walking ad for why smart people should also study STEM fields. Educate your children first.
(A STEM PhD who is not even a biologist but has learned how to think about science)

Correct. In these cases, it's the father who contributes the faulty gene, which has been duplicated in his sperm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Infertility is another side effect. It is epidemic in the middle east, with as many as 25% of all couples unable to reproduce because of consanguinity. Iran pays for in vitro, surrogacy, donor eggs etc at state-run facilities because it has no choice if the population is to survive.

Wait, people are unable to reproduce because they are cousins, or because they are the product of cousin marriages?

It's not clear. It would seem to be both. A shockingly higher than normal percentage of Iranian men are infertile, which would suggest that being the result of a consanguineous pairing has an impact on fertility (the latter proposition in your post). At the same time, a lot of Iranian couples are able to reproduce when a donor egg is introduced or donor sperm is used, suggesting they may be fertile but just unable to reproduce with each other. This would indicate that being too closely related affects people's ability to reproduce with each other (the former proposition in your post). Bottom line: keeping it *out* of the family is a good thing.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/01/17/the-islamic-republic-of-baby-making/

[Anonymous]

You might be surprised how many states on the coasts allow first cousin marriage:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

Then there's this crazy in New Jersey:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2015/01/woman_tells_magazine_shes_marrying_her_father_movi.html

Aside from potential genetic problems, I imagine that a couple of this sort faces a lot of other issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Infertility is another side effect. It is epidemic in the middle east, with as many as 25% of all couples unable to reproduce because of consanguinity. Iran pays for in vitro, surrogacy, donor eggs etc at state-run facilities because it has no choice if the population is to survive.

Wait, people are unable to reproduce because they are cousins, or because they are the product of cousin marriages?

It's not clear. It would seem to be both. A shockingly higher than normal percentage of Iranian men are infertile, which would suggest that being the result of a consanguineous pairing has an impact on fertility (the latter proposition in your post). At the same time, a lot of Iranian couples are able to reproduce when a donor egg is introduced or donor sperm is used, suggesting they may be fertile but just unable to reproduce with each other. This would indicate that being too closely related affects people's ability to reproduce with each other (the former proposition in your post). Bottom line: keeping it *out* of the family is a good thing.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/01/17/the-islamic-republic-of-baby-making/

I had never heard of this. Fascinating!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Saudi Arabia, high incidence of inherited conditions.

I thought that was from marrying DOUBLE first cousins, which is like marrying siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One blue and one brown or green eye.

That's only in X-men not cousins.

And Kate Bosworth.

And David Bowie!

Bowie's was from an accident not genes.

[Anonymous]

I'm 1/2 Ashkenazi jewelry and I have BRCA mutation. I think inbreeding due to geographic isolation was the cause, but not 100% sure on that. I got breast cancer at age 36 and have a 50% chance of passing it on.

[Anonymous]

^um supposed to say 1/4 Ashkenazi Jewish. ..damn auto correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 1/2 Ashkenazi jewelry and I have BRCA mutation. I think inbreeding due to geographic isolation was the cause, but not 100% sure on that. I got breast cancer at age 36 and have a 50% chance of passing it on.

[Anonymous]

I live in Utah and the effects of inbreeding amongst Mormons is startling. It's very strange to see the same faces over and over. And many people do seem slow, although that may be culture as much as IQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 1/2 Ashkenazi jewelry and I have BRCA mutation. I think inbreeding due to geographic isolation was the cause, but not 100% sure on that. I got breast cancer at age 36 and have a 50% chance of passing it on.

Anonymous wrote:I live in Utah and the effects of inbreeding amongst Mormons is startling. It's very strange to see the same faces over and over. And many people do seem slow, although that may be culture as much as IQ.

Omg, I'm crying from laughter at these two posts.

[Anonymous]

Most genetic defects are mutations. They have nothing to do with parents, parents' marriages, and inbreeding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most genetic defects are mutations. They have nothing to do with parents, parents' marriages, and inbreeding.

Genetic defects are mutations that can be passed on to the offspring. If you have two parents that have the same recessive mutation then they have a 1/4 chance of both passing on that gene to their child and cause the manifestation of the disease in that child.

[Anonymous]

On my dad's side, my grandparents were first cousins and so were my great grandparents. (Yes, from Kentucky).
My H and I have a child with a genetic issue but the geneticist said it was most likely not related to my family history.