Unnatural Selection: Darwin's family damaged by inbreeding.

Avatar image for domatron23
domatron23

6226

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 domatron23
Member since 2007 • 6226 Posts

This is just too good to not share. It's the perfect mixture of irony and self-pwnage.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/genetics/article7114113.ece

Avatar image for RationalAtheist
RationalAtheist

4428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 RationalAtheist
Member since 2007 • 4428 Posts

It certainly proves the point!

It's interesting to read there that globally, "50% of Muslim marriages" involve "partners who are related"...

Avatar image for GabuEx
GabuEx

36552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

#3 GabuEx
Member since 2006 • 36552 Posts

It certainly proves the point!

It's interesting to read there that globally, "50% of Muslim marriages" involve "partners who are related"...

RationalAtheist

I really wish they'd define "related", though.  I'm sure that if you traced a given husband and wife's geneology, you would theoretically find that they were at some point "related", but not in the sense that most understand when they hear the word.  I saw that they considered two people who were third cousins to be related (i.e., two people who share the same great-great-grandparent), and that really seems to me to be stretching it.

Avatar image for RationalAtheist
RationalAtheist

4428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 RationalAtheist
Member since 2007 • 4428 Posts

I really wish they'd define "related", though. I'm sure that if you traced a given husband and wife's geneology, you would theoretically find that they were at some point "related", but not in the sense that most understand when they hear the word. I saw that they considered two people who were third cousins to be related (i.e., two people who share the same great-great-grandparent), and that really seems to me to be stretching it.

GabuEx

I thought a definition (in terms at least) was made within the article:

"Last March Baroness Ruth Deech, former head of the Human Fertility and Embryology Authority, called for a "vigorous" public campaign to deter cousin marriage. She pointed out that 55% of British Pakistanis are married to first cousins and in Bradford the figure is 75 per cent.

British Pakistanis represent 3 per cent of all births in Britain but one third of children with recessive genetic disorders."

Avatar image for ChiliDragon
ChiliDragon

8444

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 ChiliDragon
Member since 2006 • 8444 Posts
Makes one wonder how much of that is intentional versus how much is just a side-effect of a desire to marry within the ethnic and cultural group though...
Avatar image for Gambler_3
Gambler_3

7736

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -4

User Lists: 0

#6 Gambler_3
Member since 2009 • 7736 Posts

With a cousin marriage do we know from the first day of birth if there has been a real problem? And is the inability to produce children the only defect you will know later on??

And yes I dont doubt the pakistani muslim thing, it really is common among us, although 55% seems rather high. Heck I know so many first cousin marriages within my relatives and family, I can do some meaningful research on it. Infact my mother knows quite alot about whoz related in what way to whom so I'll prolly collect the data and tell you people, I have been curious myself...

I know of 2 cousin marriages which created defected children but ultimately they did have healthy children. But then I know of more first cousin marriages which didnt have any problems. 2 of my first cousins fell in love and not only were they first cousins but their moms were sisters and dads were brothers, and their parents were second cousins IIRC. Their marriage was heavily opposed because of that but they did ultimatelty marry and their first child is an absolute gem, one of the cutest baby girls I have seen. For the couple it is god's sign that he has power over all things ultimately. 

One of the reasons why muslims marry so much in first cousins is because most marriages are arranged and the families are simply willing to bond 2 of their own children if they are willing to rather than ask for a girl from some family they dont really know well. The older generation of muslims were also brought up in a way that they never had the confidence to interact with girls and make a GF(but this is not the case with my generation). Then there is a problem that marriage outside of your religious sect is very much considered a taboo so even if someone managed to get a GF, if it turned out to be from another sect, there is a high chance they will not marry due to family pressure.

Then there is another thing that marrying within your family is the "easy way out". When you propose a girl for arranged marriage(meaning you are not friends with her) then 50% is about convincing the parents and the job gets much easier if they are already. I mean I could propose a first or second cousin of mine and there is 99% chances that it will be accepted.

Another huge issue is that people think that if cousin marriages really were that dangerous then allah wouldnt have allowed them. Ya your ridiculous religious reasoning has to come in afterall.:P

If I do fall for a first cousin then I really dont know what I'll do, I am not really decided on the issue.

Avatar image for RationalAtheist
RationalAtheist

4428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 RationalAtheist
Member since 2007 • 4428 Posts

If I do fall for a first cousin then I really dont know what I'll do, I am not really decided on the issue.

Gambler_3

At least you'll know that your offspring would be at a far higher risk of genetic mutation, so you can make an informed choice about parenthood.