Dispatches: First-cousin marriages

[Feck]

Impossible syndrome I think maybe they call it that because it's proper name is

Chondrodysplasia situs inversus imperforate anus polydactyly.

[Thinking Aloud]

Impossible syndrome I think maybe they call it that because it's proper name is

Chondrodysplasia situs inversus imperforate anus polydactyly.

Why do I get the feeling I can work out what that means without any further information?

[Feck]

Impossible syndrome I think maybe they call it that because it's proper name is

Chondrodysplasia situs inversus imperforate anus polydactyly.

Why do I get the feeling I can work out what that means without any further information?

Must be your classical education

[JimC]

One word.

Tasmania.

[Warren Dew]

No I missed it, but I did see the advert, and it surprised me. I always assumed it would take quite a few generations (10ish) for negative genetic effects to show from first-cousin inbreeding - and two or three from siblings. But I have no idea where I got that assumption from. Does anyone know how much inbreeding it takes to cause problems? Or even how to quantify inbred-edness?

There's some difference in the first generation. For example, the following paper provides statistics suggesting that first cousin marriage increases the chances of a birth defect by a factor of two or three. For example, for "structural birth defects in the first few days of life", the figure is 1.5% for the general population, and 3.6% for first cousins.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/uxwm5qr18j5lgrdt

That's comparable to the increase in risk for parents who have previously had a child with a birth defect, or older mothers. I don't personally think it justifies banning cousin marriages any more than it justifies prohibiting parents who have had a child with a birth defect, or mothers over a certain age, from having a child.

Continued cousin marriage over multiple generations is likely a bad idea to be avoided.

[The Dawktor]

I mention this observation- in the last 14 years of my medical job- the VAST majority of very rare, weird congenital syndromes that I have encountered have been in the offsping of consanguinous Pakistani-community couples.

[Feck]

No I missed it, but I did see the advert, and it surprised me. I always assumed it would take quite a few generations (10ish) for negative genetic effects to show from first-cousin inbreeding - and two or three from siblings. But I have no idea where I got that assumption from. Does anyone know how much inbreeding it takes to cause problems? Or even how to quantify inbred-edness?

There's some difference in the first generation. For example, the following paper provides statistics suggesting that first cousin marriage increases the chances of a birth defect by a factor of two or three. For example, for "structural birth defects in the first few days of life", the figure is 1.5% for the general population, and 3.6% for first cousins.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/uxwm5qr18j5lgrdt

That's comparable to the increase in risk for parents who have previously had a child with a birth defect, or older mothers. I don't personally think it justifies banning cousin marriages any more than it justifies prohibiting parents who have had a child with a birth defect, or mothers over a certain age, from having a child.

Continued cousin marriage over multiple generations is likely a bad idea to be avoided.

Birth defects not are all caused by genetics ....also "structural birth defects in the first few days of life" are not the only problem consanguinous marriage cause they are just the obvious physical tip of the iceberg so those figures are irrelevant . And yes if a mother is told that further child will have the same problems because it's an autosomal reccesive then why shouldn't she be prohibited ?

It's bad enough that stupid people breed any way but stupid families breeding amongst themselves .

Well Mrs Ghupta you have had 6 children 5 of them are horribly damaged due to an autosomal reccesive disease(because you shouted about racism and it being in Allah's hands when we told you after the first one)
Your last Daughter (the illegitamate one BTW ,don't panic we wont tell hubby we try hard to avoid honour killings and Sharia 'divorces' ) is perfectly fine but don't you worry, If you force her to marry a cousin too she can have messed up kids as will still fit in with the family.

[Boyle]

Right then.

1) It's fucking sad that this can't be addressed by the MP's due to fear of being called racist or some nonsense.
2) It's ridiculous to be so insular.
3) I'm against making the marriage of first cousins illegal in principle, but honestly. . . At least require genetic counseling or something, which is what Maine requires.

On the plus side it's nice to know the UK is keeping up the proud tradition of keeping it in the family. After all, why let the Royals have all the fun?

[Warren Dew]

Genetic testing and counseling might actually be a good idea before any marriage.