English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

if there is how? & in what way

2007-06-26 01:41:24 · 11 answers · asked by Shadows of thousand 1 in Science & Mathematics Biology

11 answers

This is a good question. I read a study before that suggests that there is no increase in risk of any abnormalities whatsoever. They say that cousins are as equally genetically different as any other people that are not related.

The problem here resides in the social stigma of this kind of relationship, science however suggests that gentically there is no increased risk of problems.

Edit: found the article:

I wish I could find the article again, if I do I will link it.

2007-06-26 01:51:40 · answer #1 · answered by Noncyclicphotophosphorylation 2 · 1 0

The danger of cousin marriage to an infant is actually only slightly greater than to an infant whose parents have no known relationship. This is because the populations of most countries like the USA, Australia, Canada, New Zealand etc are highly outbred. Many people in these countries can count English, Scots, German, Swedish, Irish, French etc recent ancestors. Even in source countries, recent population mobility has meant the people from different districts now marry

There is more danger if the cousins are the descendants of a similar marriage anything up to a few generations before. I'm sure you could find statistics for this on the net if you looked hard enough.

The story of inbred European royals by the way is largely myth, except in one or two families where inbreeding was by hardened court tradition. In reality until quite recently the royal families and the aristocrats were the only people with enough wealth to travel, so they had the opportunity of marrying people from other countries or at least outside their own districts.

It was not until the invention of the railway and the bicycle that ordinary people were able to select partners from more than an hour or so's walk from their homes. Over centuries that could lead to considerable inbreeding among people in any particular district. It was only the movement of troops during wars that stirred the genetic pot.

2007-06-26 09:06:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Most of the time everything is OK for the baby. But, once in a while, if there is some genetic problem in the family, the likelihood that the baby will inherit it is increased since the genes will be coming from closely related people.

For instance, diabetes is a highly inheritable disease. If two unrelated people marry and one is diabetic, the baby may still be free of diabetes. But, if cousins marry and there is diabetes in the family, the baby is more likely to be effected.

2007-06-26 08:51:26 · answer #3 · answered by Joan H 6 · 0 0

One of the problems with blood marriage is the increase in frequency of genetic diseases if these diseases were already in the family. say you marry two cousins both carrying the trait for hemophelia, this would drastically increase the baby's chance of being a hemapheliac or of being a carrier as opposed to either of those two cousins going out into the general population and marrying a random individual (not nearly as likely that the other person would be carrying the trait) also there are problems with chromosomal rearrangements and chromosomal anamolies So it's not a positive that yes there would be a problem, but it would increase the liklihood

2007-06-26 08:48:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The first generation of inbreeding rarely results in some sort of genetic abnormality or disease. It is when there is continued inbreeding that problems arise. It can take generations for this to occur. For example, the royal families of Europe to which we can trace many genetic diseases like hemophilia and porphyria. This took several generations to develop.

We can also see this in attempts to save some wildlife from extinction. Most notably, cheetahs. For a while, the breeding pool in many areas was so small that inbreeding went on almost exclusively. As a result, there were some genetic abnormalities that included thinner skull bones. This meant that the cats couldn't withstand some of the blows to the head from their prey. After 20 to 30 years of assistance to help mix up the breeding pools, they are coming back from that brink.

2007-06-26 14:23:45 · answer #5 · answered by jade_calliope 3 · 0 0

Sometimes there is sometimes there isn't. If they are 1st cousins if their first child is normal it doesn't mean their 2nd child will be. If all of their kids come out normal their offspring have a much greater chance of being mentally and physically deformed. Not to mention all the harassment the children would recieve. Look to Egypt and many of the ailments researchers have found that were caused by inbreeding of the royal families and there you will have you accurate answer as to what exact defects may occur.

2007-06-26 08:48:27 · answer #6 · answered by elliecow 3 · 0 0

omg that sounds like a jerry springer moment.
but on the real there will be effects if cousins of the same blood get married and have a baby the disorders that are pretty rampid in the family the baby will get them in the aftermath.

2007-06-26 11:08:25 · answer #7 · answered by Netti 4 · 0 1

Like people said there's a small increase of the chance of having a child with problems. The increase isn't that much though, but people HUGELY exaggerate.

2007-06-26 18:38:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You might cosider visiting the following website:
http://fire.biol.wwu.edu/trent/trent/firstcousins.pdf

Many of the ideas we have been taught are myth, but in some cases there may be risks involved. The above website explains the answer to your question and then some.

2007-06-26 08:55:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It's actually not as bad as people think.

go here

http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=65

2007-06-26 08:49:58 · answer #10 · answered by choochoo 2 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers