In most of Europe and the Americas, cousin marriage is extremely rare — only a few percent of people are married to their first or second cousins. But in other societies — mostly in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia — it’s much more common. By some estimates, more than 50% of Pakistanis are married to their first or second cousins.
A major problem with cousin marriage is that the children of such unions are more likely to have mental and physical health problems. Why? It has to do with rare recessives.
These are genes that exist at low frequency in the population and whose effects are only observed when you have two copies (recall that you inherit one copy of each gene from your mother and one from your father). They are usually non-functional versions of genes that have some important biological function, so their effects tend to be deleterious.
When two non-relatives mate, each transmits a certain number of rare recessives but, crucially, these are unlikely to be the same rare recessives (you might carry a non-functional version of gene X, while your spouse might carry a non-functional version of gene Y). Hence their children are unlikely to inherit two copies of the same deleterious gene.
Yet when two cousins mate, they are more likely to transmit the same rare recessives — since they could have each inherited a copy from their common grandparents (a non-functional version of gene X, say). It is therefore not so unlikely that their children inherit two copies of the same deleterious gene. And if their grandparents were also cousins (as might be the case in societies that have practised cousin marriage for several generations) the risk becomes even higher.
How much risk are we talking? A major UK study can shed some light on this question. The ‘Born in Bradford’ study, as it is known, has followed more than 13,000 pregnancies in the city of Bradford from 2007-2010. Approximately 18% involved parents who were first cousins, and an additional 10% involved parents with some other blood relation (usually second cousins), owing to the city’s large Pakistani population.
The latest report from the study was published last year. Its findings are shown below.
Children whose parents were first cousins were more likely to have died. They had higher rates of hospital usage, learning difficulties and speech and language difficulties. And they were less likely to have reached a “good stage of development” by the first year of school. On several of these measures, the difference amounts to a factor of 1.5-2.5, though on other measures it is lower.
Although the rate of cousin marriage among Pakistanis in Bradford has fallen over time, it remains high. A report last year put the rate at 46%. Given the risks, why don’t more Pakistanis eschew cousin marriage?
One reason may be that they don’t understand the risks. In 2012, Nasreen Ali and her colleagues carried out interviews and focus groups with Pakistanis in Birmingham concerning the practice of cousin marriage. According to Professor Ali, a “majority of participants” attributed still-births and genetic conditions to factors like “the will of God” or “black magic”.
Although the rate of cousin marriage in Britain remains low, it is substantially elevated in Pakistanis — and this explains why they have higher rates of still-births and genetic conditions. While Conservative MP Richard Holden has called for cousin marriage to be banned, Labour has said it has “no plans” to do so. For the time being, raising scientific literacy may go some way to curbing the practice.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
My understanding is that cousin marriage is also common in some traveller communities. That the resulting children are seen as a blessing and spend all their time in hospital. Since they are a blessing they should be discharged so that they can be with their families who then may no longer see them as a blessing.
Needs to be banned also the sake of the unfortunate infants born with these hideous defects.
FFS the commie bastards are rarely slow to ban anything on various spurious grounds.
Here the moral and scientific/medical case is absolutely undeniable.
Ban it with immediate effect. If this business continues the perps must be advised that “free NHS ” services will be withdrawn for life.
These people are costing law-abiding British taxpayers an absolute fortune, they are usually incapable of work and live off taxpayers their whole lives as do the parents who bred them. This has to stop.
Enough.
I haven’t fact checked this but I’ll assume it’s true. That’s a lot of Muslim mayors, and 130 Sharia courts in the England!
https://x.com/HilzFuld/status/1912914814608810458
EDIT: Just fact checked myself. 8 Muslim mayors as of last year;
”In 2011, the United Kingdom saw the rise of a new wave of mayors – Muslim mayors. Born in a country where religious faiths have long been a divisive and contentious issue, the election of the first British Muslim mayors was a momentous occasion. It was a sign of progress and inclusion, the first steps towards a multicultural and diverse society. Since then, the number of Britain’s Muslim mayors has grown, raising the question: How many cities in Great Britain have Muslim mayors? The answer is that currently, there are eight British cities with Muslim mayors: Leicester, London, Manchester, Birmingham, Blackburn, Bradford, Oldham, and Tower Hamlets.”
https://www.greatbritainmighty.com/how-many-cities-in-great-britain-have-muslim-mayors/
Yep, some years ago I had a Pakistani colleague who was married to his cousin and they had a son with a serious congenital kidney problem.
There is a reason why both Judaism and Christianity bans the practice.
Since when? In 1837 Queen Victoria, for example, was not banned from marrying her first cousin Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, or wherever it was.
Yes, and just look at the current lot.
It’s apparently only Harry that is keen to diversify the gene pool. Perhaps because he is already from diverse stock, if you know what I mean….
If he was Hewitt’s, he’d be devilishly handsome rather than a ardmann creation.
Dunno. My parents are beautiful and I look like a deformed rugby ball from a certain angle.
Yes, the Government very belatedly recognised the consequence of the generational incestuous Royal marriages throughout Europe.
The late Queen Mother was the first example of a change of policy: Bertie was allowed to marry a non-royal since he was never going to become King
And then Edward VIII refused to play ball and suddenly we got King George VI and non-Royal Elizabeth.
With Queen Elizabeth II they reverted to cousin marriage, albeit 2nd cousins, once removed ….. and Charles is the consequence. ‘Nuff said.
Judaism doesn’t ban marriage between first and second cousin.
Off-T
Yvette Cooper to Decide on Tulip Siddiq Extradition Request
Siddiq could soon be reunited with her cousins in Bangladesh. This should be an interesting case of Kneel’s Two-tier justice.
Looking forward to this.
“YVETTE COOPER TO DECIDE ON TULIP SIDDIQ EXTRADITION REQUEST”
https://order-order.com/2025/04/17/yvette-cooper-to-decide-on-tulip-siddiq-extradition-request/#:~:text=YVETTE%20COOPER%20TO%20DECIDE%20ON%20TULIP%20SIDDIQ%20EXTRADITION%20REQUEST
Allah is a nasty God, If you ask me
Read the Quran for confirmation. Ultimate hate book
I live in leafy Sussex and even here you see pakistani parents walking with their disabled kids. It’s a far bigger problem than this research shows.
Until a credible figure is put on the cost to both the NHS and the DWP of birth defects and their consequences due to cousin marriage, this subject will be dismissed as bigotry by the usual voices on the left and in Westminster.
When this study first emerged, a figure of £2bn a year was estimated as the cost to the NHS of birth defects, miscarriages etc. You could reasonably double that today. The long term cost in disability support to the DWP would be an order of many magnitudes higher. That is the figure that’s needed to stop this dreadful practice.
The real problem is that is repeated down the generations. As a one off it is usually fine.
“For the time being, raising scientific literacy may go some way to curbing the practice.”
I doubt it. It will continue to be imposed since it keeps any wealth within the immediate family and facilitates continual immigration from the sub-continent to the UK …… and a subsidised life c/o British taxpayers.