Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="infowarrior1" data-source="post: 1361852" data-attributes="member: 6516">Doesn't change the facts statistically as other posters have pointed out. It's only a matter of repeating such a practice before it becomes bad enough to manifest.There is more mutation load building up than if the woman married in her 20's.Which is also likewise true of the people you talk about.It's good that your generations genetic profile starts off very well.But on the whole across that entire group you are talking about. There will be more problems than if women in that group married younger statistically down the generations.Especially if that tradition repeats itself.Genetic load builds up. The best that can be done is minimising bad roll of the dice.In the numbers game it's going to result in problems soon enough. Especially if the start is in the 30's- 40's[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_load[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="infowarrior1, post: 1361852, member: 6516"] Doesn't change the facts statistically as other posters have pointed out. It's only a matter of repeating such a practice before it becomes bad enough to manifest. There is more mutation load building up than if the woman married in her 20's. Which is also likewise true of the people you talk about. It's good that your generations genetic profile starts off very well. But on the whole across that entire group you are talking about. There will be more problems than if women in that group married younger statistically down the generations. Especially if that tradition repeats itself. Genetic load builds up. The best that can be done is minimising bad roll of the dice. In the numbers game it's going to result in problems soon enough. Especially if the start is in the 30's- 40's [URL unfurl="true"]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_load[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification