# Products of Incest. **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 6, 2009, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096 "2009-04-06T02:51:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2009, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/41 "2009-04-07T17:01:54Z")
> [@Alive\_At\_Both\_Ends](#): > > According to the geneticist Prof. Steve Jones, the hemophilia mutation almost certainly occurred in Victoria’s father’s sperm. There was no sign of the disease in the royal family before Victoria started to have children, and such mutations are commonly associated with elderly fathers (her father, the Duke of Kent, was in his fifties when Victoria was conceived). That makes sense. (Although I read a theory that Victoria was actually a bastard as well. Hehehe!) I think inbreeding usually doesn’t start showing harm until generations of, well, inbreeding. Like I mentioned Charles of Spain (poor guy). ---
**Author:** ![jujuju](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7993a0/32.png) [@jujuju](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jujuju)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2009, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/42 "2009-04-07T17:19:50Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > It’s all about how you phrase it: “The chances of defects increases 2%.” or “The chances of defects doubles.” Most people see the first as no big deal and the second as a major concern despite being the same thing. I.e. people are bad at understanding statistics. > > And that’s just the “one off” case. Letting large numbers do it with no controls would get ugly. That is not the same thing. If you have a certain defect that appears in 1 of 10,000 births naturally, then you have a 1/10,000 chance of each birth affected, or 0.0100%. If the chances of that defect increase by 2%, then you have a 1.02/10,000 chance = 0.0102% chance. Another way to do the math is you take the original percentage and add 2%: 0.010% + .02\*0.010%= 0.0102% If you double the chances, then you have a 2/10,000 chance = 0.0200%. or, doubling the chances is the same as saying “increase by 200%”. Not the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![apollonia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2bfe46/32.png) [@apollonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/apollonia)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2009, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/43 "2009-04-07T21:47:17Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Rat Children of Gujrat. Poster childs for inbreeding. This is not true. The “rat children of Gujrat” are microcephalics who are sold into a life of begging, or abandoned by families who are unable or unwilling to care for them. There is an argument that ordinary babies are purposefully deformed in order to make more money as beggars, but it’s a contentious assertion, to say the least. Close relatives having children may have something to do with it, though (information in the last article). [BBC article discussing it more thoroughly and well than I can.](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/122670.stm) [Another article discussing it.](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080801163217.6r1x3fyu&show_article=1) [Telegraph article with slightly more information.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/3346580/What-makes-us-human.html) ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/44 "2009-04-08T02:39:06Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Is that real?! From what I’ve seen this photo has mainly pooped up and been referenced as a pair of (IIRC) Appalachian (or similar hardscrabble region) brothers from the first half of the 20th century (Depression era I believe) . It would be interesting to know their real origin. ---
**Author:** ![Toxylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f05b48/32.png) [@Toxylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxylon)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/45 "2009-04-08T07:23:05Z")
Those Appalachian / Australian (?) brothers aren’t that bad. Putting on a mean, frowny expression will make most folks look hideous. I see equally ugly people on a weekly basis (the bro’s do have world-class Dumbo ears, though). ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/46 "2009-04-08T07:41:38Z")
I think one of those guys must be Ben Stiller’s ancestor. ---
**Author:** ![mrpayday](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@mrpayday](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrpayday)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/47 "2009-04-08T10:58:45Z")
The’ve got Fragile X syndrome haven’t they? > **[Fragile X syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragile_X)** > > Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is a genetic disorder characterized by mild-to-moderate intellectual disability. The average IQ in males with FXS is under 55, while about two thirds of affected females are intellectually disabled. Physical features may include a long and narrow face, large ears, flexible fingers, and large testicles. About a third of those affected have features of autism such as problems with social interactions and delayed speech. Hyperactivity is common, and seizures o This disorder ... ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/48 "2009-04-08T11:24:10Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Is that real?! I do not see anything unreal about that photo or even much outside the usual except for the ears sticking out which some people have (ask Camilla). The frown on their expressions and the hideous haircuts will do the rest. with a different haircut which covered their ears more they would not be noticeable at all. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/49 "2009-04-08T11:49:31Z")
> [@jujuju](#): > > That is not the same thing. If you have a certain defect that appears in 1 of 10,000 births naturally, then you have a 1/10,000 chance of each birth affected, or 0.0100%. > > If the chances of that defect increase by 2%, then you have a 1.02/10,000 chance = 0.0102% chance. Another way to do the math is you take the original percentage and add 2%: 0.010% + .02\*0.010%= 0.0102% > > If you double the chances, then you have a 2/10,000 chance = 0.0200%. or, doubling the chances is the same as saying “increase by 200%”. > > Not the same thing. I have absolutely no idea where you are pulling those numbers from. The original study cited says that birth defects went up from 2% to 4%. That’s a doubling. Unfortunately, as the linked article focuses on, the media tended to state that the increase was an additional 2%. Sheesh. ---
**Author:** ![BaconAndEggs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f4b2a3/32.png) [@BaconAndEggs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BaconAndEggs)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/50 "2009-04-08T12:34:00Z")
My friend’s family has two first cousins marry each other. They have 2 children. The son has extreme paranoia about aliens and government and people following him. The daughter has a cleft lip and is crazy too. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/51 "2009-04-08T13:04:22Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > I do not see anything unreal about that photo or even much outside the usual except for the ears sticking out which some people have (ask Camilla). The frown on their expressions and the hideous haircuts will do the rest. with a different haircut which covered their ears more they would not be noticeable at all. Well, I guess I meant is that really the product of incest. Though the ears did seem a bit…unreal. They’re just so huge. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/52 "2009-04-08T13:36:43Z")
> [@apollonia](#): > > This is not true. The “rat children of Gujrat” are microcephalics who are sold into a life of begging, or abandoned by families who are unable or unwilling to care for them. There is an argument that ordinary babies are purposefully deformed in order to make more money as beggars, but it’s a contentious assertion, to say the least. Close relatives having children may have something to do with it, though (information in the last article). > > [BBC article discussing it more thoroughly and well than I can.](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/122670.stm) > > [Another article discussing it.](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080801163217.6r1x3fyu&show_article=1) > > [Telegraph article with slightly more information.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/3346580/What-makes-us-human.html) To the credit of the Telegraph and other links, at least the have tried to debunk the clamping myth, which mant “educated” Pakistanis (myself included) beleived in. I remember a documentary last year on this and they showed how this seems to be very prolific in Gujarat City for some reason, they even went to married coupls who were unrelated who had produced a “rat child”. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/53 "2009-04-08T15:06:10Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > [Yup](http://alannaonline.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/db2219-inbreeding-personafied.jpg) Other than big ears, how are these two blokes deformed? ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2009, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/54 "2009-04-08T15:12:00Z")
Sorry. Posted before I finished the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Savannah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Savannah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Savannah)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/55 "2009-04-09T01:20:42Z")
> [@astro](#): > > From what I’ve seen this photo has mainly pooped up and been referenced as a pair of (IIRC) Appalachian (or similar hardscrabble region) brothers from the first half of the 20th century (Depression era I believe) . It would be interesting to know their real origin. I do know, but I can’t remember the photographer’s name. It is from a series of black and white photographs of poor white South Africans. Most of the pictures are quite bleak. I saw the whole series on the photographer’s website, and there may have been a book, too. I can’t remember his name, however. They are twin brothers. I believe they are developmentally challenged, but I don’t recall exactly. They live on a farm. ---
**Author:** ![Savannah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Savannah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Savannah)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/56 "2009-04-09T01:26:32Z")
I have found it. The photographer is Roger Ballen, and his website is [http://www.rogerballen.com/](http://www.rogerballen.com/) Clicking into Books, choose Platteland: Images from Rural S. Africa. The brothers are the fourth picture. ---
**Author:** ![Rocketeer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocketeer/32/4437_2.png) [@Rocketeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rocketeer)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/57 "2009-04-09T13:49:56Z")
Wow. Good job of searching! 🙂 You’re certainly right; Mr. Ballen appears to like his images bleak. ---
**Author:** ![picunurse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@picunurse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/picunurse)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/58 "2009-04-09T14:01:13Z")
My mother was the product of incest. Her grandfather was her father. Mom had no physicial or mental defects. She was of above average intelligence and died from an external cause. (accidental head injury) ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/59 "2009-04-09T14:03:01Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > To the credit of the Telegraph and other links, at least the have tried to debunk the clamping myth, which mant “educated” Pakistanis (myself included) beleived in. I remember a documentary last year on this and they showed how this seems to be very prolific in Gujarat City for some reason, they even went to married coupls who were unrelated who had produced a “rat child”. The people depicted as “rat children” all had microencephaly, which is basically “abnormally small head”. This does occur as a birth defect, without any need for deliberate maiming of a child. It is not, however, a sign of being inbred. ---
**Author:** ![Cagey\_Drifter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@Cagey\_Drifter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cagey_Drifter)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2009, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096/60 "2009-04-09T16:36:46Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Is that real?! Regardless of whether it’s real or not, I wouldn’t conflate vividness with statistical probability or certainty. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/products-of-incest/492096.md?page=4)