Jump to content
mad_scientist

Why do offspring from interracial marriages result in lower pool of candidates for bone marrow transplants?

Recommended Posts

I wasn't aware of this before. According to this article it is because "when people of different backgrounds marry and produce offspring, it creates more types that are harder to match".

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/marrow-donors-rare-for-mixed-race-patients/

So you would need a large number of donors of similar mixed heritage to have a chance of finding a matching type. I think this is because there are a whole set of genes that determine tissue type, so if you have people from a wider range of backgrounds you have more combinations that you have to try and find a match for. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/09/2017 at 7:57 PM, Strange said:

I wasn't aware of this before. According to this article it is because "when people of different backgrounds marry and produce offspring, it creates more types that are harder to match".

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/marrow-donors-rare-for-mixed-race-patients/

So you would need a large number of donors of similar mixed heritage to have a chance of finding a matching type. I think this is because there are a whole set of genes that determine tissue type, so if you have people from a wider range of backgrounds you have more combinations that you have to try and find a match for. 

 

Do you think for this reason, it is best to avoid marrying someone from a different ethnic group so your children/offspring can get bone marrow transplants easier if they ever need them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad_scientist said:

Do you think for this reason, it is best to avoid marrying someone from a different ethnic group so your children/offspring can get bone marrow transplants easier if they ever need them?

You seem to assume that choosing a partner is a totally rational decision based on calculated risk factors. Life is not like that - you might use this criterion and then discover that you can't have children. Choose the partner based on a conviction that you want to spend the rest of your life with them. Everything else is peripheral and unpredictable. (Although no doubt somebody will come up with a valid exception to my generalisation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, mad_scientist said:

Do you think for this reason, it is best to avoid marrying someone from a different ethnic group so your children/offspring can get bone marrow transplants easier if they ever need them?

Are all of your threads about who to marry?

(And, obviously, no.)

Edited by Strange
(add answer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DrKrettin said:

You seem to assume that choosing a partner is a totally rational decision based on calculated risk factors. Life is not like that - you might use this criterion and then discover that you can't have children. Choose the partner based on a conviction that you want to spend the rest of your life with them. Everything else is peripheral and unpredictable. (Although no doubt somebody will come up with a valid exception to my generalisation)

Before receiving any conviction that you want to spend the rest of your life with them, it is still good to consider other factors as well. You select a mate based on many factors - their weight, beauty, facial symmetry, education level, career, life purpose, compatibility of values and inclinations, character traits etc. All these can come before that commitment to stay and be loyal to your partner until death.

11 minutes ago, Strange said:

Are all of your threads about who to marry?

Hahahaha not all. Only two I think maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, mad_scientist said:

Before receiving any conviction that you want to spend the rest of your life with them, it is still good to consider other factors as well. You select a mate based on many factors - their weight, beauty, facial symmetry, education level, career, life purpose, compatibility of values and inclinations, character traits etc. All these can come before that commitment to stay and be loyal to your partner until death.

Again, you seem to consider these things on a completely rational level. It is as though you have a check list, and potential mates tick various boxes and clock up a score, above which they are suitable as a lifelong mate. If you make choices like that, then I agree that potential  genetic problems should be on the list. 

But if you make decisions using these criteria, my guess is that it is all irrelevant because it won't be a long-term relationship. I hope I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DrKrettin said:

Again, you seem to consider these things on a completely rational level. It is as though you have a check list, and potential mates tick various boxes and clock up a score, above which they are suitable as a lifelong mate. If you make choices like that, then I agree that potential  genetic problems should be on the list. 

But if you make decisions using these criteria, my guess is that it is all irrelevant because it won't be a long-term relationship. I hope I'm wrong.

You are wrong. It would be a long-term relationship. I believe in commitment and responsibility and these always come first before intimacy and marriage. How would you go about making a decision then?

I can't understand why you can't take basic facts into account. A few good ticks is better than no ticks, right?

Also, many people already do take genetic problems into account before they marry however the technology is simply not sophisticated in all countries to make it financially feasible for everyone.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-32050313

Nothing wrong with being cautious. This is some thing any responsible people do.

Edited by mad_scientist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mad_scientist said:

You are wrong. It would be a long-term relationship. I believe in commitment and responsibility and these always come first before intimacy and marriage. How would you go about making a decision then?

I can't understand why you can't take basic facts into account. A few good ticks is better than no ticks, right?

Also, many people already do take genetic problems into account before they marry however the technology is simply not sophisticated in all countries to make it financially feasible for everyone.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-32050313

Nothing wrong with being cautious. This is some thing any responsible people do.

The percentage of Americans needing a bone marrow transplant each year is about 0.00006.

If you are going to take that into consideration because you are 'responsible', then before popping the question you should probably also insist on measuring any potential spouse's daily fluid intake. Too little water leads to more viscous blood which can eventually lead to coronary artery disease. Personally, I would also insist on collecting a fecal sample and have a gut biome analysis done. Nothing wrong with being cautious. That's what any responsible person does!  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, zapatos said:

Personally, I would also insist on collecting a fecal sample and have a gut biome analysis done.

Probably best to at least wait until the second date before asking about butt stuff, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, iNow said:

Probably best to at least wait until the second date before asking about butt stuff, though

Yes, you are probably right.

Alternatively, it might be good to ditch the 'checklist for ensuring wedded bliss by eliminating those whose genetic compatibility index fails to meet your standards', and instead choose a mate based on love, respect, compatibility, and friendship. 

Nah, that's just crazy talk!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Yes, you are probably right.

Alternatively, it might be good to ditch the 'checklist for ensuring wedded bliss by eliminating those whose genetic compatibility index fails to meet your standards', and instead choose a mate based on love, respect, compatibility, and friendship. 

Nah, that's just crazy talk!

Yes - please stop being so ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, mad_scientist said:

You select a mate based on many factors - their weight, beauty, facial symmetry, education level, career, life purpose, compatibility of values and inclinations, character traits etc.

How many of these conditions do you meet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I remember black people have difficulty finding bone marrow transplant matches as well.  So it is not just people of mixed heritages.  My guess is there is not as many mixed people as there are non mixed and race may play a factor in donor/match potential.  It is not as rare as it was  though and there are more and more biracial folks coming every day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are also cultural factors. For example some cultures or religions do not like the idea of "mutilating" the body after death by removing organs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

10 minutes ago, Kylo RenSkins said:

From what I remember black people have difficulty finding bone marrow transplant matches as well.  So it is not just people of mixed heritages.  My guess is there is not as many mixed people as there are non mixed and race may play a factor in donor/match potential.  It is not as rare as it was  though and there are more and more biracial folks coming every day. 

In case of African Americans two factors are relevant. First there are fewer African Americans and hence, fewer donors. Second is that African Americans tend to be more genetically diverse and of mixed heritage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CharonY said:

 

In case of African Americans two factors are relevant. First there are fewer African Americans and hence, fewer donors. Second is that African Americans tend to be more genetically diverse and of mixed heritage.

Wouldn't the problem of fewer donors be negated by fewer in need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Wouldn't the problem of fewer donors be negated by fewer in need?

Depends a bit on the donation rate. At small numbers (and with larger diversity) it will be disproportionately difficult to find at least one matching donor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/10/2017 at 7:27 PM, mad_scientist said:

Do you think for this reason, it is best to avoid marrying someone from a different ethnic group so your children/offspring can get bone marrow transplants easier if they ever need them?

No. Obviously it is essential you marry someone of a different ethinic group and have as many children as possible to increase the pool of potential donors. Any other course of action would be morally reprehensible and ethically indefensible! /face-palm retort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.