What's the minimum human population required to prevent

>>8109438
2.
Inbreeding is an issue only if you are not willing to kill the deformed and inferior.

And soon enough, 1, once the artificial womb is ready.

>>8109438
I read somewhere that to keep deformities to a acceptable rate, the lowest amount would be 20. I have no idea if that's 10/10 or some other ratio however.
Some kind of breeding system would also need to be constructed of course.

>>8109438
http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2001-06/992282417.Ge.r.html

The author here mentions an island that was populated using a 20 person 10/10 model, I believe this is what I read.

Basically, it would depend mainly on the amount of healthy/bad recessive genes each person had, but a low number can be achieved.
And if you decide to just live with an incredible amount of deformations, possibly resulting in the creation of a subhuman mutant species, you could go 2 as >>8109441 suggests.

>>8109441
>>8109608
Wouldn't the genome degrade after couple generations? So you'd need 5 or more tries to get a healthy kid? This kills the population.

>>8109981
why would it?

>>8109441
But if the woman is unlucky and keeps poping one deformed kid after another, since it's 9 months per kid, one day she will run out of time to have kids. It's too risky. Besides it must hurt like hell.

>>8109986
>why would it
because women have a limited number of offspring they can produce before they are infertile or die in childbirth

if you have a low number of breeding women, and the vast majority of their children are mongs like yourself, then the population is going to crash before the healthy children can get up to child-bearing age.

>>8109438
>How low ***without*** inbreeding

>>8109441
>2 if you ignore the inbreeding

>>8109598
>>8109608
>20 if you ignore the inbreeding

Good job m8s

>>8110292
>because women have a limited number of offspring they can produce before they are infertile or die in childbirth
you know that number is more than 5 right?

>>8110750
oh my bad, I dont really pay attention to OP (he's kinda a fag tbqh)

>>8109438
Define inbreeding, how far apart is considered OK? This is neccessary to answer your question the way you want it, since you can't accept these perfectly good answers >>8110750

Everyone is related in the grand scheme of things. The human race is one big inbred orgy my dear OP

I've heard 200 thrown around

To start out with?
And for how long, and what are the resources.
It's not a simple concept.
Not to mention issues with a certain % randomly developing mutagenic diseases.

technically the only diseases you need to worry about are those which prevent further breeding

>>8109438
I remember hearing someone mensioning your 2. or 3. gen cousin would be fine. So you could make a binomial based on this and it will take 2^4 people to complete a 2. gen. cousin breeding or 2^5 if 3. gen.

4 couples can avoid inbreeding until the time is for their grandchildren to breed.

If A, B, C, and D is a couple:

1. A B C D
2. AB BC CD AD
3. ABCD ABCD ADBC ADBC