Are the Jews crazy? No! Not all of them. Only the Ashkenazi Jews and not all of them either, but many more than they ever feared and the rest of us ever suspected.
It has been known for a long time that the Ashkenazi Jews, which represent 95% of all Jews, are susceptible to some severe and profoundly debilitating genetic diseases specific to their ethnic group, like:
Tay-Sachs Disease (carrier rate 1:25 births), Canavan (1:40), Niemann-Pick (1:90), Gaucher’s (1:14), Familial Familial Dysautonomia (1:30), Bloom Syndrome (1:100), Fanconi anemia (1:89), Cystic Fibrosis (1:25) and Mucolipidosis IV.
If two carriers of the same disorder have children, there is a 25% chance of having an affected child, a 50% chance of having a child who is a carrier like themselves, and a 25% chance of having a child who is neither affected nor a carrier.
The response to this awareness at the general public level in Israel has been for the affected individuals to …. sue the doctors who did not counsel their parents to abort them, a legal novelty that came to be known as “wrongful birth suit.”
In these lawsuit claims, doctors are held liable for not discovering fetal abnormalities that might have prompted parents to abort their child.
Wrongful life/birth claims, according to LifeSiteNews, are more prevalent in Israel where a higher rate of genetic disorders caused by consanguineous (connected by kinship) marriages has fueled a “pro-genetic testing culture.”
At the community level the concern has encouraged American Jews to promote research and demand better funding for research targeted to these diseases (shades of “primacy of Jewish sufering”), and in Israel to create a national registry to get a better grip on the problem and also provide a venue for donors (e.g., of marrow).
At the same time intensified Israeli research into the Ashkenazi genetic diseases has paid unexpected dividends. In an article recently published in the most prestigious scientific journal, Nature, Israeli researchers announced the discovery of a genetic marker for major psychiatric disorders with high heritability like schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders, manic depression and bipolar disorder linked in a genome-wide association in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, in lay language a mutated gene that makes Ashkenazi Jews 40% more likely to develop these severe psychiatric disorders than non-Jews.
That is a huge figure. The prevalence of schizophrenia in the US is given as anywhere between 1: and 4:1,000, which means that of every 1,000 American non-Jews you come into contact with at least one or as many as four are likely to be schizophrenics. The Nature findings can be extrapolated to mean that of every 100 American Jews you meet, as many as 16 are, if not all schizophrenics, at least carriers of the defective gene to pass on to their progeny. I could not find the prevalence of schizophrenia in Israel in any source.
The Nature study used sophisticated statistical analyses, a large sample cohort (904 schizophrenic) and a very large (1,640) control group, both from “certified” Askenazi Jews. *
Therefore a disproportionate number of Jews are affected by severe psychiatric disorders arising from a mutated gene due to inbreeding and the only cure is worse than the disease and in fact worse than death: the dreaded abomination, the “A” word, assimilation!
Why would “G-d” punish His “chosen” people so cruelly and place them between a rock and a hard place?
Or maybe it was not that “G-d” who did it but the ancient Greek gods, of whom it was said:
“Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.
*Ascertaining that the subjects are indeed Ashkenazi Jews is a skill the Israeli researchers have perfected in previous studies:
“A few Jewish organizations were concerned about linking Ashkenazi Jews to a deadly disease.75–80 Investigators responded, as one interviewee explained, by making it clear that “this was not a finding that should be stigmatizing. In fact it was going to provide a benefit to the Jewish community.” Another interviewee observed that prevalence of the mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish women was “just a biological fact. It’s a historical fact. . . . Lack of awareness about the possibility of hereditary breast cancer in the Jewish population which . . . has enormous risk compared with other populations—maybe ten-fold higher of having a mutation—makes it rather disadvantageous to not talk about it.”
Our interviewees acknowledged that linking hereditary breast cancer susceptibility to Ashkenazi Jews might carry social risks, such as employment or insurance discrimination. But they believed that the social risks, unlike the biological ones, were manageable. As one interviewee explained: “You wouldn’t want somebody with a name like Cohen to have higher [insurance] rates just because they’re clearly Jewish and are at greater risk for X, Y, Z, diseases, including breast cancer. But that’s something you can get around. You can legislate against things like that.”
“When we asked people who expressed a Jewish religious preference where their families actually came from,” one interviewee noted, “over 95% of them actually do come from that area that would be considered of Ashkenazi origin.” Another interviewee insisted: “The truth demographically is that over 90% of Jews in North America are of Ashkenazi origin. . . . If they identify as Jewish, unless they specifically tell me that they are not Ashkenazi, they probably are, and I don’t make a big deal of it.” To researchers, these percentages made self-identification reliable. “Not knowing anything else, if you’re just American and you self-identify as Jewish, you’re overwhelmingly likely to be Ashkenazi.”
Interviewees also relied on information from religious leaders. If a rabbi said participants were Ashkenazi, then they were. “We were able to get thousands of subjects,” this interviewee recalled, “but it was mostly through a rabbi who was very close to the Ashkenazi Jewish population and so his identification was going to be very robust.” Some interviewees attempted to verify self-identity by asking about the family’s geographic origins, setting their own inclusion criteria. When asked about defining Ashkenazi Jews, one interviewee responded: “Just basically Eastern or Central European Jewish decent. When we are talking to somebody who relates a Jewish religious preference, we then ask them, sort of specifically, where their family came from, or at least as well as they can pin it down. . . . If they came from that sort of part of the world, we consider them to be Ashkenazi.”