Hearty-Eating Moms More Likely to Have Boys

O

Orleander

OH JOY!!!!
Valued Senior Member
Considering the father determines the sex of the baby, how does this make sense?


http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/04/23/mother-diet-boys.html

April 23, 2008 -- Oysters may excite the libido, but there is nothing like a hearty breakfast laced with sugar to boost a woman's chances of conceiving a son, according to a study released Wednesday.

Likewise, a low-energy diet that skimps on calories, minerals and nutrients is more likely to yield a female of the human species, says the study, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Britain's de facto academy of sciences.

Fiona Mathews of the University of Exeter in Britain and colleagues wanted to find out if a woman's diet has an impact on the sex of her offspring.

So they asked 740 first-time mothers who did not know if their unborn foetuses were male or female to provide detailed records of eating habits before and after they became pregnant. The women were split into three groups according to the number calories they consumed per day around the time of conception.

Fifty-six percent of the women in the group with the highest energy intake had sons, compared to 45 percent in the least-well fed cohort.

Beside racking up a higher calorie count, the group who produced more males were also more likely to have eaten a wider range of nutrients, including potassium, calcium and vitamins C, E and B12.

The odds of an XY, or male outcome to a pregnancy also went up sharply "for women who consumed at least one bowl of breakfast cereal daily compared with those who ate less than or equal to one bowl of week," the study reported....
 
hmmm, yeah. Vegetarians would have more girls.
How the hell did Victoria Beckham end up with 3 boys??
 
Orleander said:
Considering the father determines the sex of the baby, how does this make sense?
Click to expand...
Well, as Bill Cosby said,
"It's not who had the Y chromosome, it's who had it last!"
​
But seriously, the man's semen contains both X's and Y's. Millions of them. What determines which one actually fertilizes the egg? It's not just the first one there. The egg sort of "decides" which one to let in. Is it so inconcievable that the "egg" would favor males, who eat more and take longer to mature, when times were good and females during lean times?
 
I guess eating all that Rolo icecream from the container, blessed me with
2 healthy boys.
 
Orleander said:
How does it decide?
Click to expand...
New studies are showing that the egg plays an active role in fertilization, perhaps selecting the sperm with which to fuse. Clearly, this could allow for the egg to choose the sex of the embryo.
Ah, fertilization--that miraculous process to which we all owe our existence. Let’s review: First, a wastefully huge swarm of sperm weakly flops along, its members bumping into walls and flailing aimlessly through thick strands of mucus. Eventually, through sheer odds of pinball-like bouncing more than anything else, a few sperm end up close to an egg. As they mill around, the egg selects one and reels it in, pinning it down in spite of its efforts to escape. It’s no contest, really. The gigantic, hardy egg yanks this tiny sperm inside, distills out the chromosomes, and sets out to become an embryo.

Most studies clearly show that the sperm is attracted by the egg and activated by it, says Gilbert. http://discovermagazine.com/1992/jun/theaggressiveegg55
Click to expand...
 
I don't think that's known yet. But the main variable between different sperm cells is whether they carry an X or a Y. What other criteria could the egg be using? Unless it's just random.
 
It's not just the father, when women have high testosterone levels their eggs are receptive to male sperm more than female...
 
Lets see the actually numbers from the study, and the sampling details, it could just be a badly done study.
 
It might be possible that women who have more energy to burn. Such as women who eat foods that are high in calories are more likely to have successful pregnancies with males. Female babies tend to more resiliant to "hard times" than male babies are. A woman who is starving, is more likely to have a girl because her body would most likely terminate a male pregnancy possibly before she even knew she was pregnant. I've heard it makes sense as an evolutionary strategy because female babies are usually stronger than male babies and infant morality rates are much higher among boys than girls. But once again I don't know if thats true, I just read it in one of my textbooks.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
It might be possible that women who have more energy to burn. Such as women who eat foods that are high in calories are more likely to have successful pregnancies with males. Female babies tend to more resiliant to "hard times" than male babies are. A woman who is starving, is more likely to have a girl because her body would most likely terminate a male pregnancy possibly before she even knew she was pregnant. I've heard it makes sense as an evolutionary strategy because female babies are usually stronger than male babies and infant morality rates are much higher among boys than girls. But once again I don't know if thats true, I just read it in one of my textbooks.
Click to expand...

two things run in females favors.

two sets of all chromosomes so defective genes can be compensated for if a functional copy exists on the alternate chromosomes, males lack this protection because they have only one X chromosome. this is relatively proven, for example the rate of male red-green color blind is at 6-7%, but the rate for women in ~1%, the chances for a women to be born with both X chromosomes having a defective red/green photoreceptor is very unlikely.

2nd advantages for a female fetus is theoretical, and evolutionary. Female babies and children are not cared for as nicely as male children, this natural sexism has likely hardened the female gender and weaken the male gender.
 
I think what I stated earlier might actually have some validity as far as male babies being weaker than female one's. Sperm cells that carry the Y chromosome are light and quick. They don't weigh much and they burn a lot of energy because they move so much so they don't live very long. Female sperm cells or those carrying the X chromosome are big, heavy, and strong they don't move very fast, but live much longer than male sperm. They also have no problem pushing the male sperm cells out of the way. Most of the women that I see on a daily basis that have medical problems with their fetus are almost always male fetuses. I don't know if that has any correlation, but I think its interesting.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
I think what I stated earlier might actually have some validity as far as male babies being weaker than female one's. Sperm cells that carry the Y chromosome are light and quick. They don't weigh much and they burn a lot of energy because they move so much so they don't live very long. Female sperm cells or those carrying the X chromosome are big, heavy, and strong they don't move very fast, but live much longer than male sperm. They also have no problem pushing the male sperm cells out of the way. Most of the women that I see on a daily basis that have medical problems with their fetus are almost always male fetuses. I don't know if that has any correlation, but I think its interesting.
Click to expand...

As far as I know the only weight difference between 'male sperm' and 'female sperm' is the weight difference between the X-chromosome ans the Y-chromosome. This difference is small.
Male babies have more medical problems because X-chromosomal malicious genes have no counterpart in males (only one X-chromosome) to 'correct' the problem.
 
I don't know about you, but I can see the difference just in their behavior. Sperm carrying the X chromosome don't bounce around as much and they are easily seperated from one another for people who want to have a specifically sexed child. Its a bit of a pricey procedure though. Sometimes I get to do it.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
I don't know about you, but I can see the difference just in their behavior. Sperm carrying the X chromosome don't bounce around as much and they are easily seperated from one another for people who want to have a specifically sexed child. Its a bit of a pricey procedure though. Sometimes I get to do it.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not in that line of work, so I can't see them acting differently.
It could have to do with other things I imagine.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
Female babies tend to more resiliant to "hard times" than male babies are. A woman who is starving, is more likely to have a girl because her body would most likely terminate a male pregnancy possibly before she even knew she was pregnant.
Click to expand...
My youngest son was born at the University of Chicago. Like all my children, he was born via c-section and so had some fluid in his lungs. This meant he was in the nic-U (neonatal intensive care unit) despite weighing about 9 pounds. It was pretty funny to see this "giant" white baby in the nic-u with all these tiny black babies (premies).

Anyway, the nurses there said the same thing you did, except they went a step further. They said the premies that did the worst were the "wimpy white boys". .
 
The performance of male and female sperm seems anecdotal. Commercial sperm separation is achieve by labeling X and Y carrying sperm with a florescent tag that stick to the X or Y chromosomes or other sex chromosome determinate item and then separating the sperm via flow cytometry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top