Reposting an interesting thread from IG about abstaining

[dramabird]

Now that InGender was finally back up, I was browsing through the forum yesterday and was of course very interested when I saw a post from user fivebabies titled: "90%+ FAILED GIRL sways did THIS!!~"

I don't know enough about the topic to agree or disagree, but I thought it would be interesting to get thoughts from the gals on this board. Below is the original post, with the link to the full thread at the bottom:

Ok, I have spent hours studying FAILED GIRL sways and noticed one MAJOR thing that they did. I posted 90% but its probably more than that.

Almost ALL of them did moderate to frequent release!!!!

Most of the ones that did NOT do frequent only did a 6 or 7 day abstinence which is sooooo borderline. Tamara suggests at least 7 days abstinence.

And almost all of these failed attempts did the girl diet hardcore. Wanted to pay attention to those that did since most people (including myself) think that diet is the most important factor.

I'm doing as much research as possible for my sway next year and found this to be a HUGE piece of the puzzle. I'm in no way saying that you can't get a girl with frequent release (lots have) but I wanted to avoid what looks to be a major common factor in failed attempts.

Thought you gals ttc pink might think that's helpful info.

Just wanted to say a BIG Thank You!!! to all the wonderful mommies that were willing to post their failed sways. We need all the info we can get!

Any thoughts?

http://www.in-gender.com/cs/forums/t/235076.aspx?PageIndex=1

[rainbowflower]

agree it's interesting, but does raise some questions for me but doesn't really make me doubt FR (although maybe does make me doubt frequent BD), I think someone posted this topic yesterday: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/showthread.php?5612-IG-thread-on-FR-vs-abstinence...Confused!!

[dramabird]

Oops, sorry for a duplicating a topic -- I tried to browse around before I posted, but somehow I missed that one. It's all interesting stuff to ponder.

[TTC5]

We had very frequent release and we have lots of girls!

[carmella_marie]

DH and I did frequent release with a 5 day cut off (totally girl timing right?) Nope, we got a DS. So for my sway we are going to do a 14 day abstain. I think you have to take into account the health of DH, if he is really healthy, frequent BD might not be as effective as an abdtain. if DH is older, abstaining might kill too many swimmers and frequent BDing would be better.

[atomic sagebrush]

Moderate release WILL sway blue.

We have no way of knowing how this person defined "frequent release". Was it really 7-10 days of release every single day or did the people she's mentioning skip days here and there?? That's not frequent release. She also does not mention the % of people who did FR and DID get their DG.

For frequent release you must have your husband release every day once and even twice, for 7-10 days. And if you don't do that, it isn't frequent release and in a lot of guys, will sway blue.

Tamara does not like frequent release, and so a lot of people feel like they need to back her up on that. Which is fine.

The reason why I don't love abstaining is not because it doesn't work, because it DOES. It's because there has been a small but statistically significant link between birth defects and long abstaining in guys over 35, and also because if you're doing a lot of other things to sway, it may be impossible to get pg doing long abstains. Like, I could make a post that said something like, "90% of the people who did long abstains didn't get pregnant" but I have no way of proving that. If you don't get pg, you have no shot at your DG.

Personally, I find it a little ridiculous to assume that anyone who doesn't abstain for 14 days will not conceive a girl. Most couples BD a hell of a lot more than that, esp. when they're TTC. So of most of the billions of girls and women walking around on the face of the planet, it is highly likely that most of them were not conceived via 14 day abstain.

[atomic sagebrush]

WOW. I think I've been banned from IG.

I tried to reply to this thread and could not log in. :(

[rainbowflower]

WOW. I think I've been banned from IG.

I tried to reply to this thread and could not log in. :(

they must feel threatened by you! how dare you use science to justify your arguments lol

[nuthinbutpink]

WOW. I think I've been banned from IG.

I tried to reply to this thread and could not log in. :(

I logged on and you are not banned. It would say it on there if you were.

[skrimpy]

There was one study talking about wartime conception and subsequent birth ratios that hypothesized that frequent release could help lead to the higher sex ratios common then (more boys!) But the study noted that other things could be at play there too, like higher hormone levels in mom and dad. Pre-deployment and on-leave release frequency was very high during wartime conceptions, though :p

[dramabird]

WOW. I think I've been banned from IG.

I tried to reply to this thread and could not log in. :(

That would be their loss. We get to keep you for ourselves. Yay! We love Atomic! :)

[atomic sagebrush]

I logged on and you are not banned. It would say it on there if you were.

Thanks! Must just be a glitch then!!

[atomic sagebrush]

That would be their loss. We get to keep you for ourselves. Yay! We love Atomic! :)

Aw, thank you! But apparently it was just a glitch (though I still can't log in!) Probably jsut as well because I should not get imbroiled in IG drama, that's why I LOVE this site so much more!!

[atomic sagebrush]

There was one study talking about wartime conception and subsequent birth ratios that hypothesized that frequent release could help lead to the higher sex ratios common then (more boys!) But the study noted that other things could be at play there too, like higher hormone levels in mom and dad. Pre-deployment and on-leave release frequency was very high during wartime conceptions, though :p

Yes, that was total speculation on the part of the researchers...I don't believe they asked the couples if they were DTD a lot, they just assumed that they were. Again, I would say, they need to define frequent release more clearly - it's not necessarily DTD every single day. If a couple missed even a single day here and there, it isn't FR.

[skrimpy]

Yes, that was total speculation on the part of the researchers...I don't believe they asked the couples if they were DTD a lot, they just assumed that they were. Again, I would say, they need to define frequent release more clearly - it's not necessarily DTD every single day. If a couple missed even a single day here and there, it isn't FR.

I agree that it was probably speculative, since it was an "after the fact" hypothesis. Even the couples probably don't remember accurately how much they made love. A more accurate study would track it from the get-go, or at least use women who had been charting and recording cycles/intercourse.

I'm inclined to believe that the higher sex ratio was due to hormones more than anything else. Surely they must be at higher levels in men who know they are going to war, and probably in their mates, too...?

[atomic sagebrush]

I completely agree skrimpy. The amount of physiological changes that take place in wartime as a result of stress, has to be huge and it seems a bit silly to me to chalk it up to, "Well people must have been DTD more."