To IUI or Not? TTC-Boy

[n710]

AS,
Is this the Clomid vs. IUI study you were talking about? It's not the study, but it's mentioned in "The Trouble with Timing"
"Beyond sheer luck, several of the studies that claim to support timing, used different protocols for couples who wanted boys and girls. For boys, the couples naturally ovulated and then had IUI done on O day (I assume to ensure that fertilization on O day really occurred.) For girls, the couples were given Clomid and told to have intercourse 2-4 days before ovulation. The problem with this is that IUI sways blue by bypassing the entire female reproductive tract (and sperm are washed and capacitated in advance, possibly removing some chemicals that may sway, and also recall that the capacitation process and primitive communication between sperm may sway in some way as well). Clomid sways pink by creating hostile cervical mucus that then sperm would have to live in for 2-4 days before the egg arrived!! You are supposed to CONTROL variables in studies, not introduce new ones!! The methodology used by the people who did these studies, is akin to telling people, ok Group A, you wear a blue hat and eat a lot of fatty foods and sugar, and Group B, you wear a pink hat and eat only vegetables and whole grains, and then concluding that blue hats clearly make you have heart attacks while pink hats are preventative."

1. Does all the sperm being capacitated and washed sway blue because there are a lot more turned on sperm at the same time? I'm just going off the theory more sperm=higher fertility=more boys. Or is there a different reason?

2. If clomid changes the cm to be thick and sway pink, why does that matter when in IUI it's getting inserted in the cervix-oh wait, I think I answered that. The cm in the cervix is also thicker and then sways pink.

3. I am thinking doing IUI can also help counteract any possible girl sway affects from breastfeeding. My DD#3 will be 6-7 months and still BFing 6 times/day. By delivering as much sperm as possible in the cervix?
(very cool to hear yours and others' experiences of getting DSs while still BFing)

[n710]

Those graphs do look awesome and 3.4 to 1-great ratio.
I know we are supposed to take studies with a grain of salt, esp. because we don't know how big the sample was or other variables, but heck it seems to be everyone's perception anyway that IUI results in more boys (except the dr.'s and RE's of course, but I assume they would be less inclined to want to to voice that even if there was a little more chance.)

Begonia, great quest. about microsort, why didn't that result in a higher boy rate?

PS-I've been doing so good not just having peanut butter and ice cream for dinner anymore and having a banana with cereal and almond or coconut milk, but was missing it a lot last night so I had banana slices with peanut butter and some cream cheese frosting with coco powder added. I know, kind of weird, but it totally satisfied my sweet tooth and I figured the peanut butter and banana was healthy enough

[atomic sagebrush]

Sheesh I'm totally doing an IUI next time if it's 3.4 to 1

Along those lines though, if IUI in and of itself sways boy, I wonder why MicroSort wasn't more successful for Y sorts then? You would think the sort plus the inherent tendency of IUI to sway boy would have made their boy efforts MORE successful than girl, when the opposite was true.

n710, I'd go with whatever worked for you -in this case IUI- in the past! And FWIW I love, love, love PB and vanilla ice cream. Yum.

Of the three people who I personally know who did Microsort for pink and got pregnant, 2 of the three got boy opposites. (1 singleton girl, 1 singleton boy, one B-G twins.) Not exactly a ringing endorsement for Microsort for a girl and it does seem to indicate IUI may be swaying blue, if you're putting in 85% plus X sperm and getting 50-50 results (admittely small sample size, but still). The singleton boy was something like a 92% X sort too.

When they say Microsort wasn't as good a sort for Y as opposed to X, they mean sperm numbers/ratio BEFORE insemination. They did tend to have higher % sorts for X sperm than they did for Y sperm. I don't think they had enough data to extrapolate about birth rates AFTER insemination (I hope that makes sense.)

[atomic sagebrush]

AS,
Is this the Clomid vs. IUI study you were talking about? It's not the study, but it's mentioned in "The Trouble with Timing"
"Beyond sheer luck, several of the studies that claim to support timing, used different protocols for couples who wanted boys and girls. For boys, the couples naturally ovulated and then had IUI done on O day (I assume to ensure that fertilization on O day really occurred.) For girls, the couples were given Clomid and told to have intercourse 2-4 days before ovulation. The problem with this is that IUI sways blue by bypassing the entire female reproductive tract (and sperm are washed and capacitated in advance, possibly removing some chemicals that may sway, and also recall that the capacitation process and primitive communication between sperm may sway in some way as well). Clomid sways pink by creating hostile cervical mucus that then sperm would have to live in for 2-4 days before the egg arrived!! You are supposed to CONTROL variables in studies, not introduce new ones!! The methodology used by the people who did these studies, is akin to telling people, ok Group A, you wear a blue hat and eat a lot of fatty foods and sugar, and Group B, you wear a pink hat and eat only vegetables and whole grains, and then concluding that blue hats clearly make you have heart attacks while pink hats are preventative."

1. Does all the sperm being capacitated and washed sway blue because there are a lot more turned on sperm at the same time? I'm just going off the theory more sperm=higher fertility=more boys. Or is there a different reason?

2. If clomid changes the cm to be thick and sway pink, why does that matter when in IUI it's getting inserted in the cervix-oh wait, I think I answered that. The cm in the cervix is also thicker and then sways pink.

3. I am thinking doing IUI can also help counteract any possible girl sway affects from breastfeeding. My DD#3 will be 6-7 months and still BFing 6 times/day. By delivering as much sperm as possible in the cervix?
(very cool to hear yours and others' experiences of getting DSs while still BFing)

Yes, it's that study and there are actually a few different studies that did the exact same thing (Shettles may have even done some) trying to prove timing true - they used Clomid vs. IUI to attempt to guarantee that insemination really took place on a certain day, but overlooked the fact that Clomid vs. IUI may sway independently, so it only made it LOOK like timing was doing anything...really, it was the Clomid swaying pink and the IUI swaying blue. (which we kinda "know" because when the Clomid/IUI was taken off the table, timing no longer swayed.)

The one study is from North Africa or the Middle East, and is posted somewhere on this site but I am really under the gun the last couple weeks and don't have time to look, if someone else remembers where it is.

1) We don't KNOW why. My theory is that more sperm at egg raises odds of blue. The reason I think that could be true is because the slightly different sizes of X vs. Y sperm, ~may~ give Y sperm some advantage at penetrating the eggshell. It takes more than one sperm to weaken the eggshell enough to fertilize it and if there are a lot of sperm working to weaken the eggshell, it ~might~ allow a Y sperm some sort of advantage. Like if you try to poke a sharpened pencil thru a piece of notebook paper, it will go thru easier than an unsharpened pencil, whereas if you're trying to poke a sharpened pencil thru cardboard, the tip may break off but the unsharpened pencil can be forced into the cardboard without breaking because it's bigger. It seems possible that a lot of sperm = rapidly thinner eggshell = momentary advantage to slightly smaller Y sperm, disadvantage to slightly larger X sperm (surface tension) while fewer sperm = thicker eggshell = advantage to X sperm who may be able to use a bit of brute force to get thru a thicker eggshell sooner than the Y's can. Luck would come into play because a lucky Y sperm could get thru a thick eggshell and a lucky X sperm could get thru a thin one, but it's just that one may have an advantage over the other. This is sheer speculation on my part mind you - but so is "ions", timing, hormones, and all the rest. The only thing that's been shown in a lab to really sway gender is glucose levels in already fertilized eggs affecting XX and XY differently.

Capacitation rates may very well also come into play because under normal circumstances, sperm is deposited uncapacitated, and then capacitates in waves. With normal conception, there are always going to be fewer capacitated sperm than there will be with IUI when they're all dumped in there ready to go right at the right time to meet the egg.

So to answer your question, I think IUI means more capacitated sperm can make it to the egg quickly/simultaneously, and more sperm trying to get thru the eggshell may give some advantage to Y over X. Not that X can't still win the race, just that Y has an advantage.

2)In IUI the sperm is getting inserted in the UTERUS not the cervix. Hence the name "intrauterine insemination." The CM is bypassed with IUI so it is irrelevant what happens in the cervix/vaginal environment because the sperm never has to pass thru. Honestly, I am not sure what effect Clomid has on the fluids in the uterus and Fallopian tubes - I only know it affects cervical mucus negatively.

3)i agree that IUI would undo any effects of breastfeeding on CM. Plus, it would allow you to continue BF if you so desire because some sway supps are not good for BF!

[n710]

AS, thank you for your help and info. The pencil analogy certainly makes sense to me.

"The only thing that's been shown in a lab to really sway gender is glucose levels in already fertilized eggs affecting XX and XY differently."

One quest. on the blood sugar thing. So let's say you have a fertilized egg XY, it will only implant if the blood sugar is high enough? Otherwise you just get AF. And vice versa for XX, only implants if the blood sugar is low enough?

Thanks, just trying to understand the effect on the egg

[n710]

Okay, I think I just found under the TTC Introducing LE diet you mention that the XX blasto. sucks up more glucose than the XY. I am sure I am missing something basic then because that makes me think the XX would higher levels, not lower leves of glucose if they are sucking more up?

What did I miss?
Thanks

[atomic sagebrush]

AS, thank you for your help and info. The pencil analogy certainly makes sense to me.

"The only thing that's been shown in a lab to really sway gender is glucose levels in already fertilized eggs affecting XX and XY differently."

One quest. on the blood sugar thing. So let's say you have a fertilized egg XY, it will only implant if the blood sugar is high enough? Otherwise you just get AF. And vice versa for XX, only implants if the blood sugar is low enough?

Thanks, just trying to understand the effect on the egg

It's very, very likely that extremely healthy babies of either gender can develop and implant in a wide variety of environments. It may be that some babies who got off to a late start or are slower developers, or if you have a shorter than normal luteal phase, might need the extra push that glucose levels after conception seem to provide. I also strongly suspect but cannot prove that since this mechanism does exist post conception, that there is some mechanism that detects whether your environment can sustain an XX/XY bean PRIOR to conception, because eggs are "biologically expensive" for our bodies to produce, and we don't like to "waste" them by conceiving a baby that has no shot at survival (hope that makes sense)

Basically, it makes no sense to me to do all this stuff to try and conceive a baby of a certain gender before ovulation, without trying to optimize environment for that baby, esp. since that's the one thing we know to be true!

[atomic sagebrush]

Okay, I think I just found under the TTC Introducing LE diet you mention that the XX blasto. sucks up more glucose than the XY. I am sure I am missing something basic then because that makes me think the XX would higher levels, not lower leves of glucose if they are sucking more up?

What did I miss?
Thanks

I'm glad you asked that because I know it's confusing so I like to have a fresh explanation now and then!

Because the XX is more efficient at sucking up glucose than XY, that means that they can successfully grow and implant in a lower-glucose environment. XX can get more glucose, even when less is available. XY is less efficient at sucking up glucose and therefore need MORE glucose because they can't absorb it as easily. It's like if you soak a sponge in 1/4 cup of water, and a piece of steel wool in a gallon of water, the sponge is STILL probably going to soak up more water than the steel wool will even tho it's in a smaller amount of water - because the sponge is more absorbent, the steel wool would have to be in a greater amount of water to absorb anywhere near the amount that the sponge can (bad analogy)

Beyond that, it may also be that there's such a thing as TOO much glucose, so XX could feasibly soak up too much glucose if it was in a very high glucose environment. Neither XX or XY like very high glucose levels, very high glucose is not healthy for cells.

[n710]

"Basically, it makes no sense to me to do all this stuff to try and conceive a baby of a certain gender before ovulation, without trying to optimize environment for that baby, esp. since that's the one thing we know to be true!"

You mean making sure we are keeping the right environment, either LE or HE in the two week wait, right? to ensure if the gd egg will implant?

[n710]

Okay, I think I get the glucose thing now.

Basically, the XY suck at sucking up glucose so a higher level in the uterus will ensure they get enough. Meanwhile the XX are so good at it, they may actually get too much if they are in a higher level glucose environment.


I wish science could discover the pre-ovulation part because it does make sense that somehow the body would know ahead of time which gender would have a better chance of implanting and being carried to term.

Like maybe do the think the different XY/XX sperm are affected somehow by the glucose levels? Do they know if uncapacitated/capacitated sperm soak up any of the glucose on the way to the egg? Or maybe they are just affected somehow by the different levels