-
August 7th, 2017, 07:48 PM
#11
-
August 7th, 2017, 08:13 PM
#12
Hope it was ok to post the link it may help in the studies..
-
August 8th, 2017, 01:49 PM
#13
Swaying Advice Coach
Yes, I've read that one before but always fine to post links like that!! But please understand that while the boy bump was real, the reason is sheer speculation. They don't know that it was because of more sex or sperm mobility, those are guesses. It could have been some other thing entirely like hormone levels or because everyone ate a lot of hot wings during the sporting matches. We just don't know any of it and so when we come across these kind of articles, where they take an interesting phenomenon and then attribute causes to it that they don't know, we have to take it with a grain of salt as to whether they are really on to something or not.
-
August 8th, 2017, 02:14 PM
#14
Swaying Advice Coach
Originally Posted by
dancingdiva88
Would you say in more impoverished third world countries where food supply and food source is harder to come by, that more girls would be born? You'd think so right? These countries surely must have a lot more girls than boys population wise.
This is a bit hard to explain but no, it doesn't quite work like that. Firstly because even in poor countries, even in times of famine, there are plenty of people who are still well off, still eating enough to get and stay pregnant.
Additionally, as people become TRULY poor and impoverished, they stop ovulating (and we see that on here where people who are doing LE Diet even just a little too strictly, see their ovulation stop and are unable to get pregnant even if they are still ovulating, when their weight gets too low.) So people who might have had girls, stop getting pregnant at all. Fewer people overall might get pregnant in that type of situation but those that do are likely the ones in the best condition with the most food coming in.
So, the people who end up getting pregnant (either by choice - because who voluntarily chooses to get pregnant in a time of famine, only people who have at least a fairly adequate food supply would do that, or circumstance - they haven't stopped ovulating and are still able to conceive) are likely coming in more set for boys to begin with and this neat little mechanism seems to hold the gender ratio at about 50-50.
We do see in the nations around the equator, many of which are poor, a higher ratio of girls to boys conceived than is statistically expected. But it's only by a couple % points and not the drastic shift that you are thinking of.
-
May 22nd, 2018, 07:14 AM
#15
Dream Vet
Originally Posted by
atomic sagebrush
This is a bit hard to explain but no, it doesn't quite work like that. Firstly because even in poor countries, even in times of famine, there are plenty of people who are still well off, still eating enough to get and stay pregnant.
Additionally, as people become TRULY poor and impoverished, they stop ovulating (and we see that on here where people who are doing LE Diet even just a little too strictly, see their ovulation stop and are unable to get pregnant even if they are still ovulating, when their weight gets too low.) So people who might have had girls, stop getting pregnant at all. Fewer people overall might get pregnant in that type of situation but those that do are likely the ones in the best condition with the most food coming in.
So, the people who end up getting pregnant (either by choice - because who voluntarily chooses to get pregnant in a time of famine, only people who have at least a fairly adequate food supply would do that, or circumstance - they haven't stopped ovulating and are still able to conceive) are likely coming in more set for boys to begin with and this neat little mechanism seems to hold the gender ratio at about 50-50.
We do see in the nations around the equator, many of which are poor, a higher ratio of girls to boys conceived than is statistically expected. But it's only by a couple % points and not the drastic shift that you are thinking of.
I know this is older, but I just stumbled across it -- just to clarify, is your theory that even though the ratio might be skewed slightly towards girls in underprivelged places/famine or war stricken/so on, it still will fall somewhat in line with 50/50 just by rote of the people still ABLE to have children might be more set for boys?
I'm mostly asking because I'm wondering if that was (hopefully) the deal with me considering how easily I get pregnant. Maybe DD was a girl because of how hardcore into starvation/famine mode I was, and hopefully improved conditions really well bode well? Or should I not have still been swayed for a boy and just happened to be doing so many hardcore girl things anyway?
I don't know if "set for boys" IS actually a hyperfertility set point or not from stuff I've read, but your theory hopefully bodes well for a boy for me lol!
-
May 22nd, 2018, 07:59 PM
#16
Swaying Advice Coach
Yes and I have a much better explanation in one of my newer essays here: http://genderdreaming.com/forum/sway...tml#post960941
-
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
So happy for you Treens, congratulations Sent from my SM-A225F using Tapatalk
Healthy baby girl :)