Complete PINK Swaying Statistics Spreadsheet Info and Links to enter your sway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Debahlgrim

Raspberry or peppermint tea has crazy good results? Wish I would have added that into my sway...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

NO IT DOESN"T.

I am going to delete that right now. It is some sort of weird error that was inherited from the previous spreadsheet.

Look directly below that and you will see that pep tea has been disappointing.

EVERY known theory of swaying has RRLT down as swaying blue. I have used it less than 5 times, all in people who had gone on swaying for over a year not getting pregnant and most of whom were on Clomid or Femara. So I don't even know where all those people who supposedly drank that are even coming from since I do not and never have recommended that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by butterfly8

what is 1 + j+d??

---

One attempt plus jump and dump either immediately or within 5 minutes.

in the interest of full disclosure I want to document that I just deleted this statistic which is NOT ACCURATE and I believe is coming from some error in the previous spreadsheet.

RASPBERRY &/or PEPPERMINT TEA
Total sways: 59
Total success: 57
Success %: 96.61%
Inverse success %: 0

I have not ever and will not ever (unless someone hands me a study proving it) recommended RRLT for a pink sway. I have NO clue why this was ever in the stats, or why it was ever written down this way (RRLT OR peppermint?? that was not ever even a choice, they don't do the same things or even remotely close!!!)

Every theory of swaying indicates that RRLT should sway BLUE, not pink, and since we know that peppermint tea is only middle of the road effective based on our other results (still there on the main page to compare to) and since I don't even recommend RRLT for pink swayers, having only used it less than 5 times all in people who had gone on for a year or more not getting pregnant (at least one of whom I know got a boy), then there is absolutely completely and totally NO way that this statistic is real and it's some weird error in our previous spreadsheet (there were several mistakes that crept into that spreadsheet over time, which is why blueeyedguys was kind enough to make us a new one)

Additionally, there simply are NO sway tactics that effective. It makes NO LOGICAL SENSE that any tea would be 96% effective when not even Clomid or Femara are. Please apply common sense to things in swaying that are too good to be true because they usually are. TRust me, if I ever saw anything that I truly believed was 96% effective I would be screaming it at you all till I was blue in the face and not letting anyone sway without them. I pay very close attention to these stats and unlike everyone else, I've been here monitoring them month after month after month, watching the trends, watching the success rates rise and fall over time, I know all the origin stories of when they appeared and why. So please believe me when I say, I do NOT recommend RRLT for pink swayers at this point in time and this statistic is not based in any kind of reality on this site since no one is even using it.

Is it possible that there is a mistake in the stats for caffein as well? The total number for some and lots is 173 (the numbers for total and success seem to be flipped I guess?), but the individual numbers for some (121) and lots (21) add up to 141?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk

Could someone please remove my sway from the statistics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Verena

Is it possible that there is a mistake in the stats for caffein as well? The total number for some and lots is 173 (the numbers for total and success seem to be flipped I guess?), but the individual numbers for some (121) and lots (21) add up to 141?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk

---

I'll ask about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Verena

Is it possible that there is a mistake in the stats for caffein as well? The total number for some and lots is 173 (the numbers for total and success seem to be flipped I guess?), but the individual numbers for some (121) and lots (21) add up to 141?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk

---

It's an artifact of changing the spreadsheet. Once upon a time, the spreadsheet didn't have an option for amount of caffeine, just yes or no. I went back through all the old sways on the site I could find to try to determine whether the "yes" replies would fit into 'Some' or 'Lots'. The difference between the 2 numbers (141 & 173) is the number of sways I couldn't get enough information to determine any thing more than they had caffeine. So, not a mistake, just not enough information.

The combined tea stat is another older stat which I went back through older sways to try to separate out & couldn't find any more info than the swayer drank tea. I suspect that's why it's artificially high, I believe I removed all the sways that actually included the kind of tea into their own stats, leaving only ones with no info. I can delete it from the totals list as it's confusing people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blueeyedguys

It's an artifact of changing the spreadsheet. Once upon a time, the spreadsheet didn't have an option for amount of caffeine, just yes or no. I went back through all the old sways on the site I could find to try to determine whether the "yes" replies would fit into 'Some' or 'Lots'. The difference between the 2 numbers (141 & 173) is the number of sways I couldn't get enough information to determine any thing more than they had caffeine. So, not a mistake, just not enough information.

The combined tea stat is another older stat which I went back through older sways to try to separate out & couldn't find any more info than the swayer drank tea. I suspect that's why it's artificially high, I believe I removed all the sways that actually included the kind of tea into their own stats, leaving only ones with no info. I can delete it from the totals list as it's confusing people.

---

Wow, that makes sense. I didn't know it was that complicated. Thanks for explaining! :-)

Gesendet von meinem SM-G930F mit Tapatalk

Yes it's really very challenging to keep them straight - thanks so much to blue eyed guys for having done this for us!

Could I just ask... if you ignore the J&D stats (I'm not doing J&D anymore anyway).. there seems to be minimal difference between having 1 attempt (66% success) and 2 attempts (64% success).

Am I missing something here? Perhaps diet sways more strongly than number of attempts?