Elle- take it all hun! I so hope you get your little girl.
Printable View
Elle- take it all hun! I so hope you get your little girl.
Boy, lot of hatred here. Nuthinkbutpink, I'm just surprised that you are the owner of this website and you do not want educated people to come on it. I'm really sorry to intercept your space.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinbutpink
Well this may be my last post then. I just wanted to update the response I got from Dr. Verma after I sent them the references about alternating ovulation. Here it is:
"Thanks for the info. After I looked into it in detail, I felt that we cannot include it at our website. The reason being we have nothing to do with the process of ovulation. Alternating ovulation is entirely different than alternating hormonal environment. Almost 95% women have alternating hormonal environment but percentage of women having alternating ovulation may be way way low. Nowhere at our website we mention of alternating ovulation. We are quite thankful to you for looking for us as it is easy to get confused on these issues. We will certainly clarify this point at the website.
Just to update you on the case I mentioned yesterday. We did receive the pre- and postcon samples from mary98083 yesterday and today we reported that her Pregender sample is indicating a boy phase and that there is 90% chance that the FirstGender post-conception test report will also come as a boy. We are working on her post-con sample and will be done by Wednesday. This will be the earliest case in our history meaning she conceived in the same cycle when she collected her pre-con sample. If true, this will prove our 'locking of hormonal environment after conception'. Just watch."
So, good luck to all readers at this website.
Sabrina
I don't see any "hatred" on NuthinButPink's part, she is merely questioning your theory & looking out for anyone who may come across this post....just as BabyBleux did on the other website.
You're quite transparent actually.
Sabrina, you are so full of yourself to assume we do not have a place full of highly educated individuals. Hatred? Really? I don't care enough about you or this topic to hate. I simply disagree with you about the legitimacy of this company's statistics. That's all I am questioning. What we educated people do on here is sort out fact from fiction. That and you sound like a walking billboard for their service. If you are legit, please accept my apology.
Alternating ovulation is a myth. As a highly educated doctor, I'd think you'd already know that.
I really don't care what products people try. All I'm interested in is the straight truth. 90%+ numbers are ridiculous without any proof. I'm not wasting anymore time on this topic. Good luck to you.
The proof that I am legit lies in the fact that urobiologics rejected all the references I sent about alternate ovulation. I thought their work might be related to it but is not. Today they updated their website saying that they are talking of 'alternating hormonal environments' and not 'alternating ovulation' and that ovulation has nothing to do with their work. They also mention that 'alternating ovulation' is observed hardly in 75% women whereas almost 95% women they have tested have 'alternating hormonal environments'.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinbutpink
As for trying their PreGender test, I think we have to wait for some months considering the amount of work pressure I'll face due to pending promotion. Also by that time hopefully their live chart will show enough proof to silent the critics.
You know what I don't like? I don't like feeling preyed on. I don't honestly know if Koko is some sort of plant or not, but in any case, we swayers have so much stuff going on - emotions and feelings that are raw and fragile, and we will grasp at anything to get what we so desire. It's not only unethical, it's downright cruel to flaunt some unproven mumbojumbo around and put "MD" at the end of your posts, knowing that in all likelihood, most of the unsuspecting (let's call them victims?) women on here wont be able to shake that new nagging doubt you just put in their minds.
That's what I hate.
Koko, you seem very gullible for a "physician."
Ya, you may say anything, but I gave a good thought last night. The reason I got into it is that urobiologics has brought in some new medical innovations. 1) The term "alternating hormonal environment" is new in medical field; 2) The observation that this environment alternates in every cycle is new; 3) The soon to become fact that this environment is locked after conception and one stops alternating just like one stop menstruating, is striking observation. No matter what amount of hate you may have in mind, I think every woman will have go through this phenomenon and sooner or later it will find its place in medical books.Quote:
Originally Posted by hopingforsaskia
I am deciding to get off this board but I do not want to go with this feeling that I was called names by a group of women who are just blindly biased against this work. If this board is designed to not to listen to new ideas, many other women would be getting off as well.
Thanks so much hun xxx :heart:Quote:
Originally Posted by nuthinbutpink
Sabrina, thank you for your input on this topic and I really really reallly hope you are genuine and I want to believe you are. As we are on the internet we can't prove whether or not people that come on are actually genuine or actually working for companies so think it's understandable that people get suspicious. I wish you all the luck in the world with your promotion and ttc. I would never name call and I'm all for new ideas and theories or else I wouldn't have tried the Urobiologics test myself. I would like to see Urobiologics being developed further and scientifically proven. As it's not scientifically proven, of course there are going to be doubts about it and the theory behind it. When I got my results from Urobiologics I'll be honest and say I let myself get a little carried away being told I would almost definetely get my girl if I conceive this cycle-that's what I wanted to believe but this thread brought me back down to earth. As much as I want to believe something I have to try and be realistic about it. We do have a lot going on in terms or emotions and so desperately wanting our desired gender when we are swaying-I definetely agree with hopingforsaskia on that.
Koko, one question-in your post you said Dr.Verma said there's a 90% chance that firstgender test will also show boy as the pre-gender test showed a boy phase but isn't the first gender test meant to be at least 95% accurate so why is he saying only 90% for this one??
Elle, thanks for your input and support. (Funny that we are grouping in two parties, kinda republicans and demos). Doubting should be well taken but trashing anything without knowledge should be discouraged at any board. That defeats the purpose of honest information exchange.Quote:
Originally Posted by elle82
The line of thoughts which you have right now comes only when you have been there, used them, talked to them, as in my case have actually seen a ton of data by physically meeting them. It is easy to throw mud from distance. That's pure ignorance. They didn't just pull the idea out of thin air and boom!, presented on line. They might have seen some sound basis before investing so much money in filing worldwide patents.
I think you are referring to the results for mary98083 in their live chart. By 90% he means, generally if conception occurs in a specific cycle, one has 90% chance of getting the same gender. I am just guessing that this case is special to them because she got conceived in the same cycle when she collected the PreGender sample. He may have some confidence by experience that most of cases like that get the same gender if they conceive in specific set of hormones. So in this very case conception in boy cycle would lock that hormonal set-up (according to him again) and if he observe same hormonal set up in her Firstgender post-conception sample, I'll be damn sure he will make a perfect line from these two data points and will gain much higher confidence. This way he may have more confidence if one conceives earlier rather than six months later as lot of things might have changed. I can relate by looking at his confidence in case of olga@runbox.com. heck, he even told her that she is having twin daughters and that was right. He may not have that much confidence if she would have conceived six months after testing. May be that is why they say to repeat both the test after six months. I'm also waiting for the news on mary98083's case.
This is going to be very very very interesting.