To IUI or Not? TTC-Boy

Okay, so when I start TTCing this fall I am contemplating IUI. My insurance covers it.

What do folks think? Would it increase the chances of a boy?

I would not be taking Clomid, but they would most likely have me do a shot of Ovidrel to force ovulation.


Here's my background. We had DS doing IUI with Clomid. My diet at the time was more HE. I ate breakfast, lowfat dairy (not HE), rice, beans, pasta, cheese, etc.

After DS, I have now had 3 girls. All my daughters were conceived when still breastfeeding. After having my DS though, my diet became more LE. I started skipping breakfast and eating fewer calories. Interestingly, I did start eating a lot more peanut butter, fruits and veggies and drinking lemon water nonstop. That is all I drink other than 1 cup of coffee in the morning. Anyway, those things are more boy friendly, but I think because of skipping breakfast, less protein and just having ice cream with peanut butter for dinner every night I must have a girl friendly environment.
Also, I was 120lbs when I got pregnant with my son and between 112lbs-118lbs getting pregnant with all my daughters since.


So, this will be our last baby and my DS would LOVE a little brother. I've started the diet, supps. and have been lifting weights since last year after having my second daughter.

I am just not sure if I should do IUI w/out the clomid or just natural. Like how strongly does anyone think IUI could sway blue?

I am doing all the other stuff no matter what because I definitely think my diet has contributed to me having all girls since I've changed it, just not sure how much the IUI may have also contributed to getting DS???

I'm sorry I missed this one yesterday! I try to answer all posts so if you think I missed one, bump it or shoot me a PM and tell me to reply!!

I do think IUI sways blue and since it worked for you the last time, my inclination would be for you to do it again if that was an option.

Reason being, with IUI you bypass your internal vaginal environment and deposit a large amount of already washed/capacitated sperm very close to the egg, so a lot of swimmers can reach the egg very quickly and all are ready to fertilize. It removes a lot of variables from the equation - of course we don't KNOW how swaying works, but it is very likely that it has to do with your internal environment and also the rates of capacitation of your husband's sperm IUI does away with all those things.

I'd do what worked the first time!

Peanut butter and ice cream for dinner?? LOL.

Thanks AS,
I know it's tough figuring out what to do. I seem to be pretty fertile in general and did get pg. the first try with the IUI so I imagine I would again. I just go back and forth, like if I did IUI and it was a girl in spite of the boy supps. and diet, would I regret doing the IUI, vice versa if I go natural. Aghh, decisions;)
I think DH would rather just do IUI too because he thinks that's the only way we'd get a boy

Anyone out there do IUI on boy diet/supps. or just a boy friendly lifestyle and get a girl?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuthinbutpink

I'd do what worked the first time!

Peanut butter and ice cream for dinner?? LOL.

---

I have stopped doing that as of a week and half ago and miss it!!! I'd melt a little PB in a mug and then fill it with ice cream Yum!!! I know I got 3 girls eating lots of PB, fruits and veggies, potato chips and lemon water. But that is all I ate in a day. I am convinced the fewer calories and lack of protein is what got me girls in spite of the boy friendly food.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atomic sagebrush

I'm sorry I missed this one yesterday! I try to answer all posts so if you think I missed one, bump it or shoot me a PM and tell me to reply!!

I do think IUI sways blue and since it worked for you the last time, my inclination would be for you to do it again if that was an option.

Reason being, with IUI you bypass your internal vaginal environment and deposit a large amount of already washed/capacitated sperm very close to the egg, so a lot of swimmers can reach the egg very quickly and all are ready to fertilize. It removes a lot of variables from the equation - of course we don't KNOW how swaying works, but it is very likely that it has to do with your internal environment and also the rates of capacitation of your husband's sperm IUI does away with all those things.

---

Just to make sure I understand this, the higher amount of capacitated sperm are those ready to fertilize an egg? The sperm washing they do prior to IUI removes all uncapacitated sperm? Will the environment in the uterus demonstrate "better times" then as long as I have been doing the diet and supps (assuming my body responds the typical way)?

Like the higher blood sugar will have an effect of the environment in my uterus? I def. know I had a lot of spikes and crashes when getting pg. with my girls as I wouldn't eat for hours in the am

Capacitated sperm are ready to go and do not live long. All dead sperm are removed via washing before IUIs and the process turns them "on". Literally!

Okay, I am leaning towards doing it.

Anyone do IUI? What was your experience?

this is slightly off topic, but just on one note you made: I think breastfeeding really really swayed girl for me heavily but I was still almost feeding fully (conceived my only dd when ds was only 6.5 months old and still almost fully breastfed). This included very frequent night wakings and a run down phyical status.... so just because you said all your girls where conceived while breastfeeding... I think for some it can sway girl a lot....

Sorry, no clue about IUI, but another thing I think swayed boy for me massively is taking epo capsules and drinking a lot of fluids - I got tons of EWCM in the cycle I conceived ds2 (I did everything to enhance fertility, no clue about swaying back then). I had virtually NO CM while breastfeeding.... No idea what I did for ds1, he was an "accident". This one is a failed sway..... Mainly thinking the stress of swaying got me him ;););)

I agree, if your IUI is covered, go for it! Do the diet to the fullest you can and see what happens. I see a lot more boys conceived by IUI than girls, so I agree, I think it sways boy as well. (SO not a guarantee, though.....just keep that in mind.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nini

this is slightly off topic, but just on one note you made: I think breastfeeding really really swayed girl for me heavily but I was still almost feeding fully (conceived my only dd when ds was only 6.5 months old and still almost fully breastfed). This included very frequent night wakings and a run down phyical status.... so just because you said all your girls where conceived while breastfeeding... I think for some it can sway girl a lot....

Sorry, no clue about IUI, but another thing I think swayed boy for me massively is taking epo capsules and drinking a lot of fluids - I got tons of EWCM in the cycle I conceived ds2 (I did everything to enhance fertility, no clue about swaying back then). I had virtually NO CM while breastfeeding.... No idea what I did for ds1, he was an "accident". This one is a failed sway..... Mainly thinking the stress of swaying got me him ;););)

---

I know, I am worried about the breastfeeding too. I am going to try and make up for it though with extra protein/nutrients. I really have been eating very little protein the last few years, just from cheese and pasta and ice cream/pb. I have rarely been eating beans or eggs as much. Ideally, I'd wait a bit, but age-wise DH says ifwe are doing 1 more kid, it's now or never kind of thing and I do want one more regardless of gender. DD#3 is 2 months now and only nursing 1 time at night. and 7 times during the day. She'll be 6-7months when we start TTCing and nursing 6 times during the day. It's still a lot, but I am definitely trying to eat much better protein/healthy fats than I was. We'll see:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LolaInLove

I agree, if your IUI is covered, go for it! Do the diet to the fullest you can and see what happens. I see a lot more boys conceived by IUI than girls, so I agree, I think it sways boy as well. (SO not a guarantee, though.....just keep that in mind.)

---

I know, it's what is making me go back and forth so much. I figure if I am doing the diet/supps and we do IUI and maybe a natural attempt too, we'll be in good shape. It seems more folks think IUI could only help. I think the diet., etc. would be making my whole body and reproductive system more boy friendly so it's not just worrying about making my vag./cervix a more boy friendly environment. I hope it's doing something for my uterus as well.

In some ways maybe this will be a good experiment to see if someone who does a boy friendly sway but with IUI gets a girl or boy.

I feel like I see more IUI's result in boys too, but I am thinking it's maybe because it's usually the couple's first baby which I think I've read is more likely a boy and also like AS would probably say when you are exploring fertility help you're probably eating really healthy and getting in shape too. So I guess it's more of a correlation and not cause/effect, but it'd be nice if it was for my case

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n710

Just to make sure I understand this, the higher amount of capacitated sperm are those ready to fertilize an egg? The sperm washing they do prior to IUI removes all uncapacitated sperm? Will the environment in the uterus demonstrate "better times" then as long as I have been doing the diet and supps (assuming my body responds the typical way)?

Like the higher blood sugar will have an effect of the environment in my uterus? I def. know I had a lot of spikes and crashes when getting pg. with my girls as I wouldn't eat for hours in the am

---

Yes, the washed sperm are capacitated and ready to fertilize an egg, so you place a large amount of ready-to-fertilize sperm close to the egg right at the critical time. The docs also add some glucose solution to make the sperm very active (which may also sway blue!)

We don't totally know HOW blood sugar sways, if it's before conception or after conception (by improving the environment for XY babies to grow and implant) or both. It can't hurt and may help you to follow the HE Diet with IUI.

While I do think that for the most part, you bypass a lot of what does the swaying by going IUI (vaginal environment, cervix, and the rate at which sperm capacitate) the good news is, the safest boy supps will only help you conceive and that's best for getting pg with IUI and for swaying blue as well! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n710

I know, it's what is making me go back and forth so much. I figure if I am doing the diet/supps and we do IUI and maybe a natural attempt too, we'll be in good shape. It seems more folks think IUI could only help. I think the diet., etc. would be making my whole body and reproductive system more boy friendly so it's not just worrying about making my vag./cervix a more boy friendly environment. I hope it's doing something for my uterus as well.

In some ways maybe this will be a good experiment to see if someone who does a boy friendly sway but with IUI gets a girl or boy.

I feel like I see more IUI's result in boys too, but I am thinking it's maybe because it's usually the couple's first baby which I think I've read is more likely a boy and also like AS would probably say when you are exploring fertility help you're probably eating really healthy and getting in shape too. So I guess it's more of a correlation and not cause/effect, but it'd be nice if it was for my case

---

I don't think it's a correlation tho. I think it really DOES sway blue and not just a little bit. Most people who do IUI are doing so for fertility reasons (low sperm count and/or hostile CM) which tend to sway pink, and/or were also on Clomid which sways pink. That more boys are still being conceived, I think demonstrates that the IUI sways independently of any other factor.

Also, several of the timing studies did Clomid + natural conception with cutoff for TTC pink, and did IUI at ovulation for TTC blue. Some of these studies reported 80% effectiveness or even higher. Since we have other very well done studies where timing was proved not to sway (with even slighlty more girls than boys conceived O-1 and O day), logic dictates that if timing doesn't sway, but Clomid + cutoff vs. IUI yields such drastically different gender ratio, it simply has to be the Clomid vs. IUI that's really doing the swaying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n710

I know, I am worried about the breastfeeding too. I am going to try and make up for it though with extra protein/nutrients. I really have been eating very little protein the last few years, just from cheese and pasta and ice cream/pb. I have rarely been eating beans or eggs as much. Ideally, I'd wait a bit, but age-wise DH says ifwe are doing 1 more kid, it's now or never kind of thing and I do want one more regardless of gender. DD#3 is 2 months now and only nursing 1 time at night. and 7 times during the day. She'll be 6-7months when we start TTCing and nursing 6 times during the day. It's still a lot, but I am definitely trying to eat much better protein/healthy fats than I was. We'll see:)

---

I conceived DS 4 while BF quite a bit.

Does anyone know if there is a study out there that shows IUI rates of boy/girl with gender??

This is tough, I keep not being sure if I should skip making the sperm go through the vagina/cervix.
I am planning to have a very friendly boy environment with diet., supps, and then the cough syrup, maybe also preseed.

With IUI they are all getting in there (uterus) together so then I am only relying on my uterus environment and the blood sugar which as AS says we don't know how it works.

"AS", you mentioned if I do IUI I am taking a lot of the work of my sway out of the equation, that's hard because in some ways I feel like then I have it less in my control, and therefore it almost feels like less of a chance to get my DG, you know what I mean?

I do feel like I could get a boy doing IUI because that is how I got my first, but I also know my diet and weight has changed since when I got pregnant with my son and has became so LE. So it makes me think IUI had nothing to do with me getting my son, it was all my diet and that is how I've gotten my 3 girls, all diet.
Do you really think it's better to do the IUI than natural while still doing all the boy stuff leading up?

Sorry for all the questions and I know I just have to go with my gut, I think because there is no concrete studies that I know of about this, my head is second guessing.

AS, are those Clomid vs. IUI posted somewhere? And do you know if the HCG trigger shot they give before the IUI sways?
I know I can tell them I don't want to do the CLomid, but they will have me do the trigger shot so they know when to do the IUI. Thank you:)

ScienceDirect.com - International Congress Series - Unbalanced sex ratio in newborns obtained by intrauterine inseminations

This study found 3.4 boys for every 1 girl conceived via IUI. I WISH we could get the full text because the graphs look super intriguing but it's $$$. There are other studies out there (both cows and humans) and some that claim the opposite as well of course.

the Clomid vs. IUI is somewhere on the site but I can't find it right now - does someone know where it is??

I do not believe HCG shot sways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by n710

Does anyone know if there is a study out there that shows IUI rates of boy/girl with gender??

This is tough, I keep not being sure if I should skip making the sperm go through the vagina/cervix.
I am planning to have a very friendly boy environment with diet., supps, and then the cough syrup, maybe also preseed.

With IUI they are all getting in there (uterus) together so then I am only relying on my uterus environment and the blood sugar which as AS says we don't know how it works.

"AS", you mentioned if I do IUI I am taking a lot of the work of my sway out of the equation, that's hard because in some ways I feel like then I have it less in my control, and therefore it almost feels like less of a chance to get my DG, you know what I mean?

I do feel like I could get a boy doing IUI because that is how I got my first, but I also know my diet and weight has changed since when I got pregnant with my son and has became so LE. So it makes me think IUI had nothing to do with me getting my son, it was all my diet and that is how I've gotten my 3 girls, all diet.
Do you really think it's better to do the IUI than natural while still doing all the boy stuff leading up?

Sorry for all the questions and I know I just have to go with my gut, I think because there is no concrete studies that I know of about this, my head is second guessing.

---

They all get into the uterus together anyway. Both X and Y are all up in there mixed together, as far as we know.

You can still do cough syrup, diet, supps and they may very well all help. The sperm still have to make a journey from the uterus to the Fallopian tubes to the egg and there is a lot of room to influence the process.

I have no way to know which is best, but I do know that a couple people have had great HE Diet blue sways that ~should~ have worked and still gotten opposites, so my thinking is, if we can get a 3.4 to 1 ratio with IUI, then add in diet, supps, cough syrup, surely that has to be a good thing.

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.

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)

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;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by begonia

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.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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)

---

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! :agree:

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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.

"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?

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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?

---

Yes, exactly. Why go to all the trouble of trying everything under the sun to conceive an XX or XY, if we're not going to keep it up for a few days after O. I'ts not that I think it's going to, like, KILL your baby not to do that, but why not keep it up since we do know it can help??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

Yes, that's it exactly. :agree:

I'd love it if science would do that, but until they do, we have to operate on the assumption that such a mechanism does exist, because it's just sensible that it does.

I think it could be capacitation, or it could be that low glucose allows fewer sperm to survive (doctors often put glucose into sperm when they do IUI so we know that glucose can up sperm survival), or it may be that the eggshell itself is changed in some way that makes it easier or harder for X/Y sperm to penetrate the egg due to their slightly different size. Or it could be some other factor entirely that we haven't even begun to guess at!

Thanks for answering all my quest. AS, I def. am one of those people who wants to know the "why" of things.

I think it helps me to understand the bigger picture and not get hung up on all the little details which seem to be the things that can cause stress for folks

I did IUI and had a boy. I was really interested in gender too because it seemed like you would most likely always get a boy from IUI, if done correctly at ovulation. So I created an anonymous survey where participants can see the results too! Gender results from IUI Survey

Done! Really interesting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smilomarie

I did IUI and had a boy. I was really interested in gender too because it seemed like you would most likely always get a boy from IUI, if done correctly at ovulation. So I created an anonymous survey where participants can see the results too! Gender results from IUI Survey

---

interesting. Keep us posted!

Just want to clarify, it's NOT TIMING because the best data indicates that timing does not sway. http://genderdreaming.com/forum/gend...le-timing.html Whatever with IUI that is swaying, it does not seem to be timing.