Shettles die-hards

So I'm quite active on another mummy forum and there is currently a thread going about the general principles behind swaying all based on the Shettles method (of course!), and the more I read the more irritated I get - because I'm thinking YOU'RE ALL WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! so I tried to introduce them to this website and posted a few links to different things, including why timing doesn't sway, and geez they are so quick to dismiss me! Why are they sooooo certain Shettles works I ask? Well because they all know of a friend that used his method and they got their desired gender. Oh and because the internet says so. Argh so frustrating!!! I don't know why people struggle to keep an open mind about these things. From now on I will have to avoid those types of discussions because everyone thinks I'm a party pooper lol

I have the same thing happen and have linked studies and other info showing why it won't work and some others will agree with me saying his method is debunked and we get shouted down. You just can't reason with someone who has their mind made up.

I am also on another swaying site and now that I have changed my way of thinking I find that I don't comment and contribute as much as I used to because I feel like what I now believe no longer aligns with a lot of the principles that are taught on this other site. I still stalk because there are many women who are still ttc and I am quietly rooting for them.

It drives me INSANE. I get sooooooo angry. I usually only post once briefly and avoid getting caught up for the sake of my sway, though. Bunny is right, it's basically impossible to get through to those who have made their minds up, that has actually been proven scientifically! In fact, the more you argue against them, the more they cling to their illogical beliefs. I have spent way too large a portion of my life arguing with idiots online, sigh.

They'll figure it out themselves in time! I get your frustration though. You've done the best you can now xx

I think there are so many anecdotes supporting Shettles because 50% of the time people will get their desired result in any case and the 50% who get an opposite are not as likely to go around telling people they wanted their child to be a different sex.

Why lurk on boards that have a different philosophy?
I can barely get my head screwed on straight by staying in one place [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably has to do with the fact that (for want of a better way of putting it - it's 5am here!) the one thing they truly believe in, the only way they've been told it works is now being turned on its head. I know if I spent years thinking and believing something and someone chimed in and said "actually, you've got it all wrong" (to effect - not saying that's what you said!) I'd be really quite sceptical at best! Imagine if someone came onto the boards saying AS is wrong about xyz, and, for example, o+12 is the way forward. I think most people here would react the same way. I don't think it's meant badly on their part, just maybe thrown into confusion at best. Just sow those seeds! I think all you can do is lead them to the water... xx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wantanother2017

Why lurk on boards that have a different philosophy?
I can barely get my head screwed on straight by staying in one place [emoji12]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Lol it was an accidental discovery. As I said I'm on another parenting forum and this very active thread about swaying kept popping up and well I started reading it and... I couldn't help myself!! I had to comment [emoji1] I had to try and "enlighten" them, but alas they didn't want a bar of it. Lesson learned, I will not waste my energy next time!!!

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maidentomother

It drives me INSANE. I get sooooooo angry. I usually only post once briefly and avoid getting caught up for the sake of my sway, though. Bunny is right, it's basically impossible to get through to those who have made their minds up, that has actually been proven scientifically! In fact, the more you argue against them, the more they cling to their illogical beliefs. I have spent way too large a portion of my life arguing with idiots online, sigh.

---

Yes I've learnt the hard way haha. I guess I'm hoping one or two of them who are serious about swaying may take a look. I wish I had understood it properly years ago!

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

It is BEYOND frustrating to me because the evidence so firmly points away from Shettles working. Both Tamara and I (and literally every scientist that has ever studied it including Valerie Grant) are adamant that it has been completely proven wrong that "X are big and slow but live a long time" and "y are small and fast and die sooner" We know 110% that Shettles was mistaken when he looked thru the microscope and saw X and Y sperm (that were really capacitated and uncapacitated sperm) and if Shettles was alive today I feel very confident he would have come around to our way of thinking with this new evidence. But, it just keeps hanging on.

The really frustrating thing is that so many people don't even have a clue what day they Oed on anyway. :p So they look back and they're like "yeah I got Billy Bob on O day, and Bobbi Sue 3 days before O" and we have NO WAY of knowing if that is even true. People look back and assume they did because, Shettles. :p

But, this is one of those things that I have had to accept is my way of "roling a boulder up a hill daily only to have it roll back down again the next day" and I hope over time it does start to become more recognized that it doesn't work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by familymatters

Yes I've learnt the hard way haha. I guess I'm hoping one or two of them who are serious about swaying may take a look. I wish I had understood it properly years ago!

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

---

Sometimes you have to post for the people who AREN'T saying anything. Remember there are more people reading then there are answering and it may be many of them are sitting there thinking "this doesn't add up to me" and then you may have really helped them out quite a lot. Thanks for sharing the info too BTW!!! i really appreciate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atomic sagebrush

Sometimes you have to post for the people who AREN'T saying anything. Remember there are more people reading then there are answering and it may be many of them are sitting there thinking "this doesn't add up to me" and then you may have really helped them out quite a lot. Thanks for sharing the info too BTW!!! i really appreciate it.

---

True true. No worries, thank you for starting this site and doing countless hours of research etc, it's amazing.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by familymatters

True true. No worries, thank you for starting this site and doing countless hours of research etc, it's amazing.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

---

And I did want to mention that we've had an influx of new people the last several days so you may very well have done that!! Thank you.

Haha maybe!

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

This drives me insane too. All of the research on the topic has disproven Shettles. Every single study. Either they find no difference or they find the opposite of Shettles is true. Sex on ovulation day leads to more girls while sex farther from ovulation favors boys. When I was trying to conceive my first I read this book called The Impatient Women's Guide to Getting Pregnant (great book, by the way, for getting pregnant and has a great chapter on gender selection), which is written by a psychology professor, who basically does statistics for a living. She did a meta analysis of all the studies and did find a statistically significant difference favoring the opposite of Shettles. The theory posited in the book is that most embryos conceived on ovulation day were miscarried so it makes sense that the girl embryos, which are heartier, would be more likely to survive under circumstances when miscarriage is likely.

I also agree that most people don't know when the ovulated so they just assume their baby was conceived in line with Shettles' theories. Even with temping and ovulation prediction kits there is room for error. This is also why so many people believe moon sign theory works, another thing that drives me crazy. As difficult as it is to pinpoint ovulation, it's even more difficult to pinpoint conception because conception happens within 24 hours of ovulation. So people have a 48 hour window for ovulation (if using OPKs) and then a 24 window for conception, which means there's a 3 day window and with moon signs a difference of hours, let alone days, can change what you're supposed to be having. But people swear up and down that they're sure they conceived under the correct sign for the gender of their child.

This is a really interesting read. It claims that female embryos are more fragile than previously thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/...s-study-claims

Three beautiful boys and my longed-for DD due in June 2016!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreamofpink

This is a really interesting read. It claims that female embryos are more fragile than previously thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/...s-study-claims

Three beautiful boys and my longed-for DD due in June 2016!

---

I personally believe this is a skewed study because the info that they used was from abortions and fertility treatments. I wish we had a more effective way to study it because the truth is we really have no clue if EITHER girls or boys are heartier/hardier (am I the only one who is not quite sure on the grammar there LOL)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glowbug

This drives me insane too. All of the research on the topic has disproven Shettles. Every single study. Either they find no difference or they find the opposite of Shettles is true. Sex on ovulation day leads to more girls while sex farther from ovulation favors boys. When I was trying to conceive my first I read this book called The Impatient Women's Guide to Getting Pregnant (great book, by the way, for getting pregnant and has a great chapter on gender selection), which is written by a psychology professor, who basically does statistics for a living. She did a meta analysis of all the studies and did find a statistically significant difference favoring the opposite of Shettles. The theory posited in the book is that most embryos conceived on ovulation day were miscarried so it makes sense that the girl embryos, which are heartier, would be more likely to survive under circumstances when miscarriage is likely.

I also agree that most people don't know when the ovulated so they just assume their baby was conceived in line with Shettles' theories. Even with temping and ovulation prediction kits there is room for error. This is also why so many people believe moon sign theory works, another thing that drives me crazy. As difficult as it is to pinpoint ovulation, it's even more difficult to pinpoint conception because conception happens within 24 hours of ovulation. So people have a 48 hour window for ovulation (if using OPKs) and then a 24 window for conception, which means there's a 3 day window and with moon signs a difference of hours, let alone days, can change what you're supposed to be having. But people swear up and down that they're sure they conceived under the correct sign for the gender of their child.

---

Thanks for sharing glowbug and welcome!

:agree: totally about the moon signs don't even get me started. Like anyone knows the hour of their conception. One of these days when I'm really bored I'm gonna take the mystic methods apart but it's so stupid it gives me chronic facepalm just thinking about it. :)

I have a different take on the O and O-1 day bump with girl conceptions (which I concur does seem to be the case based on my analysis of studies as well). I believe that reduced fertility and harsher maternal conditions AND poorer sperm health = more girls conceived and since sperm lives a shorter time in harsher conditions (both X and Y) I suspect that people who may not be ABLE to conceive from 2 or 3 days before O, may be more "set" for pink. Thus, they can only get pregnant with attempts that are pretty close to O. And the people who are superhuman and can get pregnant from 4 days before O are probably high sperm health/high maternal conditions couples.

Yeah that makes total sense. I've always wondered about those super human freaks who claim to have conceived from, like, 10 day old sperm or whatever and think well, it must be a cosy environment in there if sperm can survive that long in it!

Orrr...they miscalculated O (much more likely).

That having been said I did get preggo once from BD right after I got off my period, so I must've DTD CD 6-7ish or so. I suspect I had to have Oed early, but even if it was several days early, that's still a fairly big cutoff. But we were 20 years old then and yeah totally super human LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by atomic sagebrush

Thanks for sharing glowbug and welcome!

:agree: totally about the moon signs don't even get me started. Like anyone knows the hour of their conception. One of these days when I'm really bored I'm gonna take the mystic methods apart but it's so stupid it gives me chronic facepalm just thinking about it. :)

I have a different take on the O and O-1 day bump with girl conceptions (which I concur does seem to be the case based on my analysis of studies as well). I believe that reduced fertility and harsher maternal conditions AND poorer sperm health = more girls conceived and since sperm lives a shorter time in harsher conditions (both X and Y) I suspect that people who may not be ABLE to conceive from 2 or 3 days before O, may be more "set" for pink. Thus, they can only get pregnant with attempts that are pretty close to O. And the people who are superhuman and can get pregnant from 4 days before O are probably high sperm health/high maternal conditions couples.

---

I like your theory. The author of the book was only positing one reason why some studies find more girls conceived on ovulation day. She wasn't actually claiming to know the reason. I love that this site actually references research articles when making swaying suggestions. I have learned so much from reading the articles and forum posts.

To the best of my knowledge, one of my pregnancies was from a single BD 10 days before O. I was 22, and my DH 23. I do think it's possible for sperm to live over a week. Just rare.