Pretty much what it says in the title - it's at conception and during the 2ww that a pink bean prefers low blood sugar levels right? Is this the whole two weeks after O or until implantation? If there's a mechanism which takes note of the mother's condition and produces the 'correct' egg for that situation, what are the potential implications of suddenly changing diet once you're pregnant. I'm not suggesting staying on the LE diet during pregnancy and am guessing it's only in the early stages it's important but it would be good to clarify!
Also, is there a link somewhere to the study which shows the preference of pink to low blood sugar and of blue for high blood sugar?
TY x
Results 1 to 5 of 5
-
September 9th, 2011, 12:54 PM #1
How long is low blood sugar important?
2005
2007
2009
2012
-
September 9th, 2011, 01:19 PM #2
For now, we don't know, and there are no studies as of yet, so my thinking is that once you get a BFP it's probably fine though if anyone wants to continue for the full 2 weeks, it won't hurt and may help. That early on, the bean is getting it's nutrition from the yolk sac and not from mama. If you prefer to begin eating a normal diet once you get a BFP, that is fine too.
The Oxford study found that moms who had conceived both boys and girls ate identical diets during pregnancy, so once the bean is implanted, I think it's fine to resume eating whatever you like.
Also, I hope everyone realizes that it's likely that strong beans of either gender can divide/implant in a wide array of environments, it's ~probably~ just the borderline ones that are negatively affected by a less-than-optimal environment, and we're trying to maximize our odds. No one needs to worry that they will harm their baby if they have a moment of weakness during the 2WW.!!! Questions??Check out the NEW and improved Complete Index !!!
If you appreciate my help with your sway plan, please consider a donation:
https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=C92U9TVWTRTDQ
-
September 9th, 2011, 01:24 PM #3
PS - here's the actual study. It's not that X prefers low glucose per se, but X sucks UP more glucose than Y does. So Y may need more glucose in the environment than X, and X could even potentially suck up TOO much.
http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/con.../1981.abstract!!! Questions??Check out the NEW and improved Complete Index !!!
If you appreciate my help with your sway plan, please consider a donation:
https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=C92U9TVWTRTDQ
-
September 9th, 2011, 01:25 PM #4
Here's another one that is theorizing about this. Full text on this, yippee!!
http://molehr.oxfordjournals.org/con....full.pdf+html!!! Questions??Check out the NEW and improved Complete Index !!!
If you appreciate my help with your sway plan, please consider a donation:
https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=C92U9TVWTRTDQ
-
September 9th, 2011, 01:30 PM #5