Lower sperm count favors females.. some rambling

[atomic sagebrush]

with your boys, that sex made you very alkaline... sways blue, but when you abstain part of it is there is less semen inside of you raising your pH, so your pH stays lower, sways girl.

The semen may have other qualities that help lots of sperm to survive (just as CM does) so it may also raise the numbers of sperm on hand to fertilize the egg.

That having been said, Dr. Shettles believed that frequent BD through O would sway pink, because the slower-but-hardier X sperm would survive longer than the smaller-but-weaker Y sperm and all the X sperm that had survived from earlier BD would have a headstart to the egg.

[pinksapphire]

I mentioned to three different RE's about ICSI being done to fertilize the egg in IVF can produce more girls (I had read a study about that in a fertility mag) and all three said there's no merit to that. Funny how doctors still insist it's 50-50 with everyone.

[atomic sagebrush]

I mentioned to three different RE's about ICSI being done to fertilize the egg in IVF can produce more girls (I had read a study about that in a fertility mag) and all three said there's no merit to that. Funny how doctors still insist it's 50-50 with everyone.

Weirdly, two seconds before I opened this thread I was just reading about this exact thing. Two studies have been done, one of which found a gender ratio of 96:100 and the otehr 101:100, both of which are lower than the 106:100 at birth ratio and WAY WAY lower than the 140/160:100 at conception gender ratio (so many more boys than girls are miscarried, that the gender ratio at birth drops to 106:100.

I suspect it may be that X sperm are slightly larger and maybe more likely to be selected than Y sperm for ICSI. Probably nothing more mysterious than that. Then again, who knows??

I agree totally, doctors and medical personell are HIGHLY opposed to admitting, or even discussing, the possibility. It's almost like a taboo. But biologists KNOW it's real, even famous scientists like Richard Dawkins and Satoshi Kanazawa talk about it.

[atomic sagebrush]

pinksapphire and anyone else interested, here is a link to the actual study that found ICSI = more girls and standard IVF = more boys.
http://www.bjog.org/details/news/854..._balance_.html

[pinksapphire]

Weirdly, two seconds before I opened this thread I was just reading about this exact thing. Two studies have been done, one of which found a gender ratio of 96:100 and the otehr 101:100, both of which are lower than the 106:100 at birth ratio and WAY WAY lower than the 140/160:100 at conception gender ratio (so many more boys than girls are miscarried, that the gender ratio at birth drops to 106:100.

I suspect it may be that X sperm are slightly larger and maybe more likely to be selected than Y sperm for ICSI. Probably nothing more mysterious than that. Then again, who knows??

I agree totally, doctors and medical personell are HIGHLY opposed to admitting, or even discussing, the possibility. It's almost like a taboo. But biologists KNOW it's real, even famous scientists like Richard Dawkins and Satoshi Kanazawa talk about it.

With our first cycle, ICSI is a standard thing. With my others, they refused to add it in because they said that it would lessen the quality of the embies and if we didn't need it (which we didn't), then why take that risk? The cycle we had the most girls? The first one!

[atomic sagebrush]

Well, we do know that X and Y sperm are charged differently? - x are positive, y are negative, and the reaction needed for the sperm to get into the egg is dependent on things like calcium and progesterone. Maybe there is something in the uterus or fallopian tubes that happens that can't be replicated in the IVF setting which gives X sperm a bit more of an advantage?

This is a super old post but I just wanted to revive it to speak to this - I looked into this while I was researching the differences between X and Y sperm and in fact, they are NOT charged differently. http://genderdreaming.com/forum/show...ferences+sperm