Anyone hear of this?

[Koko&TT]

Sorry. I didn’t forget my promise to read patent applications by Urobiologics. I kept this Saturday evening free just for this. DH and Selena are away to NY to see grands, phew! I couldn’t go, I’m on call.

Elle, glad to know that you got your alternating report on your PreGender samples. What’s up next?

Urobiologics has two patents as mentioned on their website. The first patent is complex and was over my head but the second one (Use of Female Mammal's Urine for Determination of Fetal Gender Related Characteristics - Patent application) got me interested. Out of so many formulae mentioned there I picked one to understand how they may be evaluating urine samples before and after pregnancy. Pay attention only to claims 1 and 36 of the application, placed below. Both are almost exactly same:

CLAIM 1: A method of determining the gender of an unborn child comprising the steps of: (a) measuring levels of testosterone (T), estrogens (E), progesterone (P) and gonadotropins (G) in a body fluid from a pregnant female; (b) calculating [E-(T+P+G)] as the difference between the level of estrogens (E) and the total levels of testosterone (T), progesterone (P) and gonadotropins (G); and (c) determining the gender of the unborn child to be male if the [E-(T+P+G)] value from step (b) ranges from about 300 to about 1,500, or to be female if the [E-(T+P+G)] value from step (b) ranges from about -10 to about -800.

CLAIM 36. A method of determining gender specific compatibility of an ovum released in a menstrual cycle for pre-conception baby gender planning comprising the steps of: (a) measuring levels of testosterone (T), estrogens (E), progesterone (P) and gonadotropins (G) in a body fluid from a non-pregnant female; (b) calculating [E-(T+P+G)] as the difference between the level of estrogens (E) and the total levels of testosterone (T), progesterone (P) and gonadotropins (G); and (c) determining the gender specific compatibility of the ovum released in the menstrual cycle to be male if the [E-(T+P+G)] value from step (b) ranges from about 300 to about 1,500, or to be female if the [E-(T+P+G)] value from step (b) ranges from about -10 to about -800.

What I understand now is this. If I find out the amounts of following hormones in my urine;
a) all the three estrogens (estradiol, estriol and estradiol),
b) Testosterone,
c) progesterone,
d) gonadotropins (i.e. FSH and LH before pregnancy & HcG after pregnancy)
e) and then calculate a value using formula (All the estrogens minus (T+P+gonadotropins), and if I get a positive number with a preconception sample then I have a boy cycle and same way if I get a positive number with a post-conception sample then I’m preggo with a boy. Similarly, if I get a negative number with a preconception sample then I have a girl cycle and if I get a negative number using a post-conception sample then I’m carrying a girl. (wondering why girls mostly get a negative rating, LOL)
f) May be that is the reason they concluded that if one conceives in say a boy phase, the same phase is locked and continues till the baby is delivered. No alternating cycles thereafter.

You got to read this MANTRA with cool head several times to get it. You may have to gallop several cups of coffee, LOL. I did 3.

Their observation that almost all women alternate in every cycle is amazing. That is what Dr. Varma showed me when we visited their place. Whatever limited medical knowledge I have so far, the only way it can alternate may be due to alternating ovulation from left and right ovary. I even searched literature on this and found mixed observations. Some scientists (Side of ovulation and cycle characteristics in normally fertile women) support alternating pattern whereas some don’t. As per this article, a company also evaluated hormone levels from midcycle urine and couldn’t conclude anything relevant. (May be if they use this formula they may find something).

A second study (http://www.reproduction-online.org/c...0/1/7.full.pdf) concluded as follows “In the 25 women studied, with regular menstrual cycles of 28+/-3 days (48 cycles), ovulation occurred most often (87.6%)in an alternating manner. Our present results show that in women with regular menstrual cycles of about 28 days, ovulation would usually alternate between the two ovaries.” This pub also contained a statement which supports the locking or shifting of hormonal environment when a conception occurs. It says,” However, Dukelow (1977) and Hodgen (1982) consider that ovulation in the cynomolgus monkey and rhesus monkey, respectively, occurs alternately as long as the cycles are not perturbed.”

Yet a third publication (Characteristics of human ovulation in natural cycles correlated with age and achievement of pregnancy) concludes: “Human ovulation shows characteristics related to age. The interaction between the two ovaries seems to be most pronounced in the younger years, where ovulations jump from one ovary to the other more frequently than later on in life.”

I don’t intend to write a full thesis but after going through all of above I can say with confidence that Urobiologics makes sense and that they are taking this field to a new level. I don’t see any of these articles mentioned in their hypothesis section though. May be they should have a woman advisor (like me) on their advisory board,.

I see a lot of negative comments about them on internet. May be they had some errors which are highlighted more often than the correct ones. It is easy to develop a wrong notion about any work without getting ones head into it. You never come to know of anyone unless you deal with him/her. I had the same feeling before I came across this board.

So, it’s not that the testosterone alone controls everthing. It’s part of the story. I think this is why they say “your hormones will do everything for you, just relax”. Makes sense to me. I think the amount of work involved per case justifies the fee they are charging. I do hope my 2-hour effort will help many women in clearing their ideas about this work. These are my personal views about this work and should not be taken as endorsement or anything.

Got a word today from a close senior that I might be promoted with more responsibilities. Yikes. Should think, not twice but thrice, before going for another baby.

Good night.
SC, MD

[atomic sagebrush]

Koko, I thank you very much for taking the time to share this with us.

I still don't believe it (and I hope people believe me when I say, I have sound scientific reasons for doing so, I dismiss NOTHING out of hand) and when I have the time I will post the reasons why but for starters - boy girl twins, people who go HT and get both boys and girls, and animals with litters who conceive both boys and girls in roughly equal number (up to and including Jon and Kate and Octomom).

[Koko&TT]

Hi atomic, we would love to hear your feedback. I think it needs a thorough discussion, good or bad. That is the purpose.

As you mentioned about "boy girl twins, people who go HT and get both boys and girls, and animals with litters who conceive both boys and girls in roughly equal number (up to and including Jon and Kate and Octomom)." I must say these are biological rare events. We must look at majority 99% of normal deliveries. Octomom case for example is probably 1 in 5 billion. In fact, it may never happen again. So, we cannot and should not trash a good science or company based on rare events.

BTW, I sent the references from my earlier post to Dr. Verma (without saying anything of this site). He thankfully acknowledged and promised to include those in the hypothesis section soon. He said to watch for the development about the last entry in the live chart this week. He is getting this samples from Australia today.

Had few moments to check in. Very busy week ahead.

SC, MD

[elle82]

Koko..wow, that's a lot of info. Thank you for sharing. I am glad to hear that you think it makes sense and can work. Are you planning on trying it yourseld soon? I am TTC this month based on it being a girl cycle, will skip next month and TTC again in November. This pre-gender test is relatively new and I think at the start if people weren't getting an alternating result they were told they couldn't have a baby of their desired gender but Dr.Verma says that this is usually due to strong medication and these days they offer re-testing after a certain period of time and it is usually resolved then. I was very relieved when I did get an alternating result! Based on my recent interaction with Dr.Verma, I 100% believe Urobiologics are genuine and he is very dedicated to his work but I can't prove that it definetely works. I am willing to try it and hope I will get my baby girl. I trust it more than other methods like Jonas because they are actually testing samples and I am interested to see where it goes in the future.
Atomic, I too would love to hear your thoughts when you have time

[atomic sagebrush]

Boy girl twins, animals with litters, and people who get equal gender splits with HT are not biologically rare events.

If Dr. Verma is claiming 90-95% success with this method and saying that all women have these alternating cycles, then he needs to be able to scientifically explain Octomom in light of his theory.

[atomic sagebrush]

First of all, a patent is NOT scientific evidence.

apparently we have drastically different interpretations of the data because I was about to post a link refuting the "alternating ovary" theory only to realize that the Dr. used it to SUPPORT his theory!?!

From one of the studies above supposedly supporting the idea that ovaries alternate every month and that this indicates something hormonally: "It is concluded that in normally fertile women, the cycle length and the hormonal profile are independent of the, most probably random, site of ovulation."

Studies from the 80's, I don't necessarily dismiss them out of hand but newer studies are ALWAYS better. They have technology now to tell side of ovulation via ultrasound rather than having to rely on surgically removed ovaries and in the newer studies that are cited as supporting Urobiologics above, both state very clearly that they saw nowhere near 87% alternating cycles!!! So that older study is very likely incorrect and must be disregarded because follow up studies using superior technology and methodology did not come to the same conclusion.

It's well proven that ovulation/conception/gender ratio works differently in different animals, even amongst primates, and thus I'd hang nothing on studies a) from the 70's and 80's AND b) in non-humans, to prove anything.

Finally, re the Fukuda study, I can all but guarantee you that Fukuda and his fellow researchers do not buy into Urobiologics. I can do this on the basis of the many other studies that they've published on gender ratio that have NOTHING to do with alternating cycles whatsoever. Fukuda, et al, also found that smoking and stress and the age at which one starts menstruating also affects the gender ratio of their offspring. They found that right sided ovulation tends to be affiliated with higher fertility overall and on this site we believe that higher fertility = boys. Thus, any correlation between right sided ovulation and boys may simply indicate that higher fertility = boys.

A good theory has to explain ALL available data and Urobiologics does not do that. Vegetarians have more girls. Women with Master's Degrees have more boys. Beautiful women have more girls. Families high in social status have more boys. Men who ride bicycles and run marathons have more girls. People who had toxoplasmosis and Hepatitis B have more boys. Anorexics have more girls. Women with more muscle mass have more boys. After a famine women had more girls. After wars, women tend to have more boys. I could seriously go on and on but my point is, it makes NO SENSE whatsoever that all these people suddenly start spontaneously ovulating from a certain ovary Or hey, I'll even give the Uro-B folks the benefit of the doubt and say, who knows maybe they do, but that only PROVES that swaying would therefore be more effective then simply conceiving in a magical month

The hardest thing to refute in the world is an idea that uses truth to promote falseness. Yes, hormones alter gender ratio and you can find a lot of evidence to support that. There are also studies that seem to indicate right sided ovulation = more boys (but NOWHERE in the ballpark of 90-99%!!!! We have people on this site who've conceived girls from the right and boys from the left.) But to extrapolate those facts into a theory that somehow there are these alternating cycles, with no evolutionary explanation as to why that would be.

Husband is awake have to go

[nuthinbutpink]

atomic, please don't waste your time on this. The website quotes " estimated success rate of 90%" for the pre conception test and "estimates" 95% for the post conception. There is absolutely ZERO data to back up any of these claims.

The website looks very amateur and of course, it may work because you should have a 50/50 chance at getting it right but without any studies, results, research to speak of, it is a "fun test" and that's about it.

Koko- you are the most open-minded MD I've ever met. Most MD's I know are extremely skeptical and deal in absolutes and facts- not theories and bogus statistics pulled from thin air. It is a hypothesis- its says so straight on the website. It isn't an exact science and testing only 2 urine samples and calling that a pattern is ridiculous too and as a MD you should know that.

Nature is not symmetrical.

Please, atomic, let's move on from this. I've read enough.

[elle82]

I'm just confused...again Don't think we'll get any further with this on here. It's a shame there's no data to back up any of the claims and that it has never been independently researched. All I know is I was willing to try ANYTHING when I bought my test (and still am, lol!!) and if I get a girl I couldn't care less whether it's down to this pre-gender test, swaying, the moon signs or just pure luck!!

[nuthinbutpink]

I'm just confused...again Don't think we'll get any further with this on here. It's a shame there's no data to back up any of the claims and that it has never been independently researched. All I know is I was willing to try ANYTHING when I bought my test (and still am, lol!!) and if I get a girl I couldn't care less whether it's down to this pre-gender test, swaying, the moon signs or just pure luck!!

No, we won't get any further because there are no data points. I don't want you to stress of worry at all. I understand wanting to do everything you can. I don't like "doctors" coming on here from the "same geographic location" this company is located and raving about the service. I smell a rat.

[elle82]

No, we won't get any further because there are no data points. I don't want you to stress of worry at all. I understand wanting to do everything you can. I don't like "doctors" coming on here from the "same geographic location" this company is located and raving about the service. I smell a rat.

That thought had crossed my mind NBP but I really hope not!!
I'm so done stressing now-what will be will be I've never wanted someone to be right more than I want Urobiologics to be right though, lol!! You are right when you say it is not scientifically proven and there is no data but they say that themselves. I would like to see if it does develop further in the future.
I know I haven't been critical enough-I think I'm just blinded by what is claimed, high success rates and the hope of a little I WANT to believe it's all true. I'm sure there are plenty of others just like me. But like I said earlier on this thread I'm a big girl and, while I'm trying this stuff, I'm also being realistic and I know that I could get an opposite so I'm not setting myself up for heart break by believing my desired gender is guaranteed.
P.S NBP, I don't suppose you have any pink baby dust to spare?? LOL