Did the Ramzi theory NOT work for anyone? Can anyone debunk it?

[Makali]

Most women go crazy for this formula and swear by it but in my 20 week scan of my daughter the placenta was posterior right.

However, the Ramzi theory is basically a theory which states that if the placenta is detected on your right at 6 weeks gestation, then you're having a boy. If it's on the left, then you're having a girl. Apparently, it might not work if you go by your 12 week scan because the placenta "moves".

That's odd. Please correct me if I'm wrong but, even if the placenta "moves" it's not going move dramatically from left to right is it? It's not like a placenta detected on the left at 6 weeks is going to make a drastic switch to the right at 12 weeks? Placenta tends to expand upwards as the uterus grows.

Furthermore, the man behind the research; Dr. Saad Ramzi Ismail does not have a medical degree but does have a masters degree at medical ultrasounds. He also claims that a baby's gender can change after conception! The caveat is, however, that it's only possible no later than 40-45 days gestation.

Not only does he assert that the embryo can change gender within 45 days after conception, but he also states that if by a 3% chance the placenta is attached to the right, and it is a girl.. or the placenta is attached to the left and it is a boy, then there is probably something wrong with the fetus.

Not only am I trying to pick holes in this theory because if proven right I won't get the gender I'm wishing for, but it just seems so final, illogical and detrimental to me.

I know there are loads of women out there who have their hopes pinned on this theory but are there any it didn't work for?

[SweetLily]

I think its bull. My own kids proved it so. Changing sex by 45 days gestation? Ludacis! Hugs dear mama... he soynds lije a whack job to me!

[MissyMc7]

Well I went back and checked my 6wk ultrasound reports after I first heard about this theory and it is documented that my daughter's was on the left and my boys were on the right so it held true for me. I read the full paper of his theory and it was very interesting, I also read of a much smaller study which tried to test his theory and they also found the same anomaly of girls on the left boys on the right but it was more in the high 70% nowhere near 97% as ramzi reported.

[Makali]

I think its bull. My own kids proved it so. Changing sex by 45 days gestation? Ludacis! Hugs dear mama... he soynds lije a whack job to me!

Thank you SweetLily,
How many of your kids proved his theory wrong? At how many weeks gestation did your tech say where their placentas were?

The odd thing about this guy is that instead of saying that his theory could be wrong at times, he definitvely asserts that his forumula is bullet proof as even the supposed 3% his theory doesn't work for have some kind of defect. So by his reasoning, your children who you say proved it wrong must have some kind of problem. Can you believe that? He implies that I should take my perfectly healthy 2 year old daughter to a specialist to look for some undetected heart defect!

Here's the kicker, the guy also claims that this theory came to him in a dream in which Jesus hinted it to him. I can post these sources to you if you want.

Thank you MissyMc 7, I can't find any professional medical journal that has bothered to take him seriously enough to conduct a thorough study on his theory. Maybe the high number of stories in favor of Ramzi claims is due to the inadvertant advertising of his theory by those who it worked for and not enough people who don't give it any credence care to talk about it.

I was having a private scan of my daughter when I asked the sonographer where my placenta was to which he replied "in the back towards the right" so I told him that I'm going to guess that the baby's gender is a boy as that's what a theory online suggests. He said 'Hmm, ok lets test that theory" and showed me my baby's girly parts.

Cool, so the guy has alot of followers, but I'd like to see more people who this theory didn't work for come forward.

[atomic sagebrush]

I also think it's inaccurate, have all along but i have never had the time it would require to learn enough to debunk it. I do know some people who have gotten Ramzi opposites.

I believe (strongly) that if it worked the way that he claims then it would be in wide use. We can see from how quickly the new blood tests have proliferated, that when a method works, it becomes widespread within a couple years' time.

All that having been said, please understand that there may actually be ~something~ to it, because some other studies done by very reputable researchers have shown that right sided ovulations are slightly more likely to be boys, left sided more likely to be girls, and that a 3 month series of ovulations L, L, R ended up boys 75% of the time. It may very well be the case that there is something to the side of ovulation correlating with what the baby's gender is, and also what side it implants on, but is is nowhere near the high success rates that Ramzi claims. Also, placenta previa (very low implantation) are more likely to be boys, tubal pg (very high implantation) are more likely to be girls, and so there may be some difference in the way that babies of different genders implant.

Just to clarify, just because someone doesn't have a medical degree is certainly not any reason to doubt them (not sure why he calls himself DR. but whatevs LOL) and ultrasound techs have way more knowledge about ultrasounds than doctors do, as a general rule. And the reason why the placenta can "move" is because as the uterus grows and stretches, the placenta can grow in an entirely different direction and so it can go from being left or right to front, back, top, etc. The uterus when Ramzi is supposed to work, is still quite small and if you imagine a pinpoint on the side of a pear that grows to being a pizza on the side of a watermelon, it may be a little easier to picture how it could start off in one spot and sort of grow around to a different position.

So, to sum up, I also do not believe this works but it isn't quite as ridiculous as it seems at first blush.

[atomic sagebrush]

If you search for one of our users Kaseybaby she has looked into it extensively and has some pretty eloquent posts about how it doesn't work.

[atomic sagebrush]

here's one that was wrong, baby on left but it is a BOY http://genderdreaming.com/forum/ultr...zi-theory.html

[atomic sagebrush]

Here is some more people who got Ramzi opposites in this thread http://genderdreaming.com/forum/ultr...appointed.html and also it is one where Kaseybaby chimes in, and she's studied it more extensively than I.

[jo doc]

i checked on my ultrasound at 7 weeks then 20 weeks with the tech and placenta was on left both times! ramzi was wrong baby was a boy! xx

[Makali]

Thanks for the feedback ladies.

Atomic sagebrush, I will definitely check out those threads! Thanks for getting back to me and pointing me in the right direction.

Here's another study which proves that the theory is wrong:

P18.17: The role of placental location assessment in the prediction of fetal gender - The - 2010 - Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology - Wiley Online Library

As for there being *something*about the method, well yes, there is something about certain Old Wives Tales too. Like the way a woman is carrying for instance or which season she conceived. Farmers used to use these methods on horses and cattle which would prove accurate more than 50% of the time. I've read a newspaper artcile which also stated how Old Wives Tales became so popular and passed through generations, there was usually *something* to them at the time they were invented. I think the Ramzi theory is also 50/50 because many people who swear it worked for them didn't actually get a tech's statement as to the position of their placenta and others simply haven't even heard of it or give it any credence to try it out.

There are as many people who swear by the ring, biocarb, craving, hair growth and boob growth theory to name a few.


The placenta is implanted in a teeny tiny womb at the beginning of the pregnancy. Over time, the uterus expands, and in doing so, pulls the growing placenta up with it. Best way to "visualise"... If a pregnant woman has a tattoo on her stomach. Early on, it will look normal.
As her bump expands, that tattoo will also expand and "move". It's still in the same place on her skin, just, getting pulled out. If anything, the placenta grows and spreads.

The embryo attaches to the wall of the uterus around the third week after last period. By the fourth week (two weeks pregnant, possible curiosity starting to form as to "could I be pregnant?", if you're an early noticer), the embryo has "split" in two. The half that "separates" becomes the fetus, the half still attached to the wall becomes the placenta. He can sit there and say 45 days sex determination all he wants. He just stamped all over his own theory. If the placenta implants on the "girl" side, and then the mother "changes the baby's sex to male", the placenta does not move.
The Ramzi theory is said to be 97+% correct. He himself claims 1/20 women "change" the sex of the baby (I can source it here if anyone wants).
Those two numbers don't add up.

"just because someone doesn't have a medical degree is certainly not any reason to doubt them"

Concur! Absolutely. I don't subscribe to the arrogance of having a 'degree' as being a sign of inelligence. There is, however a reason to doubt someone when their claims are unfounded and lack professional merit. Most scientists and doctors produce their theories on findings after years of research and experiments while testing their predecessors findings and the outcome is never given a 100% accuracy. Mr. Ramzi, however, has decided that his very unreaslistic and conservative 97% prediction can only be broken by an anomaly. Plus, I'm not sure I'm ready to trust a self-appointed doctor who asserts that an embryo changes sex without any evidence to back it up. Especially when most of his research is implemented to support a vision rather than scientific endeavor.

Ultrasound techs do have more knowledge about ultrasounds than doctors do but they do not have the evidence or recources to back their theories. They don't have the expertise, experience or decades of education into the intricacies of the human anatomy.

I will look for Kaseybaby's posts.

If there's anyone else who thinks this theory is highly irrational or has failed for them, please post your stories or views here as I would love to hear them.