Fri, May-09-08, 09:29
|
 |
Senior Member
Posts: 5,323
|
|
Plan: food? what's food?
Stats: 234/185/165
BF:nothin' but wobble
Progress: 71%
Location: YAY! trees and grass!
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Baerdric
Actually the female has 100% of the control, as such. While obviously not under conscious control, the male delivers both male and female sperm, out of his control by any measure. It is the egg and it's enviroment chooses which makes it through. Like I hand you twenty red chips and twenty blue chips, and you choose the one you want, out of my control.
So while it is the individual sperm's DNA that makes the child a boy or a girl, it is the egg that chooses the individual sperm out of the crowd.
|
maybe control is the wrong word... i meant it to be synonymous with intent or motive. the correlation you're drawing here, which is similar to the correlation the article seemed to be drawing, was that women have a conscious input in the decision-making process as to whether the baby will be male or female. but in reality, since all eggs are X chromosomed, women can't even claim partial responsibility over whether the child is male or female.
with your chip analogy, i'm making a conscious decision to reach out my hand and choose either a red chip or a blue chip. i have no conscious control over my eggs, and the egg has no conscious control over which sperm manage to make it all the way up, or which of the 100 or so that beat against the egg to weaken the cell wall will finally make it through to fertilization. it's not a case of choosing out of a crowd, it's a case of all the sperm working together to achieve fertilization.
while i do agree that diet can have an impact over the acidity/alkalinity of the cervix and womb, altering a diet would have more effect on increasing the probability of pregnancy than it would on the sex of the child.
what the article did NOT do was interview the 740 fathers to find out if there were any correlations between THEIR diet and the proportion of X sperm to Y sperm.
|