Mom's Diet May Influence Baby's Gender

Study Shows Women Who Eat Breakfast Give Birth To Slightly More Boys

(WebMD)  In addition to being the most important meal of the day, breakfast may help determine your unborn baby's sex.

In a newly reported study, women who ate breakfast cereal gave birth to more boys, while those who skipped breakfast had more girls.

Women who ate more total calories also delivered more boys, even though the overall male-to-female birth ratio among the study participants was close to 50/50.

The early findings in no way prove that what a woman does or doesn't eat prior to conception influences her baby's sex.

But they do hint at a sex-selection bias among humans similar to that seen in other animals, favoring male births among well-fed mothers and female births among mothers who are less well nourished.

They may also help explain a subtle decline in the proportion of male births in industrialized countries like the U.S., researcher Fiona Mathews, PhD, tells WebMD.

"It is true that there is an obesity epidemic, but there is also an increase in dieting and very unstable dietary habits among young women," she says. "And more people are skipping breakfast. Our data suggest that these things may play a role in the small but noticeable decline in male births."

Fewer Calories, Fewer Boys

The study involved 740 newly pregnant British women who had not given birth before and who did not know the sex of their fetuses. All the women were white, non-obese, and had no medical problems.

The women completed detailed food-frequency questionnaires during the first pregnancy exam and well into their pregnancy, and they were asked to keep a detailed food journal for a week around the time of their fourth month of pregnancy.

They were also asked to recall their dietary habits in the year prior to conceiving.

Using this data, the researchers determined that women who ate the most calories around the time of conception delivered more boys, with 56% giving birth to male babies, compared with 45% of women who ate the fewest calories prior to conceiving.

Of those who reported eating breakfast cereal every day, 59% gave birth to boys compared with 43% of women who reported rarely or never eating cereal for breakfast, says Mathews.

In addition to consuming more calories prior to conception, women who gave birth to boys were also more likely to have eaten higher-quality diets with a wider range of nutrients, including potassium.

If nutrition does affect fetal sex selection, Mathews says it is not clear whether it is calories or nutrients that makes the difference.

What the mothers ate during pregnancy did not seem to influence the sex of their babies.

"The mothers who had boys took in about 300 milligrams more of potassium and about 180 more calories a day than the mothers of girls," she says.

"That is the equivalent of a large banana."

The Importance of Breakfast

So should a woman who wants her next child to be a girl skip breakfast and limit calories?

Absolutely not, says American Dietetic Association spokeswoman and registered dietitian Elisa Zied.

Breakfast foods, especially breakfast cereals, are among the best dietary sources of folic acid , a nutrient that is critical during conception and early pregnancy for preventing birth defects.

"Whole-grain cereals are loaded with folic acid, and so are oranges and orange juice," she says. "If you skip breakfast, you could easily not get enough."

She adds that eating a balanced diet prior to conception and during pregnancy is one of the best things a woman can do to ensure a healthy pregnancy.

"That means eating regular, frequent meals, eating plenty of fruits and vegetables and foods rich in folic acid and other nutrients and avoiding alcohol," she says.

First stages of scientific study should not be reported as fact.

Posted by nfomastr at 09:33 PM : Apr 24, 2008

Looks to me like it was reported as a study. What did they say that you object to, and how should they have said it?

[drinuk]

I make no apology for changing the subject as I find it both amazing, cynical and very suspicious that not only this TV channel but all of them are not informing mothers of the current situation regarding vaccines. Senators Obama, Clinton and McCain have called for serious independent research into MMR, all believing that there could be a link to Autism. The figures show and I quote McCain that it is becoming an epidemic and that as many as 1 child in every 100 now has the disease. Please go to www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk for information. The silence by the media will come to be seen as both unforgivable and wicked. Parents, please go find the information because it is not being provided by either your government or those you rely upon to keep you informed.

[nfomastr]

That''''s a very important part of science. You observe what happens, then you hypothesize about it, then you test your hypothesis, and eventually, if all goes well, you have a theory. All that''''s in this report is the initial observed facts. That doesn''''t make it invalid, or unscientific; it''''s just the first step.

Posted by ge556 at 08:39 PM : Apr 24, 2008

Yes, I am well aware that this is the first step. However, this is being reported to the general population as if it is a proven fact. It was on my local news and is popping up on birth boards all over the Internet. That''s what makes it faulty science. It has not been scientifically tested, nor has it been replicated.

I accept that a mother''s diet may alter the acidity of her reproductive system and that may affect which chromosome is delivered to an egg. I admitted that in my original post. But this article didn''t mention this because the study didn''t address it.

First stages of scientific study should not be reported as fact.

How scientific was this study? Those numbers could be chalked up to coincidence if they can''''t tell me HOW the mom''''s diet is affecting the gender conceived. There are other ways you are supposed to be able to affect the *** of your baby (positions, time of conception, etc.), so unless all of that was equal with the couples involved, I don''''t know if I''''m buying the results of this "study". It was just a survey type deal that just asked for diet info. Where''''s the science behind these claims?

osted by nfomastr at 11:36 PM : Apr 23, 2008

That''s a very important part of science. You observe what happens, then you hypothesize about it, then you test your hypothesis, and eventually, if all goes well, you have a theory. All that''s in this report is the initial observed facts. That doesn''t make it invalid, or unscientific; it''s just the first step.

All you people who say, "I know how X and Y chromosomes work, this is nonsense!" or "The father determines the s.e.x of the baby" need to open your minds a bit. Yes, most of you are correct, but there can be more to the story. Science is the process of learning more and more.

[dalesmith64]

CBS = (take your pick):
Cabal influencing Baby''s ***
Calumny about Baby''s ***
Camarilla influencing Baby''s ***
Camorra influencing Baby''s ***
Canards about Baby''s ***
Charlatans influencing Babys'' ***
Colligation for Babys'' ***

[bonb413]

This is not new; 25 to 30 years ago, a research/ professional was a guest on Phil Donohue and said the same thing. A high potassium/low calcium diet greatly increases the odds of a male and the opposite is true to yield a female if/when a pregnancy occurs. When it came time to begin our family, I followed that "rule" and the diet worked; is that science or luck?

[nfomastr]

I wonder if higher potassium and calcium levels in mom''s system alters her reproductive tract to inhibit the ability of little swimmers carrying the X chromosome to fertilize an egg because since it is actually dad who determines the *** of the baby, like others, I''m not seeing the connection.

How scientific was this study? Those numbers could be chalked up to coincidence if they can''t tell me HOW the mom''s diet is affecting the gender conceived. There are other ways you are supposed to be able to affect the *** of your baby (positions, time of conception, etc.), so unless all of that was equal with the couples involved, I don''t know if I''m buying the results of this "study". It was just a survey type deal that just asked for diet info. Where''s the science behind these claims?

CBS: F- for reporting this as if it were news.

[haoli25]

I wonder how many of the women who ate breakfast had more regular bowel movements? And if so, does that mean that women who had more regular bowel movements (due to the increased fiber in their diet) gave birth to more boys?
Posted by emma253

Apparently Barbara Bush had a bowel movement and raised it to adulthood.

[oleander8]

Poppycock! CBS, you lose credibility when you publish these pop-studies.

[istj04]

Considering it is the MALE''S SPERM (and not the female!) that determines the gender of a baby, how exactly is what a WOMAN EATS, going to determine that which is "pre-determined" by the male sperm, and whether those are affected by HIS diet!?

[b-easy63]

Couples in which the man is dominant, boys are born. In couples, where the woman is dominant and the man wears an apron, girls are born.

Posted by d33pthroat1 at 05:38 PM : Apr 23, 2008


Wrong--dominant men are shown to produce more girls not boys--the idea being that any child removes cosmic energy from the same gendered parent--so dominant people seek to deplete their partners energy not their own. Ergo--dominant men produce girls and weak men produce boyz and what a woman eats really does determine which sperm will penetrate the egg on any given day....LOL (all sarcasm)

[b-easy63]

Science gets more and more idiotic every day. I was undernourished (in my last year of college) never ate breakfast and gave birth to a very healthy 8lb 9 oz baby boy. I spent a life time not eating before 11:am and was skinny as a rail.

They should try putting a little science into the science--one of the most ridiculous forays is to continually tell us the benefits of certain foods. They need to stop pushing food panaceas--they don''t work, most are debunked and food now costs too much to play around with.

[excoachken]

There is nothing new here. Try sticking to news!

[abigail4476]

"...what some may not know is that the ph of a woman''''s vaginal secretions determines whether male or female sperm survive and are able to fertilize the egg. knowing this, it''''s not too far of a stretch to believe that the ph of a woman''''s vaginal secretions may be affected by her diet."

This may be true (I don''t know, I haven''t read anything about it personally), but the inference of the article is that the gender of the baby can be influenced AFTER conception. Therefore the article comes across as idiotic, and so does CBS for printing it.

[abigail4476]

Has it occurred to any of these brilliant researchers that maybe the gender of the baby might influence the mother''s dietary CHOICES????

[abigail4476]

"And all this time I thought it was x/x chromesomes for girls or x/y chromesomes for boys." --by lochlan

We''ve been duped, loch. DNA means nothing. Gender is now determined by the mother''s breakfast choices and other external influences.

I wonder how many of the women who ate breakfast had more regular bowel movements? And if so, does that mean that women who had more regular bowel movements (due to the increased fiber in their diet) gave birth to more boys?

That would mean that women who poop more often during pregnancy tend to have more boys. LOL!!!!!

[d33pthroat1]

My experience is that the gender of the offspring is determined by who is dominant /submissive among the parents.

Couples in which the man is dominant, boys are born. In couples, where the woman is dominant and the man wears an apron, girls are born.

This discussion reminds me of the common disbelief in evolution: "I don''t understand it, it seems in conflict with what I know, those people must be stupid."

[erasmus81]

"I can''''t remember what I ate the other day." Posted by cbscrash07 at 05:05 PM : Apr 23, 2008

Well, if you are a guy, that might explain it.:)

[Syndicate]

ge556: I saw a show years ago. I believe it was beyond 2000. Anyway they were using Egg whites to try to seperate the male coded sperm from the female. It had something to do with the surface electrical charge of the sperm.