BMJ  2007;334:486-487 (10 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39141.622917.80

Editorials

Ratio of boys to girls at birth

Is not related to the time taken to conceive, or exposure to environmental agents

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In 2005, the BMJ published a paper suggesting that subfertile couples were more likely than fertile couples to have boys.¹ This observation was offered as support of the hypothesis that sperm bearing Y chromosomes swim faster through viscous cervical mucous. In the flurry of letters that followed, other researchers reported that their data did not support the sex ratio finding.² Furthermore, the sperm swimming hypothesis was exposed as a persistent myth.³

In this week's BMJ, Joffe and colleagues⁴ pool data from several large fecundity studies, further confirming the lack of association between secondary sex ratio (boys to girls at birth) and time to pregnancy. On this point, we are confident the authors are correct. However, their hypothesis that the sex ratio could be a marker of adverse effects on the male reproductive system is less certain. They suggest that a slight decline over time in the secondary sex ratio . . . [Full text of this article]

¹ Department of Occupational Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, DK 8000 Aarhus, Denmark, ² Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Durham, North Carolina, USA

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Sex ratio and time to pregnancy: analysis of four large European population surveys

Mike Joffe, James Bennett, Nicky Best, and Tina Kold Jensen
BMJ 2007 334: 524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Time to pregnancy and sex of offspring: cohort study

Luc J M Smits, Rob A de Bie, Gerard G Essed, and Piet A van den Brandt
BMJ 2005 331: 1437-1438. [Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

other factors affecting the ratio

Sebastian Kraemer
bmj.com, 11 Mar 2007 [Full text]