A crude but fairly-effective low-tech method of gender-selection seems to have been stumbled upon by British researchers: a new study
of 9000 pregnancies in Liverpool, England* shows that moms-to-be who
smoke are one-third less likely to have male children than moms who
don't smoke. If the dad-to-be smokes, the likelihood drops to
almost one-half (this is taking into account other factors such as
health and age).
The mother doesn't even have to be a smoker at
all, as even second-hand smoke was found to have an effect upon the
resulting baby's gender. This is all pretty significant when you
consider that 52%, or slightly more than half (I know you know this but
I'm saying it for my own math-deprived brain), of babies born in
Western countries are male. What would the balance be like if no
one smoked at all, I wonder? (or if everyone did?)
Researchers still haven't a clue as to the cause of this phenomenon, but they hypothesize that it has something to do with smoking
has to do with the effect of nicotine upon the Y-chromosome (which
determines gender), and also something having to do with the effects
upon the mother (it's known, for instance, that smoking reduces
estrogen and thins the cervix, as well as causes other bad stuff, but how this results in gender changes
they haven't a clue).
So, if you want a girl, smoke 'em if you've got 'em!
*damn, I couldn't work the term "Liverpudlian" into this article.
