You appear to have not understood my scientific method. To unwrap, I studied a bunch of scientific literature that strongly correlated child gender with time of impregnation. I’ve not published a peer reviewed article yet, because.. it is not my field.
I used that study to choose the day of impregnation. (As stated above) I did not just voice this as a statistical possibility) - I simply provided the appropriate gametes on an appropriately statistically chosen day.
Everything else was beyond my control. But Math is Math.
@Czarcasm, medical research places the three to five days worth of sperm fecundity inside a woman into the realms of science.
If you know any pre-menopausal women, you can ask them. Hell, please do.
To be honest, unless @Czarcasm chooses to make a new thread about how and why two men are arguing about reproductive health in women, I am going to drop out.
The Pit is the appropriate place, though I would venture to suggest “there is no appropriate place”.
It is not crazy to think that maternal factors can impact which sex zygote gets created and survives. But solid evidence that timing of intercourse impacts that is lacking.
It is also not crazy to think that experience can impact the genes that get passed on - again see those links on epigenetics - but the mechanisms suggested in the OP do not make any physiological sense.
I don’t pretend to know anything at all about this field. I am just a casual reader of trivia and there are several things about this topic that I was hoping I could throw out there and watch the xperts discuss it. Some of the things that lead me to believe or at least worth investigating I feel point to a possible link between the brain and sperm development. (some of my words may be off but I hope you get the drift) # 1. It takes about 74 days to manufacture a sperm. That is really a long time for something so simple. 2. What are possible mechanisms? The nerves and blood are tightly blocked from where sperm are manufactured. The only thing that it does share some of its environment with is the brain. Neurotransmitter’s have very short alf lives so it is not likely they are picking up on them but when the neurotransmitter decays it leaves a wide variety and combinations of varieties af amino acids that will linger for an extended period of time. Could this possibly be interpeted by developing sperm cells? It seems to be the only exposure they would have to what we experience in life. It would be extremely difficult to find or prove in a human but something like mice it may be possible over a 20 year period.
If the conversation progressed far enough, the topic I would be most interested in discussing were the tests that could be set up to force the desired changes.
Sperm formation is a highly complex process that involves many changes to the cell structure, such as shrinking of the nucleus, generation of a sperm tail, and remodeling of the sperm head*.* Disrupting this process at any point can result in nonfunctional sperm and male infertility.
It does not make your line better, for starters, how the nucleus is shrank from the original size/setup shows that your line here is very underwhelming. It does not mean what you think.
If I were to interview 1000 scientists all actively involved in this field what percentage would tell me that brain activity had some kind of influence on sperm.
It is your line, not mine. You should investigate that, As others pointed out, demanding that a very iffy connection should be there just because one says so, does not force others to go against evidence or consensus.
Your post has nothing to do with anything I said. You are attempting to twist the conversation. I isimply feel for those inclined it might be an interesting discussion.
No sperm does not share environment with the brain other than being in the same body. The brain communicates to the testes by way of the neuroendocrine system, but that is from a relative distance.
The breakdown products of neurotransmitters in the brain are not near the testes and are resorbed and reused or excreted far away from there.
So
No.
Again they aren’t getting to the sperm, but no. Other things do. We create stress hormones, we get exposed to toxins, microplastics, we simply age … there are lots of things we do in life that expose the developing sperm to things.
Almost all would explain about the neuroendocrine axis and how through it the brain controls sperm production and testosterone levels. Pretty sure not a one would say the brain impacts sperm in the way you are suggesting or anything at all similar to that. Zero.
You still do not seem to understand what neurotransmitters, proteins, or amino acids are.
First, amino acids are a specific class of molecule. That chart of various types of neurotransmitters I posted? None of them are made up of amino acids and therefore none of them break down into amino acids.
Second, for the neurotransmitters that are made up of chains of amino acids, they aren’t using a “wide variety” of amino acids, they are using 20 or 21 types. The same 20 or 21 types used for the tens of thousands of types of proteins used in the body. When those chains of amino acids are disassembled, they are still the same 20 or 21 types. There are not “neuron amino acids” that are different than other amino acids. There is absolutely no way for a sperm cell to know if a lysine it encounters came from a neuropeptide, from the tuna salad you had for lunch, or from the disassembled flagellum of an invading bacterium. Every single cell of the body contains amino acids, and contains the same amino acids.
Just looking for another method for evolution besides natural selection. Here I was just suggesting a way that it might come from the brain. I guess not though.
The blood levels of amino acids are in constant flux, muscles and organs breaking proteins down and building up continuously, amino acids used for energy too, new ones added in by the foods we eat. So, no.