Gender and environment: general and monthly gender distribution of newborns and cosmophysical parameters

doi:10.4236/health.2010.26097

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Vol.2, No.6, 639-644 (2010) Health

doi:10.4236/health.2010.26097

Gender and environment: general and monthly gender

distribution of newborns and cosmophysical

parameters

Eliyahu Stoupel1,2*, Evgeny Abramson3, Peter Israelevich4, Mordechai Shohat2,5,

Jaqueline Sulkes3

1Division of Cardiology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tiqwa, Israel; *Corresponding Author: stoupel@inter.net.il

2Sackler Faculty of Medicine Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Israel

3Management Data Center, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tiqwa, Israel

4Department of Geophysics & Planetary Science, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Israel

5Recanati Institute of Medical Genetics, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tiqwa, Israel

Received 23 March 2010; revised 27 April 2010; accepted 28 April 2010.

ABSTRACT

Recent publications have described a relation-

ship between fluctuations in environmental

physical activity and several aspects of fetal

development. This study explored the possible

effects of cosmophysical parameters on new-

born gender, overall and by maternal age. The

gender distribution of 123,368 infants born over

a 189-month period (November 1993–July 2009)

was analyzed against levels of solar, geomag-

netic, and cosmic ray activity at the time of

conception. The cohort was then divided into

three groups by maternal age (< 28 years, 29-35

years, > 35 years) for further analysis. Pearson

correlation coefficients and their probabilities

were calculated, and chi-square test was ap-

plied, as necessary. The physical data were de-

rived from space science centers in the USA,

Russia, and Finland. The results showed that

the male/female ratio for the whole cohort over

the study period was 1.06. However, on monthly

analysis, there was a significant male predomi-

nance in most months, with a male/female ratio

of up to 4. Younger mothers (< 28 years) gave

birth to significantly more boys than older

mothers. The gender distribution in the three

maternal age groups was partially linked to the

different physical factors. These findings sug-

gest that environmental physical activity in the

month of conception may play a role in newborn

gender. Further study is needed to determine

the mechanism underlying this effect.

Keywords: Newborn; Gender; Solar; Geomagnetic;

Cosmic Ray; Activity; Age; Mother; Pregnancy

1. INTRODUCTION

Newborn gender is a focus of human and scientific in-

terest. In addition to the known genetic factors that affect

fetal development, several studies published in the last

decades have considered the potential influence of fluc-

tuations in environmental physical activity (solar, geo-

magnetic, cosmic ray) on physiologic and pathologic

aspects of pregnancy and fetal development [1-9].

The aim of the present study was to investigate the

possible effect of fluctuations in cosmophysical parame-

ters at conception on newborn gender distribution, over-

all and by maternal age.

2. METHODS

The study included all 123,368 infants born at a tertiary

university hospital in Israel from November 1993 to July

2009 (189 months): 63,415 male and 59,953 female

(liveborn or stillborn). Distribution by maternal age

showed that 54,158 (43.86%) infants were born to moth-

ers younger than 29 years, 47,655 (38.60%) to mothers

aged 29-35 years, and 21,657 (17.54%) to mothers older

than 35 years. These data were correlated against levels

of the following cosmophysical parameters in the month

of conception: solar activity indices— sunspot number,

smoothed sunspot number, solar flux at 2800 MGH and

10.7 cm wavelength, and adjusted solar flux; geomag-

netic activity (GMA) indices—Ap, Cp, and Am (plane-

tary and regional, for middle latitudes); and cosmic ray

activity (CRA)—represented by neutron activity at the

Earth’s surface (in imp/min). The cosmophysical data for

E. Stoupel et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 639-644

640

the study period were derived from weekly and monthly

calculations published by space science institutions in

the United States, Russia, and Finland that regularly

monitor these parameters worldwide (National Geo-

physical Data Center, Space Weather Prediction Center,

Moscow Neutron Monitor, Space Weather Prediction

Center; Space Environment Services Center; November

2003-July 2009) [10-15].

2.1. Statistical Analysis

Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and their probabili-

ties (p) were calculated between newborn gender distri-

bution and the physical parameters. Chi-square test was

used to analyze the likelihood of a newborn being male

or female by physical parameters and maternal age

group. Probabilities of 95% and higher were considered

significant, probabilities of 90%-94% were considered

trends toward significance. Non significant results were

marked N.S.

3. RESULTS

The male/female ratio in the whole population of new-

borns was 1.06. Maximal monthly deviations ranged

from 1.387 to 0.7399. One hundred fifty months (79.36%)

were characterized by a significant prevalence of male

newborns (79.36%), and 39 months (20.1%) by a sig-

nificant prevalence of female newborns; in one month,

the gender distribution was equal.

Table 1 presents the newborn gender relationship with

cosmophysical parameters during the month of concep-

tion. Table 2 presents the same relationship by maternal

age group: 28 years or less; 29-35 years; and 35 years or

mor e .

The results showed that mothers aged 28 years or less

gave birth to significantly more male newborns than

older mothers (χ2 = 3.9, p = 0.047). The ratio of months

with more male newborns to months with more female

infants in this maternal age group was 2.62. In the two

older groups, this ratio was 2.16 (p < 0.0001).

The differences among the maternal age groups

prompted our use of multifactorial analysis for each

gender and each of the three maternal age groups to pre-

dict the chances of a mother of particular age giving

birth to a boy or girl according to levels of the cosmo-

physical parameters. The findings are shown in Tables

3-5. Factors that failed to show a significant relationship

in the total correlation study (Table 1) were included as

significant in the subgroup of multifactorial analysis (for

example, monthly GMA Cp for mothers older 35 years)

(Tables 3-5).

The relationship of solar and neutron activity was also

different among the three age groups, changing from a po-

sitive in the young mother group to an inverse relationship

Table 1. Monthly (n = 189) newborn (n = 123683) gender distribution by physcial parameters in the month of conception (Pearson

correlation coefficients and their probabilities).

Parameters Physical Activity 9 Months to Delivery

Male (n = 63415) Female (n = 59953) Ratio (1.06)

Year 0.72 p < 0.0001 0.704 p < 0.0001 NS

Month NS NS NS

Solar activity

Sunspot number 0.21 p = 0.0039 0.16 p = 0.02 NS

Smoothed sunspot number 0.24 p = 0.0012 0.2 p = 0.0056 NS

Solar flux 2800 MGH, 10.7 cm 0.3 p < 0.0001 0.26 p = 0.0003 NS

Adjusted solar flux 0.283 p < 0.0001 0.243 p = 0.0008 NS

Geomagnetic activity

Ap NS NS NS

Cp NS NS NS

Am NS NS NS

Cosmic ray (neutron) activity (imp/min)

Moscow –0.295 p < 0.0001 –0.28 p = 0.0001 NS

Oulo –0.27 p = 0.0002 –0.25 p = 0.0005 NS

Note: 150 months, more males; 39 months, more females Chi-square = 134.8, p < 0.0001; range: 1.387-0.7399.

E. Stoupel et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 639-644

641

Table 2. Monthly (n = 189) gender distribution by environmental physical activity in month of conception and maternal age (Pearson

correlation coefficients and their probabilities).

Parameter Age  28 Age 29-35 Age > 35

Male

(n = 27997)

Female

(n = 26161)

Male

(n = 24352)

Female

(n = 23303)

Male

(n = 11168)

Female

(n = 10489)

Year 0.263

0.0003

0.233

0.0013

0.88

< 0.0001

0.86

< 0.0001

0.68

< 0.0001

0.735

0.0001

Month NS NS NS NS NS NS

Solar activity

Sunspot number 0.46

< 0.0001

0.44

< 0.0001 NS NS

–0.19

0.0085

–0.21

0.0031

Smoothed sunpsot number 0.51

< 0.0001

0.49

< 0.0001 NS NS

–0.2

0.0057

–0.2

0.0055

Solar flux 2800 MGH, 10.7

0.53

< 0.0001

0.51

< 0.0001

0.13

0.08 NS –0.12

0.1

–0.13

0.07

Adjusted solar flux 0.51

0.0001

0.49

< 0.0001

0.12

0.09 NS –0.13

0.07

–0.14

0.049

Geomagnetic activity

Ap NS NS NS NS

–0.12

0.1

–0.17

0.018

Cp NS NS

–0.17

0.02

–0.16

0.03

–0.17

0.018

–0.2

0.0055

Am 0.13

0.07 NS NS NS

–0.14

0.056

–0.165

0.023

Cosmic ray (neutron) activity (imp/min)

Moscow –0.465

< 0.0001

–0.44

< 0.0001

–0.16

0.025

–0.14

0.06

0.15

0.033

0.134

0.065

Oulo –0.4

< 0.0001

–0.34

< 0.0001

–0.17

0.02

–0.16

0.03

0.14

0.057

0.12

0.1

Table 3. Prediction model to determine likelihood of a woman older than 29 years giving birth to a male or female infant by levels of

physical factors in the month of conception.

Variables Parameter estimate Standard error Probability

Likelihood of male infant (n = 27897)

Intercept –3569 621.2 < 0.0001

Year 1.85 0.311 < 0.0001

Solar flux 2800 MGH 2.485 0.436 < 0.01

Adjusted solar flux –2.54 0.454 < 0.0001

Smoothed sunspot number 0.4 0.123 0.0012

Likelihood of female infant (n = 26161)

Intercept –3097 610.4 < 0.0001

Year 1.61 0.306 < 0.0001

Solar flux 2800 MGH 2.43 0.428 < 0.0001

Adjusted solar flux –2.5 0.446 < 0.0001

Smoothed sunspot number 0.l38 0.12 0.0016

E. Stoupel et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 639-644

642

Table 4. Prediction model to determine likelihood of a woman aged 29-35 years giving birth to a male or female infant by levels of

physical factors in the month of conception.

Variables Parameter estimate Standard error Probability

Likelihood of male infant (n = 24352)

Intercept –12310 437 < 0.0001

Year 6.21 0.218 < 0.0001

Month 0.788 0.289 0.0071

Smoothed sunspot number 0.124 0.00257 < 0.0001

Likelihood of female infant (n =23303)

Intercept –11071 469.76 < 0.0001

Year 5.62 0.234 < 0.0001

Month 0.54 0.311 0.08

CRA –0.01 0.003 0.0028

CRA—cosmic ray activity

Table 5. Prediction model to determine likelihood of a woman older than 35 years giving birth to a male or female infant by levels of

physical factors in the month of conception.

Variables Parameter estimate Standard error Probability

Likelihood of male infant (n = 11166)

Intercept –4343 323 < 0.0001

Year 2.16 0.159 < 0.0001

GMA (Cp) 10.98 4.267 < 0.01

CRA 0.011 0.00258 < 0.0001

Likelihood of female infant (n = 10489)

Intercept –4339 288.08 < 0.0001

Year 2.167 0.14 < 0.0001

GMA (Cp) 19.98 4.267 < 0.001

CRA 0.0062 0.00158 0.0001

GMA—geomagnetic activity, CRA—cosmic ray activity

in the older than 35. In the intermediate age group (age

28-35) non significant relationship was seen (Table 2).

4. DISCUSSION

Newborn gender is known to be affected by genetic

(chromosome X, Y interaction) and endocrine (hormonal)

factors [16,17]. A series of publications has demon-

strated that environmental physical parameters, such as

solar, cosmic ray and geomagnetic activity, at the begin-

ning of pregnancy may also play a role [1-9,17-19], per-

haps via their effects on chromosome function (clearly

shown in the case of Down syndrome) and hormone

secretion [5] Accordingly, other neonatology parameters,

including monthly number of infants born, newborn

length and weight, preterm deliveries, and occurrence of

congenital heart disease and other malformations have

been linked to cosmophysical activity [1-6,9,15,17,19,

20]

The mechanism underlying this relationship is still

unknown, although the physiologic and teratogenic po-

tential of cosmophysical factors is clear. The effect of

solar activity on human biological behavior is apparently

due to solar corpuscular and wave energy. High levels of

E. Stoupel et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 639-644

643

cosmic rays in space leave remains of crushed atoms in

the form of neutrons, and the measurement of neutron

activity on the Earths’ surface serves as an indirect

measure of cosmic ray activity. It is assumed that neu-

trons, by the nature of their physical properties, connect

with H+ ions and are converted to protons, which attack

cell nuclei in enzymes and other regulatory systems

[19,21]. Solar and geomagnetic activities shield the

Earth from cosmic rays; when they are weak, the effect

of cosmic ray activity increases. One study conducted

over a 216-month period found that the correlation be-

tween solar and cosmic ray activity was –0.84 (p <

0.0001) [22,23]. Recent study, describing the Y chro-

mosome as a very labile structure [24], allows to see it as

an object for possible physical influences.

According to the world-renowed physicist, Dr. Fein-

mann, “Probably the most powerful single assumption

that contributes to the progress of biology is the assump-

tion that everything from the animals to the atoms can do

that are seen in the biological world are the result of the

behavior of physical and chemical phenomena” [25].

Overall, we found that the number of male newborns

only slightly surpassed the number of female newborns.

A male/female ratio of 1.06 to 1.07 has been consistently

reported in studies in various countries and regions [6].

However, males showed a considerable predominance

when we compared monthly deliveries: in some months,

the male/female ratio was close to 4. This trend was

more apparent in younger mothers (age 28 years or less).

Further analysis of gender distribution by maternal age

showed that in the youngest age group, solar activity had

a strong effect and cosmic ray activity a weak effect,

whereas in the older groups, this relationship was re-

versed. Given that the youngest group was larger, our

findings for the overall link of monthly gender distribu-

tion with physical factors were close to those for the

youngest group.

Although we focused only on maternal age in this

study, we assume a concomitant younger age of the fa-

thers as well, which may also play a role in the physical

influences at the time of conception.

The presented data constitute another chapter in the

study of clinical cosmobiology and the opposing physi-

cal forces in our environment (“equilibrium paradigm”)

[26]. The link between the physical environmental and

human homeostasis brings to mind the statement of Al-

bert Einstein: “The human will is free only within the

bounds of a determined cosmic system” [27].

5. CONCLUSIONS

Both gender monthly newborn number is linked with the

level of cosmophysical activity.

Overall, there is a small male prevalence among

newborns, although monthly calculation of this relation-

ship reveals a considerable male predominance. In addi-

tion to other known factors that determine newborn

gender, environmental physical activity during the month

of conception may also be involved.

The relationship of the different physical factors with

newborn gender varies by maternal age.

More studies are needed to further our understanding

of the ways in which physical forces affect newborn

gender.

REFERENCES

[1] Merlob, P., Raisner, S.H., Shimshoni, M. and Stoupel, E.

(1989) Fetal growth in periods of extreme solar activity.

Journal Foetal Medicine, 9(1-2), 1-4.

[2] Stoupel, E., Keret, R., Assa, S., Kaufman, H., Shimshoni,

M. and Laron, Z. (1983) Secretion of growth hormone,

prolactin and corticosteroids during different levels of of

geomagnetic activity. Neuroendocrinology Letters, 5(6),

1-4.

[3] Stoupel, E., Silbergeld, A., Gil-Ad, I., Keret, R., Shim-

shoni, M. and Laron, Z. (1989) Relationship between so-

lar activity and levels of of plasma growth hormone and

prolactin. Neuroendocrinology Letters, 11(5), 1-9.

[4] Stoupel, E., Hod, M., Shimshoni, M., Fridman, S.,

Ovadia, J. and Keith, L. (1990) Monthly cosmic activity

and pregnancy induced hypertension. Clinical & Ex-

perimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 17(1), 7-12.

[5] Stoupel, E., Frimer, H., Appelman, Z., Ben-Neriah, Z.

Dar, H., Fejgin, M., Gershuni-Baruch, R., Manor, E.,

Barkai, G., Shalev, S., et al. (2005) Chromosome aberra-

tion and environmental physical activity: Down syn-

drome and solar activity, Israel, 1990-2000. International

Journal of Biometeorology, 28(2), 1-9.

[6] Stoupel, E., Kalediene, R., Petrauskiene, J., Gaizauskiene,

A., Israelevich, P., Abramson, E. and Sulkes. J. (2006)

Monthly number of newborns and environmental physi-

cal activity. Medicina, 42(3), 238-242.

[7] Stoupel, E., Monselize, Y. and Lahav, J. (2006) Changes

in autoimmune markers of the anti-cardiolipin syndrome

on days of extreme geomagnetic activity. Journal of Ba-

sic and Clinical Physiology and Pharmacology, 17(4),

269-278.

[8] Stoupel, E., Sirota, L., Osovsky, M., Klinger, G., Abram-

son, E., Israelevich, P., Sulkes, J. and Linder, N. (2007)

Monthly number of preterm births and environmental

physical activity. Journal of Basic and Clinical Physiol-

ogy and Pharmacology, 18(2), 149-157.

[9] Stoupel, E., Birk, E., Kogan, A., Klinger, G., Abramson,

E., Israelevich, P., Sulkes, J. and Linder, N. (2009) Con-

genital heart disease: Correlation with fluctuations in

cosmophysical activity, 1995-2005. International Journal

of Cardiology, 135(2), 207-210.

[10] National Geophysical Data Center (monthly) Solar Ac-

tivity Bulletin. Boulder, CO: NOAA/NGSD.

[11] National Geophysical Data Center (monthly) Geomag-

netic Indices Bulletin. Boulder, CO: NOAA/NGSD.

E. Stoupel et al. / HEALTH 2 (2010) 639-644

644

[12] Moscow Neutron Monitor. Neutron Monitor Data (daily,

weekly). Izmiran Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences,

Moscow.

[13] Neutron Monitoring Data. Monthly, Daily. Oulu Univer-

sity Neutron Monitoring Station. Oulu, Finland.

[14] Space Environment Services Center (1989) Glossary of

Solar Terrestrial Terms. Boulder.

[15] Space Weather Prediction Center (weekly). Weekly

Highlights and Forecasts. Boulder, CO: NOAA/NSWPC.

[16] Santolaya-Forges, J., Meyer, W.J., Burton, B. and Scom-

megna, A. (1999) Altered newborn gender distribution in

patients with low mid-trimester maternal serum human

chorionic gonadotropin. Journal of Maternal-Fetal Medi-

cine, 6(2), 111-114.

[17] Coutandt, R., Boux de Casson, F., Douay, O., Rouleau, S.,

Beringue, F., Gillard, P., Limal, J.M. and Descamps, P.

(2001) Relationships between placental GH concentra-

tion and maternal smoking, newborn gender and mater-

nal leptin: possible implications for birth weight. Journal

of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 86(10), 4854-

4859.

[18] Archer, V.E. (1979) Anencephalus: Drinking water, geo-

magnetic and cosmic radiation. American Journal of

Epidemiology, 109(1), 88-97.

[19] Kirby, A.J. and Hollfelder, F. (2008) Enzymes under the

nanoscope. Nature, 456(7218), 45-47.

[20] Fenig, E., Michaeli, M., Kalish, Y. and Lishner, M. (2001)

Pregnancy and radiation. Cancer Treatment Reviews, 27

(1), 1-7.

[21] Nias, A.W.H. (1998) An Introduction to Radiotherapy.

John Wiley & Sons, New York.

[22] Stoupel, E., Kalediene, R., Petrauskiene, J., Starkuviene,

S., Abramson, E., Israelevich, P. and Sulkes, J. (2010)

Death-optimal physical conditions. Journal of Basic and

Clinical Physiology and Pharmacology, 21(1), 143-156.

[23] World Health Organization (2009) Genomic Resource

Center. Gender and Genetics.

http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index4.html

[24] Hughes, J.F., Skaletsky, H., Pyntikova, T., Graves, T.A.,

Van Daalen, S.K.M., Minx, D.P., Fulton, R.S., Mcrath,

S.D., Locke, D.P., Friedman, C., Trask, B.J., Mardis, E.R.,

Warren, W.C., Repping, S., Rozen, S., Wilkson, R.K. and

Page, D.C. (2010) Chimpanzee and human Y chromo-

somes are remarkably divergent in structure and gene

content. Nature, 463(7280), 536-539.

[25] Feinmann, R. (2003) Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist.

Perseus Books, Cambridge.

[26] Stoupel, E. (2002) The equilibrium paradigm in clinical

cosmobiology. Journal of Basic and Clinical Physiology

and Pharmacology, 13(3), 255-263.

[27] Einstein, A. (1932) Mein Weltbild. Europa Verlag, Zurich.