Blood test can determine fetal gender starting at 5 weeks!

[Circe]

I am listening to Day-To-Day on Slate and just heard about this (rest
of the article is at
http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/women/articles/2005/06/27/test_reveals_gender_early_in_pregnancy/):

Test reveals gender early in pregnancy
Ethicists fear use in sex selection
By Carey Goldberg, Globe Staff | June 27, 2005

First came the home pregnancy test. Now here comes the home gender
test.

A new blood test being marketed to American women offers them the
chance to find out whether they are having a boy or a girl almost as
soon as they realize they are pregnant, as early as five weeks along.

Just two or three days after mailing the test overnight to a Lowell lab
for processing, a pregnant woman can know what color to paint the
nursery -- or even decide whether to get an abortion if she wants a
child of the opposite sex, a prospect that worries ethicists.

The $275 test works by detecting and analyzing fetal DNA floating in
the mother's blood, a method that researchers say holds promise for
serious clinical uses, from cancer testing to prenatal diagnosis of
Down syndrome.

The test, called the Baby Gender Mentor, is meant for ''the type of
woman who can't wait to open Christmas presents," said Sherry Bonelli,
president of Mommy's Thinkin', the company that is marketing the test
at an online pregnancy store.
=================

I have to say that I wonder how accurate the test would be for women
who've already had a boy baby in a previous pregnancy. I have always
understood that the Y chromosomes from the fetus float around in the
mother's bloodstream for several years after giving birth to a boy.

Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
many of you are about to call and order up the test?)
--
Be well, Barbara

[KC]

Circe wrote:

> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)

I am sure I would have done it in my first 2 pgs, but in my 3rd I
decided to not find out until the birth, and I am really sold on
waiting now. I liked finding out at the end, so no, I wouldn't use it
now.

I am fine with other people having access to it though, no matter what
they choose to do with it.

KC

[Ericka Kammerer]

Circe wrote:

> I have to say that I wonder how accurate the test would be for women
> who've already had a boy baby in a previous pregnancy. I have always
> understood that the Y chromosomes from the fetus float around in the
> mother's bloodstream for several years after giving birth to a boy.

I've been sort of watching this develop over time. IIRC,
on the website they do discuss that there's a time period after
having a boy during which this test is inaccurate for the reason
you describe. I've been waiting to see some more large scale
studies on accuracy.

> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)

I think the boat has sailed on prenatal sex determination.
Nearly everyone does it. I find that somewhat sad (even though
I would have caved with #3), but there ya go. I do think it's
great if there's a less invasive way to get the job done. It
would be nice to think it would lessen the number of u/s, but
I don't think it will. I think the biggest value will be if
it becomes accurate enough to use it instead of amnio so that
those who need the information won't have to take the risks
of amnio. Heck, if I needed to know something, I'd much
rather have blood drawn than go through an amnio. Of course,
there would still be things you could only tell from amnio,
but I suspect most amnios are done to detect chomosomal
anomalies.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Leslie]

Circe wrote:

>
> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)


I wish I'd had this info a few weeks ago, since the column
I write for our Diocesan paper was on sex selection last month. :-)

Predictably, I think this is a bad thing. Aside from the unethical
uses I'm sure will occur, I just wonder what the impact is on
kids of their parents have nine months to come up with pre-conceived
expectations based on gender.

Leslie

[Joybelle]

"Circe" > wrote in message
oups.com...


> I have to say that I wonder how accurate the test would be for women
> who've already had a boy baby in a previous pregnancy. I have always
> understood that the Y chromosomes from the fetus float around in the
> mother's bloodstream for several years after giving birth to a boy.
>
> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)

I personally wouldn't do the test, but that's because I haven't felt like
finding out the gender for any of my pregnancies ( I do know this one, but
that was more to do with circumstances than anything). If someone else
wants to, I guess that's fine with me. :)

Joy

[Caledonia]

Circe wrote:
> I am listening to Day-To-Day on Slate and just heard about this (rest
> of the article is at
> http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/women/articles/2005/06/27/test_reveals_gender_early_in_pregnancy/):
>
> Test reveals gender early in pregnancy
> Ethicists fear use in sex selection
> By Carey Goldberg, Globe Staff | June 27, 2005
>
> First came the home pregnancy test. Now here comes the home gender
> test.
>
> A new blood test being marketed to American women offers them the
> chance to find out whether they are having a boy or a girl almost as
> soon as they realize they are pregnant, as early as five weeks along.
>
> Just two or three days after mailing the test overnight to a Lowell lab
> for processing, a pregnant woman can know what color to paint the
> nursery -- or even decide whether to get an abortion if she wants a
> child of the opposite sex, a prospect that worries ethicists.
>
> The $275 test works by detecting and analyzing fetal DNA floating in
> the mother's blood, a method that researchers say holds promise for
> serious clinical uses, from cancer testing to prenatal diagnosis of
> Down syndrome.
>
> The test, called the Baby Gender Mentor, is meant for ''the type of
> woman who can't wait to open Christmas presents," said Sherry Bonelli,
> president of Mommy's Thinkin', the company that is marketing the test
> at an online pregnancy store.
> =================
>
> I have to say that I wonder how accurate the test would be for women
> who've already had a boy baby in a previous pregnancy. I have always
> understood that the Y chromosomes from the fetus float around in the
> mother's bloodstream for several years after giving birth to a boy.
>
> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)
> --
> Be well, Barbara

I think it's pretty cool, and would have ordered the tests in my
earlier pregnancies (although I find it oddly offensive to be akin to
'the kind of woman who can't wait to open presents.') Although the
price is steep, it would have been a better use of our money than
buying a crib...that was used to store toys.

Caledonia

[Anne Rogers]

> I think the boat has sailed on prenatal sex determination.
> Nearly everyone does it. I find that somewhat sad (even though
> I would have caved with #3), but there ya go. I do think it's
> great if there's a less invasive way to get the job done. It
> would be nice to think it would lessen the number of u/s, but
> I don't think it will. I think the biggest value will be if
> it becomes accurate enough to use it instead of amnio so that
> those who need the information won't have to take the risks
> of amnio. Heck, if I needed to know something, I'd much
> rather have blood drawn than go through an amnio. Of course,
> there would still be things you could only tell from amnio,
> but I suspect most amnios are done to detect chomosomal
> anomalies.

ultimately if they can get the info about sex they should be able to get the
other chromosome info, at least that was what I understood from the grant
applications, research proposals etc. I read a few years ago when I was
offered a research post in the computer side of this kind of stuff
(sometimes wish I'd been able to take it up, but DH couldn't find a job in
the area we would have had to move to).

Anne

[V.]

"Anne Rogers" > wrote in message
...
>

>
> ultimately if they can get the info about sex they should be able to get
> the other chromosome info, at least that was what I understood from the
> grant applications, research proposals etc. I read a few years ago when I
> was offered a research post in the computer side of this kind of stuff
> (sometimes wish I'd been able to take it up, but DH couldn't find a job in
> the area we would have had to move to).
>
> Anne
>

That's the hope, that amnio will become obsolete once fetal *cells* can
easily be derived from maternal blood. Right now, they are just testing for
the presence/absence of Y chromosome DNA free-floating in the maternal
blood. I suspect they are using FISH-Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization
which mixes a complementary strand of fluorescently marked DNA with the
maternal blood and is then washed away. When you look at it under a
microscope with a special light that makes the marker fluoresce you see
little lights where the marker bonded with the DNA you were looking for (in
this case Y chromosome). If there is no matching DNA, all the fluorescence
gets washed away because it didn't have anything to hold on to.
Since right now they aren't reliably getting whole fetal cells, so they
can't do a full chromosome count. Doing FISH to look for chromosome 21 for
example will just show you it's there, not how many per cell unless you have
whole cells, and also won't differentiate between fetal and maternal. It is
possible to isolate nucleated fetal cells from maternal blood, it's just too
difficult right now for mass use. The day is coming though!

[Ericka Kammerer]

Anne Rogers wrote:

>>I think the boat has sailed on prenatal sex determination.
>>Nearly everyone does it. I find that somewhat sad (even though
>>I would have caved with #3), but there ya go. I do think it's
>>great if there's a less invasive way to get the job done. It
>>would be nice to think it would lessen the number of u/s, but
>>I don't think it will. I think the biggest value will be if
>>it becomes accurate enough to use it instead of amnio so that
>>those who need the information won't have to take the risks
>>of amnio. Heck, if I needed to know something, I'd much
>>rather have blood drawn than go through an amnio. Of course,
>>there would still be things you could only tell from amnio,
>>but I suspect most amnios are done to detect chomosomal
>>anomalies.
>
>
> ultimately if they can get the info about sex they should be able to get the
> other chromosome info, at least that was what I understood from the grant
> applications, research proposals etc. I read a few years ago when I was
> offered a research post in the computer side of this kind of stuff
> (sometimes wish I'd been able to take it up, but DH couldn't find a job in
> the area we would have had to move to).

Right, they ought to be able to get the chromosomal
information, but they wouldn't be able to get information on,
say, MSAFP, or lung maturity, or perhaps rh antibody titre,
etc. So, it wouldn't eliminate amnio, but I imagine it could
drop the number of amnios substantially.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Circe]

"Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
...
> Circe wrote:
>> Whether or not it's accurate, what do you all think of this? (And how
>> many of you are about to call and order up the test?)
>
> I think the boat has sailed on prenatal sex determination.
> Nearly everyone does it.

Yep. And I think the fears that people in the US and other Western countries
would use such early results to terminate pregnancies if the fetus is the
"wrong" gender are largely unwarranted. I suppose there might be a very few
statistical outliers who have a fairly large number of children of only one
gender who would terminate if the fetus wasn't of the opposite gender, but I
really doubt that would happen often enough to justify not allowing the test
to be used. Now, in places like China and India, you're looking at a
different metric, but since people there are terminating mid-pregnancy after
fetal sex determination, I really don't see that this type of test would
make the situation *worse*.

> I find that somewhat sad (even though
> I would have caved with #3), but there ya go.

Heh. I was the opposite. I didn't know with #1 or #2 because they didn't
cooperate during the ultrasound, and then I decided I didn't want to know
with #3, but there he was, displaying the goods at just shy of 14 weeks! But
then, I already had the requisite boy and girl by that time, so the gender
of #3 wasn't really a concern.

> I do think it's
> great if there's a less invasive way to get the job done. It
> would be nice to think it would lessen the number of u/s, but
> I don't think it will. I think the biggest value will be if
> it becomes accurate enough to use it instead of amnio so that
> those who need the information won't have to take the risks
> of amnio. Heck, if I needed to know something, I'd much
> rather have blood drawn than go through an amnio. Of course,
> there would still be things you could only tell from amnio,
> but I suspect most amnios are done to detect chomosomal
> anomalies.
>
Definitely. Although the determination can be done so much earlier than an
amnio or even CVS that you'd have quite a bit of waiting to do before you
could find out for sure through an amnio what was going on.
--
Be well, Barbara

[Ericka Kammerer]

Circe wrote:

> "Ericka Kammerer" > wrote in message
> ...

>>I do think it's
>>great if there's a less invasive way to get the job done. It
>>would be nice to think it would lessen the number of u/s, but
>>I don't think it will. I think the biggest value will be if
>>it becomes accurate enough to use it instead of amnio so that
>>those who need the information won't have to take the risks
>>of amnio. Heck, if I needed to know something, I'd much
>>rather have blood drawn than go through an amnio. Of course,
>>there would still be things you could only tell from amnio,
>>but I suspect most amnios are done to detect chomosomal
>>anomalies.
>>
>
> Definitely. Although the determination can be done so much earlier than an
> amnio or even CVS that you'd have quite a bit of waiting to do before you
> could find out for sure through an amnio what was going on.

Well, if they get to the point where they're able to
isolate fetal cells, rather than just particular chromosomes,
and it's far enough removed from the last pregnancy, presumably
the results *would* be accurate enough for the chromosomal
issues. That'll remain to be seen, though.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Anne Rogers]

> Yep. And I think the fears that people in the US and other Western
> countries would use such early results to terminate pregnancies if the
> fetus is the "wrong" gender are largely unwarranted. I suppose there might
> be a very few statistical outliers who have a fairly large number of
> children of only one gender who would terminate if the fetus wasn't of the
> opposite gender, but I really doubt that would happen often enough to
> justify not allowing the test to be used. Now, in places like China and
> India, you're looking at a different metric, but since people there are
> terminating mid-pregnancy after fetal sex determination, I really don't
> see that this type of test would make the situation *worse*.

you know I heard a really interesting radio program yesterday about the
ratio of sexes, there was research that indicated that for some unknown
reason women who are carriers of hepB have 1.5 boys to every girl, someone
looked into it more thoroughly at population level and there were various
naturally occuring controls, such as white Alaskans alongside native
Alaskans, where the sex ratio follows the differing rates of hepB which is
greater in native Alaskans, working through the statistics it was calculated
that around half the "missing women" in places like China could be accounted
for due to hepB rates. As it's very difficult to collect stats on the true
rate of terminating due to sex, this result suggests things might not be as
bad as previously thought, which is a good thing.

Anne