Not just X, Y

For all these years we have known that the child's sex is determined by the X, Y chromosomes. But now a new report suggests that dietary habits may have something to do with it too. While this may help explain demographics in some countries, I fear it could be misused.

We all know those anti-sex determination or anti-female infanticide ads on Doordarshan. The doctor would always show the couple a chart and explain how the father is responsible for the female child and not the woman. The intention being to stop people blaming and harassing the daughter-in-law for having daughters. However, we know that not everyone gets the message and women continue to suffer for having girls. And in spite of sex-determination laws female fetus abortions continue.

Though the new study may need more scrutiny before it becomes a 'fact', the sheer mention of it should be enough for such people to blame the woman again. Of course another extreme could be that people modify diets in the hope to have a girl child. But I do hope that the study helps to increase awareness about eating habits, and study demographic patterns rather than to serve the interests of anti-girl-child monsters.

Sunday irony

I have been having increasing instances of difficulty with falling asleep. And after a really bad instance last night, I chance upon this story in today's TOI. "Educated women sleep better than men. Ironic? Or rather balach!

Mobiles and tumors

I thought this correlation was rubbished years ago. The study says that the "risk of developing a parotid gland tumour is nearly 50% higher for frequent mobile phone users -- more than 22 hours a month." Though such tumors are non-cancerous and only lead to an increase in size of the gland, some could be cancerous.

I am sure most of us spend more than a day a month talking on the cell. And then we just started a few years back. How about the next generations who use the cell right from high school? Those whose livelihood depends upon these cellphones? A 50% higher risk could translate into a real big number. So are my days numbered?

The Haitian

I find it very disturbing that a single person from Haiti could be instrumental in bringing the AIDS pandemic to the US. The BBC reports:

"With this data, they recreated a family tree for the virus, which they believe shows conclusively that the strain came to the US via Haiti - probably via a single person - in around 1969."

It raises questions about the sexual behavior of the US society. Rather about humans in general. If the general acceptance of monogamy, disdain of cheating is as widespread as it appears to be, a single person should have infected only a few dozen at the most. Even considering that his children passed it on and so forth, the person in question is believed to have entered US only in 1969. I am exaggerating no doubt, but is it really possible for a single person, or a few others from Haiti that came after him to have caused a pandemic?

I also fear if this would be used by some spiteful anti-immigration proponent to back his stance. I hope not!