Does fetal heart rate accurately predict baby gender? - Mothering Forums

Does fetal heart rate accurately predict baby gender?

View Poll Results: Did the fetal heart rate accurately predict your baby's gender? Boy>140 Girls<140
Yes 30 100.00%
No 50 100.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 3. You may not vote on this poll
Carsonsmama's Avatar Carsonsmama (TS)
05:01 PM Liked: 10
#1 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 325
Joined: May 2004
So I am interested in seeing how often the fetal heart rate was correct in the gender prediction of the baby.
They say if the babies heart beat is over 140 beats/minute it is a girl....anything under is a boy.
It was correct with my DS who's heart rate was 120 beats/minute....just went to the doctor and this one is 155 beats/ am I having a girl then????
Just curious if the heart rate was correct in predicting your baby's gender!!
Carsonsmama's Avatar Carsonsmama (TS)
05:07 PM Liked: 10
#2 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 325
Joined: May 2004
AHHH!! I screwed up my less then /greater then signs!!! I don't know how to edit the poll!!


BOYS should be less than 140 beats/minute

GIRLS should be more than 140 beats/minute!

emmasmommy's Avatar emmasmommy
05:15 PM Liked: 10
#3 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 1,111
Joined: Feb 2004
My dd's heart rate was almost always 160bpm or higher, so it was correct in that case. This baby so far it has been 170 one time and 150 the next time, so I guess that would mean girl again, but I am kind of getting boy vibes with this baby, so who knows.
operamommy's Avatar operamommy
05:19 PM Liked: 12
#4 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 2,817
Joined: Nov 2004
We just had our ultrasound on Monday. The tech asked me what I thought the baby was, and I said "girl." She said, "Well, the heartbeat sounds like a boy, but we'll see." She was right. We were about 170 the first time the heartbeat was heard, and after that it has been in the 140s-130s.
MelMel's Avatar MelMel
05:23 PM Liked: 172
#5 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 1,863
Joined: Nov 2002
I thought this was just a wives tale or bs when I heard it....but when BOTH my midwives said it last week, I had to ask if it was actually something people 'count' on. My homebirth midwife said it was 'pretty' accurate, and my hospital/prenatal midwife said it was 70% accurate.

but i am still in the early part of my pregnancy (17 weeks) and from what they said it isnt really an indicator until later in pregnancy, as all babies are fast beaters in the early stages.

my girl was 160. this time I was 160 at one visit, and 150 the last who knows! its still high but it may be going down, lol
RyvreWillow's Avatar RyvreWillow
06:08 PM Liked: 12
#6 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 539
Joined: Mar 2005
I don't know, because my **former** ob never told me such "unimportant" stuff like my baby's heartrate--i didn't even know they recorded that *rolls eyes*

I posted this question awhile back, and almost everyone who responded told me it was just an old wives' tale. A friend of mine, and a midwife on another messageboard both told me it was accurate, so if it is, i guess we're having a girl (always 160 bpm). Our ultrasound didn't tell us anything, because that stubborn little baby wouldn't move its feet from the area of interest, haha!
AngelBee's Avatar AngelBee
06:10 PM Liked: 15
#7 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 19,261
Joined: Sep 2004
Nope! All 3 of my kids have the heart rate of the opposite sex!
mightymoo's Avatar mightymoo
06:16 PM Liked: 11
#8 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 10,291
Joined: Dec 2003
Ever since I had a nonstress test on my daughter I can't believe anyone can think this is true. I watched the strip as her heartbeat continuously fluctuated from 120 to 160 and down again. (This is what all babies do by the way).

Babies heartrates don't stay at a particular speed, they vary greatly from minute to minute and hour to hour. How on earth then does that predict the gender? at your appointment the midwife listens for less than a minute - this is a snapshot of the heartrate at that time, a minute later it could be above or below that line.
cuqui's Avatar cuqui
07:15 PM Liked: 10
#9 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 316
Joined: Apr 2004
Both my dd's were in the 160's at all times and they were girls, my midwife has it the other way around girls>140, boys<140. So this way it was accurate, but as it is above it was not accurate.

This one is at exactly 140 the 2 times we checked. Baby is going to keep us guessing until his or her arrival.
Carsonsmama's Avatar Carsonsmama (TS)
07:20 PM Liked: 10
#10 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 325
Joined: May 2004
Originally Posted by Carsonsmama
AHHH!! I screwed up my less then /greater then signs!!! I don't know how to edit the poll!!


BOYS should be less than 140 beats/minute

GIRLS should be more than 140 beats/minute!

MamanFrancaise's Avatar MamanFrancaise
08:22 PM Liked: 15
#11 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 1,360
Joined: Apr 2004
Nope. My DD's rate was always around 140 throughout the entire pregnancy.
lunamegn's Avatar lunamegn
09:16 PM Liked: 10
#12 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 1,068
Joined: Nov 2004
My mom said that this was true and that my heartrate was <150 during her pregnancy and so she swears this is a girl because the heartrate is always over 150. I asked my midwife about it and she said that it was basically an old wives' tale but that it would be interesting to compare heartrates and sex in families and see if there's some sort of corrolation.
Galatea's Avatar Galatea
10:31 PM Liked: 432
#13 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 7,153
Joined: Jun 2004
It doesn't have anything to do with it. When their little hearts first start beating they become very fast, like 180s, and then as they grow, they slow down. So your "girl" at 3 months may be a "boy" at 6 months!
mclisa's Avatar mclisa
11:21 PM Liked: 15
#14 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 5,713
Joined: Jul 2004
The heartrate is more affected by size. Think hummingbird vs. elephant. When the baby is 13 weeks then it makes more sense to be 180's. Then as the baby grows it slows down. Boys tend to be bigger than girls on average so they tend to have a slower heartbeat, but necessarily.
stafl's Avatar stafl
11:31 PM Liked: 10
#15 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 9,123
Joined: Jul 2002
DD1's heartrate stayed around 160 most of the time.
DD2's heartrate stayed around 130...

I voted no.
leosmama20's Avatar leosmama20
11:48 PM Liked: 10
#16 of 30
05-26-2005 | Posts: 553
Joined: May 2004
It was with my first. My second (who is a boy) however, is all over. But he is always over 140.
caligirl's Avatar caligirl
12:03 AM Liked: 10
#17 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 487
Joined: Jul 2004
My Dd was always 160-170,....with this second pregnancythe heart rate was always in the 140's. We though..boy, but nope, it's another girl!!!

We're sure, I had to have 2 level II sonos.
LianneM's Avatar LianneM
12:44 AM Liked: 18
#18 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 3,191
Joined: May 2004
Wrong for us! DS was always around 170
kel's Avatar kel
01:51 AM Liked: 10
#19 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 885
Joined: Nov 2001
I think it's just one of those things - it seems to be "right" for a lot of people, but sometimes it isn't! It was right for all three of my kids, *toward the second half of the pregnancy*. Early on they all had the higher rate heartbeart, but toward the end my boys were routinely around 130 or 140, and my daughter was in the 150s. It's also been right for most of my friends and family. It may not be scientific or make sense, but not everything does!, and there are probably equal numbers of doctors and midwives who either do or don't believe in it. It's just fun.
musingmama's Avatar musingmama
01:56 AM Liked: 10
#20 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 420
Joined: Oct 2004
hmmm well, my ds' heartrate was always between 150-160 all pregnancy .... and he is a boy! hmmm... I wouldnt think you can judge the gender by that... it reminds me of when i was in my mamas belly and the dr was insistent that I was a boy (before ultrasound) because I was so active and big and kicked a lot!
nikandgeisel's Avatar nikandgeisel
10:38 AM Liked: 10
#21 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 133
Joined: May 2004
Both pregnancies (opposite sexes) have been around 150 the entire time.
LolaEight's Avatar LolaEight
11:26 AM Liked: 10
#22 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 97
Joined: May 2004
Both my boy and my girl had the exact same heartbeats the whole time. Weird. I think they were about 153 ish.
Hey Mama!'s Avatar Hey Mama!
03:31 PM Liked: 34
#23 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 2,903
Joined: Dec 2003
It's been true for me all three times. Heart rates in the 150's all girls
LacieD's Avatar LacieD
06:47 PM Liked: 12
#24 of 30
05-27-2005 | Posts: 581
Joined: Feb 2005
My peanut's heartbeat has never been lower than 148, and usually ran in the 150's-160's. We used to listen every night with a doppler. He's definitely a boy!
LoveChild421's Avatar LoveChild421
03:32 PM Liked: 78
#25 of 30
05-29-2005 | Posts: 4,490
Joined: Sep 2004
As soon as my midwife listened to the heartbeat around 12 weeks she looked at me and said "It's a boy" and she was right!
paniscus's Avatar paniscus
10:27 PM Liked: 10
#26 of 30
05-30-2005 | Posts: 640
Joined: Oct 2003
I had to be hooked up to a fetal monitor for 4 hours and the hr fluctuated the ENTIRE time so I don't see how it could predict the sex unless our baby changes from a boy to a girl every few minutes :LOL .
Sagesgirl's Avatar Sagesgirl
02:16 AM Liked: 174
#27 of 30
05-31-2005 | Posts: 3,262
Joined: Nov 2001
It doesn't make sense when you think about it. Even if a midwife is right, she's got about a 50/50 chance (actually slightly better if she errs on the side of boy, since boys seem to be a teeny bit more common). It's like most urban legends, we tend to remember the incidents that fit in with the theory, and ignore the ones that don't. Which isn't to say that you shouldn't look at it for fun, but I'd hate to think anyone was counting on it.

Both my girls hovered right at 140, usually. Of course as MightyMoo said, I found out through occasional monitoring of an hour or two at a time that my babies' heartrates would vary quite a bit.
kenziesuexo's Avatar kenziesuexo
06:43 PM Liked: 10
#28 of 30
11-15-2013 | Posts: 1
Joined: Nov 2013

How far along were you when you first heard the heart beat

Blanca78's Avatar Blanca78
09:55 AM Liked: 263
#29 of 30
11-19-2013 | Posts: 2,078
Joined: Jul 2009

Both babies have hovered around the 140s, both girls.

Kryston Fowler's Avatar Kryston Fowler
12:58 AM Liked: 0
#30 of 30
05-20-2014 | Posts: 2
Joined: May 2014
A study done in 1993 at the University of Kentucky seemed to prove this theory right, finding that the fetal heartbeat could be used accurately to predict the sex of 91% of boys and 74% of girls. But subsequent studies all disagree. "I also tell my patients that there must be other atmospheric conditions that affect this because you have a run of babies where this theory tends to work, and then suddenly you can't get one right to save your life!" Crane says.
Reply Subscribe I'm Pregnant
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3