The Student Room Group

Scientists have proven Telegony for the first time.. How scared are you ?

..
(edited 9 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Avatar for ilem
ilem
17
I don't care in the slightest.
I'm not too worried, as I'm not a fly.
Reply 3
Avatar for RYAN1872
RYAN1872
Original post by EmilyOphelia
I'm not too worried, as I'm not a fly.

Are you sure?:wink:
Reply 4
Avatar for Miss Posh
Miss Posh
So let me get this right... Is the article saying that if a pregnant women has sex with another male, then the male's sperm will influence the growth of the already fertilized egg, embryo? Or is it saying that I have traits of the guy my mother had sex with in school before she ever met my dad? I find that hard to believe.

And if it's true. My mum only has sex with attractive men, so what if I get their traits. It just means I have many fathers.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Hydroxy
You do realise most studies start on insects/animals right and end up holding true for most animals.

I suspect you were trying to be funny and failed miserably rather than miss a point that stupidly however. So i'll give you the benefit of the doubt.


Wow, that's too kind of you.
Until I find a sound explanation as to why this would occur, I'll dismiss this theory. The article states that these results must be repeated on say, mice, in order to begin speculating.
Reply 7
Avatar for Miss Posh
Miss Posh
Original post by Hydroxy
I've interpreted is as the males sperm influencing eggs in some way before begin fertilised.

He's a telegraph article that may be a bit better written.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11133203/Could-previous-lovers-influence-appearance-of-future-children.html


What a load of rubbish. So if I had sex with loads of black guys, then had a kid with a white guy, my kid would be half cast because the black guys have changed my growing eggs with their black DNA?
Original post by Miss Posh
What a load of rubbish. So if I had sex with loads of black guys, then had a kid with a white guy, my kid would be half cast because the black guys have changed my growing eggs with their black DNA?

there's only one way to find out

*unzips*
Original post by Hydroxy
You do realise most studies start on insects/animals right and end up holding true for most animals.

I suspect you were trying to be funny and failed miserably rather than miss a point that stupidly however. So i'll give you the benefit of the doubt.


Looks like someone (you) definitely isn't a scientist :rolleyes:
Original post by Hydroxy
No I'm not.

Do you think in light of these findings, one day it could be proved in humans or other animals too ?


In humans? Definitely not. There are some animal species whose females "store" sperm from mating to be used later on down the line, humans however do not share this trait, we would definitely know by now if we did we know a massive amount about our own reproductive systems, there is no way it would have gone amiss.
if true.. and there is a monumental 'IF' there..

Then it would make me very glad that I married someone who had no previous sexual partners.. at the time I did not care, as her sexual history would have no bearing at all on our future life, relationship or children.. But if this were true, and it did have an effect, even a very very small one, on our future children.. then that would have most definitely made me think twice about marrying someone with an extensive sexual history..
Extremely interesting, and not actually as unfeasible as I'd expected. It would be interesting to see what happens if they go on to test mammals. We may finally have an explanation for Prince Harry's hair.

However, experience would dictate that any effect in humans is likely to be very small. I remain sceptical until further tests are done.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Hydroxy
Good to know.

Would be great next time if you avoided the childish sarcasm and emoticons and just contributed to the thread like a mature human being.

Thanks.


I'll talk how I see fit, especially when someone is spouting pseudo-science on the internet pretending they know what they're talking about. Although in this thread the majority of people could probably deduct in their heads it's not possible for humans, had it been another topic you could have easily swayed people into thinking false scientific information which depending on the topic can be harmful. So no, I'll talk and respond how I like.

Also that's quite rich coming from you.
Only a virgin woman is worthy of harbouring my children
Original post by Hydroxy
Oh you go you. You all talking and responding how you like and see fit.

I wish I was as strong and independent as you. Amazing.

But as far as I'm concerned, I could have been deliberately, profusely and outright lieing in my original post and you coming along with winkey faces and sarcasm rather than a useful and mature opinion still would have seemed useless.

I think you just don't like criticism so you chose to argue back. There wasn't really anything unreasonable about what I said.

If it's rich coming from me, then don't do the same as me. You saying it's rich would make you a hypocrite too.


Such a big man aren't you?

If you were outright lying a fail to see the point in that, but to to each his own.

It wouldn't make me a hypocrite to say that, as for example say I'm eating a burger and you are also eating a burger and you say "you shouldn't eat that burger" that would be rich coming from you as you are doing the thing you are saying I should not do, whereas I never disagreed with the behaviour of eating the burger as such I cannot be a hypocrite for eating the burger.
Would love to know the specifics of how this could be possible in both insects and humans/other mammals.

Doesn't say anything of it, really.
Original post by hellodave5
Would love to know the specifics of how this could be possible in both insects and humans/other mammals.

Doesn't say anything of it, really.


Yeah it would have been great it if it had given links to the actual scientific articles and studies for reference as there is very little science in the texts.
Original post by SophieSmall
In humans? Definitely not. There are some animal species whose females "store" sperm from mating to be used later on down the line, humans however do not share this trait, we would definitely know by now if we did we know a massive amount about our own reproductive systems, there is no way it would have gone amiss.


I don't see how you can be certain that this couldn't potentially be found in humans.

We are discovering new things pretty often. Saying 'if it was true, we'd know already' doesn't really make sense.
This study shows that it may occur in fruit flies which are not exactly closest relatives, have significantly different reproductive methods to us and completely different life histories.

They even say that they have no evidence it occurs in other species at all.

If the study was done on say a mammal it might have some relevence but until then, nope. Plus mountains of research has been done on our own reproduction and hasn't shown anything like this.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you