Diet May Influence Sex of Baby

Women who consumed more calories while pregnant had more males than women on lower-calorie diets. Cynthia Graber reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Podcast Transcript: Considering getting pregnant and want to influence whether you have a boy or a girl? According to new research published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, you might want to check out your diet. Scientists at the Universities of Exeter and Oxford in England followed 750 first-time pregnant women. The women were asked about their eating habits before and during pregnancy. They were split into three groups based on the sheer number of calories consumed and the healthfulness of their diets.

For the women who consumed more calories and received a wider range of nutrients, 56 percent had boys. This group was also the most likely to eat breakfast. Among the women with the lowest caloric intake, only 45 percent had boys.

The study is the first linking sex determination with diet in humans.  Although it’s been known in some animals that more calories equals more males. And while those of us in the West have plenty of calories available, in the US and UK the boy-to-girl ratio has been slipping. Possibly because mothers are on low-calorie diets or are skipping breakfast.

—Cynthia Graber

60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast: RSS | iTunes

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe