The Returning Soldier Effect

[Sebastião II]

Today I came across this very interesting topic and I didn't find any thread with it so...
1. Is the returning soldier effect real/true?
2. If so, what's the cause? (is it reincarnation?)

 

[Tauriel]

Any answer to this must be speculation on our part.
But what first comes to my mind is:
The universe always strives for balance.

There are different hypotheses that try to explain this phenomena though.

Returning soldier effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Returning soldier effect is a phenomenon which suggests that more boys are born during and immediately after wars.[1][2] This effect is one of the many factors influencing human sex ratio.
The phenomenon was first noticed in 1883 by Carl Düsing of the University of Jena, who suggested that it was a natural regulation of the status quo. Writing in 1899, an Australian physician, Arthur Davenport, used Düsing's findings to hypothesize that the cause was the difference between the comparative ill-health of the returning troops compared to the good health of their partners.[3] Research published in 1954 by Brian MacMahon and Thomas F. Pugh showed that the sex ratio of white live-births in the United States had shown a marked increase in favor of boys between 1945 and 1947, with a peak in 1946.[4] In 2007, Satoshi Kanazawa published a paper theorizing that the effect was due to "the fact that taller soldiers are more likely to survive battle and that taller parents are more likely to have sons". This was based on his research of British Army records from the First World War, which showed that "surviving soldiers were on average more than one inch (3.33 cm) taller than fallen soldiers".[1] Valerie Grant attributed it to changing hormone levels of women during war, as they tended to "adopt more dominant roles".[5][6] William H. James writing in 2008 gave an increase in coital rates by returning soldiers as a possible cause. He also noted that a fall in the ratio of male births had been recorded in Iran following the Iran–Iraq War, "explained by psychological stress causing pregnant women disproportionately to abort male fetuses".[

 

[ivanb]

I highly doubt Kanazawas' and Grants research, logic alone would suggest that taler soldiers where more exposed to projectiles both in dugouts and over the battle fields, and the surviving shorter soldiers passed their genetic disposition for shorter stature in the demographics, requiring several generations for genetics to reintroduce taller people demographically. As could be proven. And as for the theory that stronger willed women would gestate fewer males sounds like motivated research. My understang is that if the XX chromosome is healthier than the XY chromosome the offspring tended to become XY, and visa versa to create balance in the genetic pool, not accounting for acquired mental dispositions of course . At least that's what I was taught long ago. But I guess biological science has become more sophisticated lately. Lol

 

[Nević Nenad]

My guess would be that boys are born in bigger numbers than girls after the wars because boys get killed in same wars in much bigger numbers than girls. Nature's (or Universe's) way to get energy back in the balance.

If that really happens, that is.

 

[whitecoast]

Any answer to this must be speculation on our part.
But what first comes to my mind is:
The universe always strives for balance.

There are different hypotheses that try to explain this phenomena though.

That's kind of interesting. Maternal stress does disproportionately affect male fetuses. Even if they aren't aborted they tend to have lower birth weights and more tenuous health. So the stress of war and occupation would of course adversely affect them, resulting in a larger % of female births. On the other hand, the men who emerge victorious and survive seem more likely to have sons.

Between the two of these points, the more conquered and stressed city has more females, and the victorious city has more males. You do the math on that one.

 

[ivanb]

That's kind of interesting. Maternal stress does disproportionately affect male fetuses. Even if they aren't aborted they tend to have lower birth weights and more tenuous health. So the stress of war and occupation would of course adversely affect them, resulting in a larger % of female births. On the other hand, the men who emerge victorious and survive seem more likely to have sons.

Between the two of these points, the more conquered and stressed city has more females, and the victorious city has more males. You do the math on that one.

Knowing the effects of war on civilians and how returning soldiers from war effect gestation requires our keen attention, the obvious psychological traumas must be empirically researched. And on another note, why is western society experiencing such low birth rates let alone unhealthy births. It. Would almost seem that any environment tending to this outcome may be encouraged by different and cordinated sources. Good research for the sake of the populations are crucial.