relationship between R / L handedness and birthweight study

[albatros]

The university of Southampton have just finished a study into handedness and concluded that birth weight is a major factor in determining it. In a study of 212 children they found 20% of low birth weight were left handed compared to 6% of normal to high BW
So for my unscientific study add you DD / DS birth weight and handedness
DD1 7lb 6 R H
DD2 4lb 6 L H

Ds1 9lbs 8oz RH

Ds2 9lbs LH

DS 5lbs.5ozs LH

DD aged 10 - 8lb 4 LH for writing although she doesn't really have a dominant hand as such

DS aged 8 - 8lb 7 RH

sorry I think its a load of crap... but I will be happy to be proved wrong

DS 10lbs 1/2 oz RH
DD 10lbs 10oz RH

DD 6lb 12oz, aged 3 LH

ds1 9ibs 9oz RH
ds2 9lbs LH
dd 6lbs 9oz think RH at the mo

OHHHHHH... there does seem to be a link. Keep them comming

DD - 7lb 11 1/2 oz - LH

DS - 8lb 5 oz - RH

DD 7lb4 RH
DS 8lb3.5 LH
DD 9lb15 RH
DS 11lb1 RH (mostly) - Although we did suspect he was going to be left handed for a long time but since starting school he is RH)

Cant say with my girls yet but...

my brother : 7lbs 8oz - RH
me : 5lbs something - LH

DS 10lb5 RH
DD 10lb1 RH

Me 9lb5 LH
my sister over 9lb LH
dad 8lb 12 LH

I think its genetic

ds1 8.7 born at 35 weeks
ds2 9.2 born at 38 weeks
me 4.10 born at 32 weeks

don't know about dh but we are all RH

Me 6lb ?? RH
db 7lb ?? LH but forced to use RH to write

dd 5lb 9oz RH
ds 6lb 5oz RH

DS1 5lb 11 oz RH
DD 5 lb 13 oz RH
DS2 6lb 15 oz (not sure yet but showing signs of RH)

DD1 7LB 7 LH
DD2 7lb 2 RH

ds1 6lb 12 1/4 oz RH

ds2 8lb 3oz LH

their uncle is also left handed who was the biggest out of him and their dad who is right handed

i think their study is a load of cr*p!!

212 isn't very many children though, is it? There are something like 650,000 live births every year! Could be a statistical anomaly.

FWIW ds appears to be right-handed and was 8lb 7oz.

dd1 6lb 10 RH
dd2 7lb 10 RH

Ds1 8lb 8oz RH
Ds2 8lb 8oz RH
Dd1 7lb 5oz LH
Dd2 7lb LH

If there's anything in this study, which seems to have been conducted on a rather small number of children, I wonder if it's to do with a reported link between the number of scans a baby is subjected to in utero. The more scans, the more likely a child will be LH and perhaps low-weight babies have had more scans due to concerns about their condition? Fwiw, I had no scans with the ds's but was scanned several times with the dd's.

ds 5lbs 7 oz RH
dd 6lbs 14 oz LH

Can't remember the exact figures, but of myself and my three siblings brother #1 was the heaviest (8lb 8oz, I think, with the rest of us between 7 and 8lb), and is the only left-hander. And of DH and his two siblings DH was the heaviest (9lb 7oz) and is also the only left-hander.

Not sure of DS's handedness yet.

DD 10lbs - LH
DS 10lbs - RH

Ha!

The 212 children studied were between 14 - 16 years I don't know if scanning was as popular then as it is now. The article in the Observer mentions that other researchers have questionned weather other factors such as birth order, gender, smoking in pregancy, etc. were taken into account, the team at Southampton say that the link persists even when other factors are considered.
I to had alot of scans with dd2 who is LH. No one in my family or DP's is LH so I don't think it is genetic

Scanning was definitely routine when I had dd1 in 1987. There's only one LH cousin in our family so I doubt it's genetic for us either.

me 8lb 4oz LH