A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.parenting » Twins & Triplets
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Introduction and identical twin question



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #12  
Old February 26th 05, 03:35 AM
Terri and Rob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Maybe they are just going by the fact that they were in separate sacs.
Although we know differently in this group, a lot of people automatically
assume fraternal just because of separate sacs.

I even have people say that to me. My girls look so much alike that even my
husband and I have trouble telling them apart sometimes, but we have not had
them genetically tested. People argue with me that they MUST be fraternal
because they were in separate sacs and separate placentas.

Maybe that is what Mr and Mrs Olson are doing too.

--

Terri & Rob
Colton (11-29-00)
Aimee and Kylie (12-22-03)
Visit us at:
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a..._kylie_colton/

"Nick Theodorakis" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 23:59:19 GMT, (Paula Johnson)
wrote:

[..]

...Olson twins are fraternal and I can't tell them apart at all (not that
I try that hard ;-)


So the claim goes. I wonder if they have been genetically tested, or
just relying on the word of the OB.

Nick

--
Nick Theodorakis

contact form:
http://theodorakis.net/contact.html



  #14  
Old February 28th 05, 11:10 PM
Cindy Wells
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Smith wrote in
9.130:

snip

When we found out that we were expecting twins last year, I did a lot
of research. One thing I found was the talk of a third type of twin,
ie not truely fraternal but not truely identical. These supposedly
would come from one egg that splits and gets fertilized with two
sperm. Therefore the mother's half of the genetic material is
identical in both twins, which explains "fraternal" twins that look
remarkably similar. I just googled and found this:
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/b...pages/Twins_id
entic al_and_fraternal?open

Supposedly this third type of twin is almost impossible to prove and
cannot be distinguished from fraternal (which is just basically
non-identical)



Actually, DNA testing would differentiate between all three possibilities.
Fraternal twins will share 50% of their genes, ID's 99% (I don't think
current tests admit 100% accuracy) and the polar body twins will share
75% of their genetic structure.

Cindy Wells
(who has enough bio and biochem to have heard of many of the issues with
DNA analysis)
Steve


  #15  
Old February 28th 05, 11:39 PM
Steve Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cindy Wells wrote in
. 142:

Steve Smith wrote in
9.130:

snip

When we found out that we were expecting twins last year, I did a lot
of research. One thing I found was the talk of a third type of twin,
ie not truely fraternal but not truely identical. These supposedly
would come from one egg that splits and gets fertilized with two
sperm. Therefore the mother's half of the genetic material is
identical in both twins, which explains "fraternal" twins that look
remarkably similar. I just googled and found this:
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/b...pages/Twins_id
entic al_and_fraternal?open

Supposedly this third type of twin is almost impossible to prove and
cannot be distinguished from fraternal (which is just basically
non-identical)



Actually, DNA testing would differentiate between all three
possibilities. Fraternal twins will share 50% of their genes, ID's 99%
(I don't think current tests admit 100% accuracy) and the polar body
twins will share 75% of their genetic structure.

Cindy Wells
(who has enough bio and biochem to have heard of many of the issues
with DNA analysis)
Steve




Oh, is that what people mean by saying "Polar Body twins"? I heard that
term for the first time on a post here in the last week or so and didn't
know what it meant. I didn't realize that "type" of twin was actually
recognized, in the original article I read (not the one I linked to), it
sounded like the author was just throwing a wild idea or something. Why the
term "Polar Body"? I ask the question, but I'm just gonna google it now
anyway, heh...

Steve
  #16  
Old March 1st 05, 12:11 AM
Cindy Wells
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve Smith wrote in
9.130:
snip



Oh, is that what people mean by saying "Polar Body twins"? I heard
that term for the first time on a post here in the last week or so and
didn't know what it meant. I didn't realize that "type" of twin was
actually recognized, in the original article I read (not the one I
linked to), it sounded like the author was just throwing a wild idea
or something. Why the term "Polar Body"? I ask the question, but I'm
just gonna google it now anyway, heh...

Steve


I don't know how many actually accept the idea. However, polar body is
the term I've heard most often for it. (I suspect the phrase gets its
start from some portion of the cell splitting to egg cycle.)

Cindy Wells
(I haven't heard any DNA studies that give percentages of twins tested
that turned out to include polar body twinning)
  #17  
Old March 1st 05, 03:42 AM
Nick Theodorakis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 17:11:14 -0600, Cindy Wells
wrote:

Steve Smith wrote in
. 99.130:
snip



Oh, is that what people mean by saying "Polar Body twins"? I heard
that term for the first time on a post here in the last week or so and
didn't know what it meant. I didn't realize that "type" of twin was
actually recognized, in the original article I read (not the one I
linked to), it sounded like the author was just throwing a wild idea
or something. Why the term "Polar Body"? I ask the question, but I'm
just gonna google it now anyway, heh...

Steve


I don't know how many actually accept the idea.


I don't. I haven't been able to find any evidence for it in the
medical literature, either. Several years ago, I wrote some comments
about this on this ng:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.twins-triplets/msg/75bd419f47b413dc
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.parenting.twins-triplets/msg/0e469913a768cac4


Nick


--
Nick Theodorakis

contact form:
http://theodorakis.net/contact.html
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.