That's interesting. I noticed they used data from 1734 to 1888. I wonder if the results would be much different with modern data? I have also read that either twins are more likely to be left handed, or left handed people are more likely to be twins (or have been twins at some stage of development since sometimes one twin stops developing in the womb). File that under "useless twin facts." :)
They did mention that they used data from those years because then it wouldn't be affected by modern fertility drugs/birth control. Which mostly concerned the 'number of kids' variable.
But yeah, it would be interesting to see how the modern data compared.
I have also read that either twins are more likely to be left handed, or left handed people are more likely to be twins (or have been twins at some stage of development since sometimes one twin stops developing in the womb).
Interesting. Esp as my twin-cousin are not lefties and my single-birth-sister is. :-P We just love to buck the odds in this family. O:-)
Comments 2
I have also read that either twins are more likely to be left handed, or left handed people are more likely to be twins (or have been twins at some stage of development since sometimes one twin stops developing in the womb). File that under "useless twin facts." :)
Reply
But yeah, it would be interesting to see how the modern data compared.
I have also read that either twins are more likely to be left handed, or left handed people are more likely to be twins (or have been twins at some stage of development since sometimes one twin stops developing in the womb).
Interesting. Esp as my twin-cousin are not lefties and my single-birth-sister is. :-P We just love to buck the odds in this family. O:-)
Reply
Leave a comment