Responses

Download PDFPDF

Sex differences in outcomes of very low birthweight infants: the newborn male disadvantage
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Vulnerability by sex and evolutionary theory

    Dear Editor,

    In a recent article Stevenson and colleagues[1] report further data showing increased vulnerability of male compared to female infants in early life, and comment that the biological mechanisms contributing to the male disadvantage or female advantage have not been elucidated.

    In fact, male vulnerability in early life is consistent with an aspect of evolutionary theory described by Trivers...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.