Name start from s for baby boy: Baby Boy Names That Start With S

Baby Name Meaning, Origin and Popularity

• Pregnancy

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Baby & Toddler

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Parents

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Getting Pregnant

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Baby Names

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Product Reviews

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Registry

  RECOMMENDED READING

• Community

  RECOMMENDED COMMUNITY FORUMS

Follow Us

Name Search

Updated
June 25, 2023

Popularity:1027

Origin:Danish

Meaning:Stern; strict; severe

Soren is a masculine name of Danish origin, meaning “stern,” “strict,” or “severe.” It is derived from the Latin word severus, which means “stern,” and is related to the feminine name Sorine. This fierce name is most closely associated with Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, known for his groundbreaking work in the philosophy of existentialism. With a serious name like Soren, perhaps baby too will make great leaps and bounds in their future career.

On This Page

• Popularity Trend Chart
• Related Baby Names Lists
• Similar Names
• Sibling Name Ideas
• Parents Who Like the Name Soren Also Like

Similar Names

Explore similar sounding names to find other baby names for your My Favorites list.

• Daren
• Oren
• Warren
• Gordon
• Corban
• Corben
• Jordan
• Norman
• Dorian
• Lawrence
• Torrin
• Torrence
• Jordon
• Morgan
• Lawton
• Jaren
• Terran
• Jarren
• Efren
• Cyril

Parents Who Like the Name Soren Also Like:

• Rowan
• Wren
• Silas
• River
• Quinn
• Asher
• Sage
• Nova
• Atlas
• Willow
• Everett
• Wilder
• Kai
• Sawyer
• Emerson
• Finn
• Ezra
• Theo
• Maeve
• Arlo
• Sloane
• Harlow
• Luna
• Harper
• Luca
• Remi
• Ivy
• Avery
• Hazel
• Oliver

Related Baby Names Lists

Check out these related baby names lists to discover more baby boy and baby girl names and meanings.

• Baby Boy Names
• Cool Baby Names
• Baby Boy Names That Start With S
• Baby Names That Start With S
• Danish Baby Names
• Top 1000 Baby Names of 2021
• 121 Badass Baby Names
• Two Syllable Baby Names
• Aesthetic Baby Names
• Cozy Baby Names
• Baby Names Ending in N
• Baby Boy Names Ending in N
• August Baby Names
• Top 500 Short Baby Names
• Top 1000 Baby Names of 2023
• Leo Baby Names
• Baby Names Inspired by the Olympics
• The Top 400 Baby Names in 2020

Sibling Name Ideas

Are you looking for a sibling name for Soren? Here are some great options:

• Avery
• Skylen
• Stigr
• Carryn
• Jack
• Skielor
• Harper
• Troels
• Liam
• Lauge
• Noah
• Karen
• Emma
• Charlotte
• Daniel
• Olivia
• Ava
• Aiden

Not sure you have the perfect name? Search to add more baby names to your My Favorites list.

Article saved.Go to My Saved Articles

Article removed.

Baby Boy Names That Start with S

Along with starting your baby registry and planning a nursery, picking out a baby name is one of the more exciting things to do when you’re having a baby. But where to start? We’ve compiled a list of baby boy names starting with letter S to make things easier.

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

Baby Stephen is going to need the perfect nursery to go along with his perfect name.

Join millions of families who have used Babylist as their all-in-one registry.

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Gender-neutral

UniquePopular

GENDER

POPULARITY

Boy

UniquePopular

VIEW ALLBaby Girl Names That Start with SGender-Neutral Baby Names That Start with SSee the Names of Babylist Babes Born Last Week

This information is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. We do not accept any responsibility for any liability, loss or risk, personal or otherwise, incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, from any information or advice contained here. Babylist may earn compensation from affiliate links in this content. Learn more about how we write Babylist content and the Babylist Health Advisory Board.

20 ball games that will captivate children

You can listen to the short version of the article. If it’s more convenient for you, turn on the podcast.

Today’s children spend a lot of time on gadgets and often sit on the street staring at smartphones.

Many outdoor games are becoming a thing of the past, and this is not only a fun pastime, but also a great way to develop dexterity, speed and accuracy, not to mention social skills.

Below we list 20 ball games you can teach your child. Some of them are suitable for the home, others will be a great way to have fun while walking on the playground or on a trip to nature.

Indoor games

Although these games do not require a lot of free space, the ball can still accidentally hit something fragile. So get away from your new TV and your favorite vase so your fun doesn’t end in tears.

1. Edible-inedible

One player throws a ball to another and says a word that can mean something edible or not. In the first case, the ball must be caught, in the second — to hit. If the player makes a mistake, he becomes the leader.

This game is suitable for both toddlers 3-4 years old and older children. In the first case, you can use simple and familiar dishes like porridge, soup or bread, in the second, you can try more complex names, such as profiteroles, ribeye or artichokes.

Trick questions will do. For example, peacock-eye or silkworm larvae are quite edible, at least in the cuisines of Asia and Africa.

2. Home bowling

Another game for kids of all ages. For it, you can use both a medium-sized rubber, and a tennis or even a massage ball, if you have one.

An obstacle is built on the floor, such as a tower of blocks or several empty plastic bottles. Players then take turns trying to knock things down from a given distance.

3. Seated dodgeball

The players sit on the floor in a fairly wide circle, with the leader going down in the middle. Children throw the ball, trying to hit the person in the center, and he dodges by any means. The one who manages to hurt him goes to the middle and becomes the leader.

If dodging is difficult, you can set a rule — do not throw the ball, but roll it on the floor, like in a bowling alley.

4. Who was who

One player throws the ball to another while naming an object or living being. The second person must catch the ball and answer the question without a hitch.

For example, a chicken was a chicken or an egg, a cow was a calf, glass was sand. If the player does not know the answer, then he becomes the leader and asks the question himself.

5.

Rhymes

One player throws the ball to another and at the same time says any word of his choice. The second must catch the ball, name the rhyme as quickly as possible and throw it to the next.

If a lot of people participate in the game, you can exclude those who did not come up with a rhyme, if not enough — write down penalty points for a hitch and keep score.

6. I know five…

The player says: “I know five female names” and begins to hit the ball with his palm on the floor, accompanying each hit with a new name. When everyone is named, the ball goes to another child and he does the same without repeating.

If all the children completed the task, the following is given — for example, five male names, trees, birds, domestic or wild animals, brands of cars, fairy-tale characters, and so on.

If a player cannot name five of anything or loses the ball, he is out of the game. As an option — receives a penalty point.

7. Earth, air, fire, water

The players sit in a row, the driver stands in front of them. He throws the ball to the first in line and says one of the four words. When you hear «earth», you need to name an animal, «water» — a fish, «air» — a bird, and at the word «fire» wave your hands over your head.

If the player who received the ball did not catch it, did not give an answer or mixed up the commands, he becomes the driver.

8. Sabzhe (honey)

Players line up. The driver asks the first question: “What is your name?” and begins to offer answers by throwing the ball to the first player. If he doesn’t like the name, he hits the ball, if he likes it, he catches it. Now that’s his name.

If the player fails to hit the ball or catches it by accident, he is given the name that was called at the time of the throw. Also, the driver sometimes has to say “Sabzhe” or “Honey”, and if the child manages to catch the ball, he can be called by any name of his choice.

In this way, all people from the line pass, after which the following question is asked: “What is your last name?”.

The list of questions is something like this:

1. Where do you live?
2. What do you do?
3. Name and surname of the future husband/wife?
4. What kind of pet do you have?
5. How many children do you have and what are their names?

You can fantasize endlessly. The funnier the options, the better.

9. Catch — don’t catch

There are several variations of this game — with simple commands and with various tasks.

Players stand in a circle and throw the ball to each other, giving commands. If the throw sounds «catch», you need to catch the ball, if «do not catch» — hit it. Anyone who does not follow the command is out of the game or receives a penalty point if there are few participants.

You can make the game more difficult by adding some task. For example, if the name of the animal was heard during the throw, the ball is caught, if something else, it is beaten off. You can take absolutely any category: countries, pieces of furniture, insects, male or female names, and so on.

Outdoor games

1. Whoever is called catches

The game is good for getting to know each other and helps to learn the names of all the people in the company.

Children move freely around the court, and the leader throws the ball higher and calls the name. Having heard his own, the child must catch the ball.

2. Catch the ball (dog)

This game requires a minimum of three players. Two people are located at a distance from each other, and the third — the driver — stands in the middle between them.

Participants throw the ball to each other, and the driver tries to catch it or at least touch it. If he succeeds, he switches places with the last thrower.

If more than three people are involved in the game, you can stand in a triangle or circle and throw the ball over the center, where the driver will be.

3. Shtander-stop

Participants stand in a circle, the driver is in the center. He tosses the ball or throws it away and says the name of one of the participants. The named one runs after the ball, the rest — in different directions.

There is also another selection method. The driver closes his eyes and extends his hand. The rest of the players walk in a circle, and when he shouts: «Stop!», Stop. Whom the hand shows, that and run after the ball.

When a child, whose name was called (or who was pointed to by the hand), catches the ball, he shouts: “Shtander!” or «Stop!». At this point, all players must stop and freeze.

A child with a ball estimates the distance to the driver and names the number of steps it takes to reach him. Steps can be:

• giant — as wide as possible;
• «Lilliputian» — when the heel of one foot is placed close to the toe of the other;
• «umbrellas» — turns around;
• «camel» — a step to the distance of spitting;
• «frog» — jumping forward from a full squat.

These steps are usually mixed. For example, a child might say, «He’s got three giant steps, two camel steps, and three frog steps. » When he goes the distance in the chosen way, the driver folds his hands in the manner of a basketball hoop, which you need to hit with the ball.

If this succeeds, the child becomes the leader. Everyone returns to the circle and the game starts over. If he missed, the driver remains the same.

4. School of the ball

This game can be played with both a rubber children’s ball and a tennis ball. The latter option is more difficult and suitable for older children.

Players come up with various tasks with increasing difficulty, for example:

1. Throw the ball up and catch it.
2. Throw the ball up, clap and catch.
3. Throw the ball on the floor and catch it.
4. Hit the ball on the floor, clap your hands and catch.
5. Hit the ball against the wall and catch it with one hand.
6. Hit the ball against the wall, turn around and catch it.
7. Hit the ball on the floor and catch it with your eyes closed.
8. Throw the ball at the wall, let it hit the ground and catch it.
9. Throw the ball at the wall with your back to it, let the ball hit the ground and then catch it.
10. Jump over a bouncing ball.
11. Throw the ball from under the foot, from behind the head, while squatting.

You can also make the task more difficult by increasing the number of exact repetitions. For example, not just catch the ball after a turn, but do it five or ten times in a row.

5. Wall

Players line up against the wall. It is better to choose deaf, without windows. The first player in the column throws the ball higher so that it hits the wall and bounces off, after which it runs back and gets up last.

The next person must catch the ball and repeat the action. Those who do not have time are out of the game.

6. Eleven (potato)

Children stand in a circle and toss the ball to each other at random, counting out loud. The one who throws first says «One», the second one catches and says «Two», and so on. The player who is to say «eleven» must hit the ball.

If he does not do this (for example, he catches or misses altogether), he becomes a «potato» — he goes to the center of the circle and squats down.

The game starts again, and now the eleventh person must not only hit the ball, but try to hit the one sitting in the center. If successful, the “potato” returns to the circle with the others. If not, the thrower joins him in the center.

In this way, the game continues until the whole company gathers in the middle, and one person remains standing with the ball. Then you can start again or hit the ball on the ground 10 times, and on the 11th hit someone in the center.

7. Frog

Children line up in a column against the wall. First, a line is determined on it, above which you need to throw the ball, for example, according to the level of a tile, some kind of mark or window sill.

The first player throws the ball at the wall, and after it hits the ground, jumps over it, legs apart. If everything worked out, the child goes to the end of the line, and if the jump fails or the ball hits the leg, he is eliminated from the game. Then the player standing behind him turns on and performs the same actions.

The tasks become more difficult with each round. For example, instead of a “frog” jump, they make a “suitcase” when the child jumps on one leg, stretching the other to the side.

You can also throw the ball higher and higher or do it with your back to the wall, as well as jump over at the moment of the second bounce from the ground.

8. Hunters and foxes

The “foxes” children stand in a circle, and the “hunter” enters the center. He throws the ball up three times and catches it, after which the players scatter. The driver at this time throws a projectile at them.

If the «hunter» touches the «fox», she becomes his assistant and they chase the others together. Thus, there are more and more «hunters».

But if the ball hits the ground after an unsuccessful throw, the “foxes” can intercept it and throw it to each other without giving it to the “hunter” and his assistants.

The game continues until only one «fox» remains.

9. Grooter

Two large circles are drawn on the ground at a distance of about 15–20 paces from each other. In the first, all the participants in the game are standing, with the exception of one — the driver, or «grocer», who walks in the field.

One of the players hits the ball hard on the ground and runs into an empty circle. Together with him, a few more guys can try to get over, but no more than three.

At this time, the «grocer» catches the ball and from the same place throws it at the players who left the base. If he manages to knock down one of the runners, he becomes the new driver, and the last «grocer» gets up in the first circle to the children remaining there.

If the ball flies past, and the fugitives successfully reach the second circle, they remain there until the end of the game, and the driver catches the ball and returns it to the first group. The game starts again and continues until all the children have managed to get to the second round.

10. Deception

Children gather in a circle and put their hands behind their backs, and the leader stands in the center. He throws the ball to any player who must catch it.

The bottom line is that the ball can be thrown for real or just pretend. If the player gets his hands out from behind his back, but does not catch anything, he will change places with the player in the center.

11. Free ball

Players stand in a circle and place their feet shoulder-width apart so that the neighbors’ feet touch. The driver stands in the center and throws the ball between the legs of the participants, trying to knock it out of the circle.

The task of the players is to prevent him using his arms or legs, but then return the feet to their original position again. If the ball still leaves the circle, the one who missed it becomes the driver.

Read also 🧐

• What to play outdoors: 12 ideas for any company
• 11 games that will make children love cleaning and washing dishes
• Winter fun: 17 active games and other outdoor activities

Alien legacy: why the image of GMO products has deteriorated Anna Ivanova is a practicing bioinformatician and specialist in the analysis of biological and medical data.

With permission from Bombora Publishing, Forbes Life publishes an excerpt from her book How GMOs Save the Planet and Why People Get in the Way

«GMO causes infertility» and Superbacteria Cynthia, the legacy of aliens and hermaphrodite Amazons

Following the name of Dr. Pusztai in the list of scientists who express their concerns about genetic modification technologies, the name of Irina Ermakova almost always comes.

Irina Vladimirovna — “Soviet and Russian biologist. Candidate of Sciences in Psychology, Doctor of Biology, until September 2010 – Researcher at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences.” Also, Irina Vladimirovna is the author of the theory that our humanity descended from the hermaphrodite Amazon race, in which there were no men initially, and the ancient maidens did not need them. According to Ermakova, there is also “information” that GMO technologies were created by aliens, and we can only speculate why they did it.

In 2016, Irina Ermakova was awarded the title of Honorary Academician of VRAL at the second forum «Scientists Against Myths». Such an award is presented by well-known Russian scientists and educators «for an outstanding contribution to the development and dissemination of pseudoscience and pseudoscience.»

When the novel coronavirus pandemic began in 2020, all the news outlets wanted to get their hands on experts for comment. And as an expert, Irina Vladimirovna argued that it was not the virus that was to blame, but the bacterium Cynthia, which got out of control of scientists.

Related material

Ermakova is also a vocal opponent of COVID-19183 vaccination and even created a petition asking the government to ban it for children and pregnant women. Irina Vladimirovna has very few scientific works, and she prefers appearances on TV and controversial conferences, as well as publications in popular media, to publications in scientific journals.

But it’s time to move on to the work that brought Irina Ermakova her fame.

Unfortunate cubs

The article «Influence of genetically modified soybeans on birth weight and survival rate of rat pups» is the same «smoke source» for asserting the effect of GMOs on offspring and the formation of infertility. We will talk about it in the following chapters.

The introduction begins with a loud statement about the well-known complex effect of the use of GMOs on the body of animals, confirmed in many scientific papers. As this set are listed, in particular: another article by Ermakova herself, an article by Arpad Pusztai (the same one we met in chapter 3 “GMOs affect immunity, or you see the smoke — bring oil”), the work of a Norwegian scientist, anti-GMO activist and politician Terje Traavik (I highly recommend looking at the sidebar).

And now to the experiment itself. Female rats were divided into three groups, each of which was fed differently for two weeks:

— the first 6 rats received the usual diet and a supplement of GM soy;

— the second group of 3 rats — the usual food and the addition of traditional (non-GM) soy;

— the third, control, group of 6 rats — only the usual food, which did not include any soy at all.

The rats were seated in cages of three, and in each cage, separate containers of two types were installed: for the main feed and for soybeans diluted in water. Access to food in rats was free (no one controlled whether the rats shared the proposed soy in a sisterly way or only one female got all the contents).

After two weeks of such a life, the rats were given a group meeting with rat cavaliers placed in each cage. After the birth of the cubs, the female was moved to a separate cage along with the offspring for the feeding period. All this time, the females continued to receive the established diet.

Next, we had to count the mortality among the cubs and their physical parameters. According to the findings, among rat pups whose mothers ate GM soy, the mortality rate was 55.6%, and among the other two groups — 9and 6.8% respectively. In addition, according to the author, increased mortality of rat pups was also observed during the period of breastfeeding, and the rat pups themselves had, on average, less weight. Sounds pretty scary. But let’s figure it out.

And the first question: why are there only three rats in the group that received ordinary soy for the diet, and 6 in the rest? After all, 3 is too small to draw any confident conclusions using statistical tools. At the second step of the experiment, the number of rats becomes even smaller — not all gave offspring:

— 4 rats (out of 6) from the first group,

— all 3 rats from the second group,

— 4 (out of 6) from the third group.

These are such small samples that their results could simply fit within the bounds of chance. Otherwise, if we trusted samples of this size, it would be worth asking the question: were the rats from the first and third groups healthy enough initially? Why did 30% of the rats from these groups fail to get pregnant, while all 100% of the rats from the second group got pregnant?

Related material

The second question is: why is there no data on the total composition of diets in groups in the article? Although it is mentioned that the diet of the control group contained less protein and had less energy value, and this should already have affected the result. By the way, even the amount of food that each animal received cannot be measured and estimated — after all, they had free access to feeders when they lived together.

In short, there are many more questions than answers. However, the media and various conservative organizations picked up the article instantly. Ermakova herself constantly stirred up interest in her work, declaring more and more new experiments: first with soy flour, then with soybeans, then with various combinations …

But all this remained only at the level of rumors and statements for journalists, no papers appeared in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The scientific community considered it necessary to intervene in what was happening and asked Irina Vladimirovna to talk about her research and answer specific questions. The temptation to get a publication in the prestigious journal Nature Biotechnology was too great, and in 2007 an article was published containing an explanatory note by Ermakova about her research and findings. It just came out accompanied by comments from experts in the field. And here begins the most interesting part of this story!

Reinventing the wheel

When asked where the GM soybeans came from, the author refers to the Dutch supplier Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). However, experts note that this company has never sold pure GM soybeans. The only thing they could sell to the Moscow laboratory was a mixture of different soybean varieties, among which there could be a GM variety.

It turns out that the rats from the experimental group could only be given a mixture that also had some (unknown) amount of GM soy (we know that GM soy was still there, since in the original work it was checked by laboratory methods, which can show the presence of the target gene in the sample). Soy for the second group of rats was also a mixture of several varieties, among which the GM variety was not present (according to the author). But we cannot judge whether these two mixtures were equivalent in their nutritional properties and energy value.

Experts also consider the researcher’s decision to keep rats in cages of three, without the ability to control the exact intake of food and soy supplements by each female, to be incorrect. In one cage, for example, there could be a rat egoist who each time ate most of the food herself. That is, in the group that received GM or ordinary soy as an additive to the main diet, there could be animals that did not even have time to try soy.

In a standard experiment of this type, each animal is placed separately, and the amount of food consumed by it is strictly taken into account. Let’s move on to males, about which we know very little from the article. It is only said that females from all groups were impregnated by two males, who were alternately placed in each cage with females: first for three days of the first male, then for three days of the second. All we know about the males from the original article is that they were the same age and weren’t fed soy. But if the male lived with the females for three days, and the females had free access to soy, how can you be sure that the males never tasted soy? Including GM soy? What if, in general, all deaths of cubs in all groups are a consequence of the fact that their fathers, and not their mothers, once tried GM soy? Experts also ask another question: what if males, being stronger and larger, had access to soy on the days of conception and ate most of it, leaving little for females?

Related material

When asked how many animals were in the experiment, the researcher replies that there were 48 females used in five different experiments, with a different soy supplement in each experiment—for example, the first gave whole soy, the second diluted in water soy powder. However, among the published one you can find only one article (we analyze it above). Even on the official website of Ermakova, in the full list of her works, there is only this article. And it says, let me remind you, only about 11 females who participated in the experiment. But let’s imagine that the rest of the data for all five experiments exists somewhere. Then we divide 48 by 5 — in each experiment we get about 10 females or less (approximately converges with the first known number of 11). Further, we take into account that in each experiment the females were divided into three groups: 10/3. That is, at each time in each group, offspring were brought by about three females (which still does not give us the opportunity to use statistical analysis methods due to too small samples). Further, the author combines the results of five different experiments, each of which used different food additives (somewhere soy flour, somewhere soaked beans, somewhere some kind of food mixed with soy), the amount of additives could not be taken into account due to for the design of the experiment itself. And then draws conclusions about the dangers of GM soybeans.

Moreover, the conclusion of the author concerns the entire technology of genetic modification: “Whatever the mechanism of the negative impact of GM plants on animals and their offspring, the conclusion can be unambiguous: the use of GMOs as food is premature.” Reminds me of the history of Pusztai and GM potatoes.

Another comment of the experts is based on the standards of toxicological research in matters of reproduction, according to which there should be at least 20-25 animals in each of the study groups. That is, in Ermakova’s experiments, with the design she chose, it would take at least 6–7 times more animals. You also need to take into account that each female brought a different number of cubs, which means that a rat with 10 more brothers and sisters will receive less care, attention and, most importantly, milk from its mother than a rat with only 6 brothers and sisters, and this greatly affects survival.

Therefore, for studies of this kind, it is customary to equalize the number of cubs in all females, as well as to balance the offspring by sex. For example, leaving each mother with 4 girls and 4 boys.

Related material

The laboratory line of Wistar rats that Ermakova chose for her research is well studied. All possible reference values ​​are set for it. Including the normal level of survival of cubs. It is above 99% throughout the lactation period. That is, normally no more than 1% of the cubs die. But even in Ermakova’s control groups, these values ​​reached 9% is a very high mortality rate. Which may indicate problems with the nutrition or maintenance of all animals.

It is important to note here that the very assessment of mortality must not be made on an arbitrary day. There are several standard methods for selecting days when mortality and size/weight and other parameters of the offspring are estimated. For example, for the Wistar line, survival can be assessed at days 0, 4, and 21. Therefore, in order to draw conclusions about deviations in development, it is necessary to carry out measurements at the appropriate control points. But this was not done in Ermakova’s experiments. Therefore, we cannot compare the weight and parameters of females during pregnancy with the reference ones, and draw conclusions about them accordingly.

Why, in the presence of well-thought-out and developed standards for the design of experiments of this type, was a self-invented approach chosen? Why, instead of the usual testing of a speedy bike of a new design, did the author choose to develop her own bike with square added wheels and a steering wheel from an airplane?

It would take a very long time to list all claims to the study.