[sci.space] Moon Myths

hairston%utdssa%utadnx%utspan.span@VLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (03/29/89)

In an earlier issue John Roberts asks the right question:
>>I mean, maybe the moon has some effect on noctournal animals, but if you're
>>trying to defend the age-old astrologer's "the moon effects the tides, and
>>they're water, and since the human body is 98% water, the moon must affect
>>people" argument, then I would really love to see some data on that.

to which Jim Merritt replies
>Ask your wife or girl friend...
>(hint: ask for PERIODic events with a CYCLE of appox a lunar month.)
 
The idea that the human female menstrual cycle is somehow connected to the lunar
cycle has been circulating for years (millenia?), but age doesn't make it any 
more correct.  For starters the lunar cycle (full moon to full moon) is 
29.53  days while the human menstrual cycle is (on average) 28, so the
two AREN'T even the same period.   And if you're female (or are male and have
a wife or significant other you can ask about this) then you know that 28 days
is a nice average, but rarely do you hit exactly 28 days (or 29.53 days for
that matter).  There is quite a range of lengths of menstrual cycles both
between individuals and at different times within the life of an individual.
The length of an individual's cycle is determined by environmental and 
biological factors (overall health, nutrition, exercise, stress, illness, age, 
medication, etc.) but not by the gravity of the moon.  The gravitational pull of
the moon on a human body is roughly equal to the gravitational pull of a
couch you're sitting on.  (If you calculate the tidal difference, the couch
overwhelms the moon by a factor of a million or so...)

What is happening is that people are confusing correlation with causation,
the lunar cycle is a handy rule of thumb for timing menstrual cycles, but that
doesn't mean that one is causing the other.  (This fallacy shows up far too
often in all sorts of arguments, such as "Lack of prayer in public schools
has caused the downfall of the American education.  Since prayer was been
banned in the early 60's, the national average SAT scores have dropped by
x points..."  Both statements are true, prayer was banned and SAT scores have
fallen, but that doesn't mean one is the cause of the other.)  

Another version of the argument runs something like "it's part of evolutional 
history of us.  Our ancestors were amphibians/fish/whatever that had reproduc-
tive cycles tied to the tides, much like the spawning of comtemporary grunions."
This argument at least tries to give us a causative agent, but if it were true
then most (if not all) descendents of those early amphibians or whatever would
have fertility cycles tied to the lunar cycle.  Instead, examining the cycle 
for various mammals shows that the lengths of their periods are all over the 
place ranging from mice and rats with a cycle of 5 days to 37 days for chimp-
anzees.  The only other mammal that matches the human cycle of 28 days is the 
opossum.

Suppose for a minute that there WAS a causative agency between the lunar cycle
and the menstrual cycle.  That would mean somehow the phase of the moon is 
triggering the menstrual period of human females.  That would mean that at some
point in the cycle (say first quarter) ALL the women on Earth would begin having
their period and the sanitary products on supermarket shelves would all disap-
pear at once.  Instead, what really happens is that the number of women having 
their period at any one time is uniformly spread throughout the lunar cycle,
which is the same thing as saying there is no causative connection between the
two.  In fact, (taking this to its absurd extreme) if there REALLY was a tidal
cause affecting the menstrual cycle, the 29.53 day lunar cycle is the wrong one
to look at.  Instead we should see women following the earthly tides and having
two menstrual cycles per day!  (I will refrain from making any sexist jokes in
poor taste here.)

Then Gabriel Velasco pointed out:
>When my wife was pregnant, a doctor told her that sometimes they pre-
>fer to think of a full term pregnancy as 10 lunar months.

So what?  Human pregnancies run for roughly 10 menstrual cycles for biological
reasons that have nothing to do with any astronomical influences.  They can
just as easily think of the pregnancy lasting 280 solar days, three quarters of
one orbit of the earth around the sun, one third of the time between oppositions
with Mars, the length of time between the first and last appearance of Venus
as either an evening or morning star [now THAT'S too much of a coincidence, 
there MUST be a connection!  :^) ], one fifth of a presidential term of office,
etc.

If you want to dig further in these and other lunar cycle myths check out "Moon
Madness" by George Abell in the book "Science and the Paranormal" edited by
George Abell and Barry Singer (Scribner, 1981) or the article "The Moon Was 
Full, and Nothing Happened" in the Winter 85-86 issue of "Skeptical Inquirer".

Marc Hairston--Center for Space Sciences--Univ of Texas at Dallas
SPAN address  UTSPAN::UTADNX::UTD750::HAIRSTON
______________________________________________

I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what the University of Texas System's opinion about 
menstrual cycles is, but I sure they must have one....somewhere.....and I'll
bet we disagree....