FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
100% Positive
Analyzed from 268 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#left#handed#right#handedness#same#both#twins#odds#why#having

Discussion (3 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
I think the "sharp weapon" hypothesis is interesting and favors "why right and not left?" but I think it's too specific and unnecessary to explain the more important "why 90-10?".
It seems that 20-30% is double or triple the likelihood of the being lefthanded normally, implying that actually there is a stronger correlation towards genes being a factor.
If at least one of the twins was left-handed, we would expect odds of 19% among sets of twins compared to 10% among babies generally, but then expect only 1% odds of twins, both twins would be left-handed if there was no correlation. So, the expected odds of exactly one being lefthanded is then 1:19, or just over 5%. Having actual odds of this being 20-30% shows that whatever is causing this is likely to affect both babies the same.
Having said that, I don't necessarily think we can just jump to genes - it could also be due to something environmental during pregnancy, after all both babies are growing in the same environment.