Decidedly un-scientific gender test…

…it’s a boy! …at least according to a $25 box of chemicals. Brennyn says that Gupta (CNN guy) swears by it, but neither of us are putting too much stock in the result. The company itself only claims about 80% accuracy. In either case, it’s fun! Brennyn took it before work today, and left the result on the bathroom counter for me.

There’s a CNN video below about it…
Embedded video from CNN Video

7 thoughts on “Decidedly un-scientific gender test…

  1. This is so neat. I guess we had been accurately referring to the baby as a “he” when we didn’t say lime, or plum or some other fruit that identifies his size. I ran over a pink pacifier at the airport and thought sure, though, that it was a sign that you guys were having a baby girl. Guess time will tell!

  2. Ran over a pacifier? With the car or with the wheels on the luggage? Crazy ol’ grandma. I hope you guys are doing well! Tell that baby I love him/her.

  3. Does that mean I can go shopping for a baby boy? Or should I wait. It would be nice to have a boy to carry on the Pieper name. But if it is a girl that would also be wonderful….there is nothing better than to have a shopping buddy for life.

      1. It appears that running over a pink pacifier with my suitcase at the airport did accurately indicate the sex of your baby. Maybe I need to market that!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *