‘Sandy Babies’ Might Not Strictly Be Sandy Babies, Say SkepticsDoug Barry5/27/13 12:00pmFiled to: hurricane sandybirthspregnanciessexbabiesbirthratenew york27EditPromoteShare to KinjaToggle Conversation toolsGo to permalinkWhat hath Hurricane Sandy really wrought? Apparently, lots of babies. According to overburdened record books of several New York hospitals, the storm, which hit the Northeast just about nine months ago, along with the resulting blackouts, apocalyptic panic, and the epic boredom that comes from being stuck on the upper floors of a condo tower with only bath candles and some tasteful erotica, may be responsible for a looming uptick in births in July and August.In its report on the purported Sandy babies, the New York Times manages to interview several expecting couples, toss out some statistics from metro-area hospitals, and summarize a sociological study from India that linked declining birthrates with the civilizing influence of electricity without once mentioning birth control. Stuck at home and with nothing to do but be afraid of the sky, the logic of the Sandy birthrate surge goes, couples had lots of sex. Lots of sex. Unprotected, baby-making sex, apparently, because when the power goes out, as everyone well knows, condoms and birth control pills immediately stop working. It’s science. Now, thanks to the Great Sandy Fuckathon of 2013, hospitals are anticipating a 10 to 30 percent spike in midsummer births.