Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 640 posts

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#171

Post by voqv »

jonplackett wrote: post #83
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said "temporarily", so I want to remind you that all the same things are harmful to a child's development, especially when their systems are just coming online and establishing their baselines.

Yes absolutely! Still doing the dietary things for her. She gets to have hot baths though, and wear tight fitting underpants. FYI anyone else reading, if you have a boy Teflon is really something you should avoid.

I wonder if it's Teflon in general or damaged Teflon pans - many people do not used them correctly, overheat them and have damaged coatings that leak chemicals.

You can go check perfectly fine pans having 1-star Amazon reviews "Pan sticking after a month!".

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#172

Post by eightails »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #136
bpodgursky wrote: post #35

Would it be... unreasonable... to point out that the fall in sperm quality, egg quality, and overall hormonal disruption is happening concurrent with a blurring of overall gender identification, predominantly in the youngest generation? Identification as trans or other non-binary status is incredibly high among the gen-z cohort. Might be unrelated social upheaval, but would anyone really be surprised if we weren't ac…

It's not unreasonable to speculate that it may be one factor. It is unreasonable to implicitly assert that it's the only factor and the clear singular cause.

> It is unreasonable to implicitly assert that it's the only factor and the clear singular cause

Sure, but did op assert that? I didn't read it that way.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#173

Post by DoreenMichele »

eightails wrote: post #172
DoreenMichele wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not unreasonable to speculate that it may be one factor. It is unreasonable to implicitly assert that it's the only factor and the clear singular cause.

> It is unreasonable to implicitly assert that it's the only factor and the clear singular cause Sure, but did op assert that? I didn't read it that way.

It's a distinction that doesn't require the OP to have done any such thing for the distinction to be meaningful. Making a distinction about what is or is not a reasonable inference when someone asks isn't the same thing as accusing them of anything.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#174

Post by eyko »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #123
petertodd wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've also eaten soy for much longer than others, literally thousands of years(1) at this point. That's more than long enough to evolve countermeasures if it did have an effect. They also eat soy differently, mainly in products which are fermented. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean#History

Almost 95 percent of the soybeans grown in the U.S. are genetically modified. https://www.thedailymeal.com/travel/8-most-genetically-modif... In 2007, over half the world’s soybean crop was genetically modified; a higher percentage than any other crop. https://worldofgenetics.weebly.com/genetically-modified-soyb... Asians are probably eating less GMO soy (than Americans) and we don't really know what those genetic mo…

> They are typically made to improve profit in some fashion, not to improve human health.

The main goals of GMOs are to increase yield and protect against disease / pests, which is practically the same goal we've had for thousands of years of crop domestication. Take for instance wild pre-domesticated maize vs present day non-GMO maize[1] and you'll see what "natural" crop selection does. Not only do we select for strains that are healthier and with more defenses, we also select strains that give us more bang for buck. Over the years, we've also selected for: texture, size, adaptability to different climates and soil compositions, lower concentration of toxic compounds, etc. Cassava and potatoes, for instance, can be deadly in their "natural" variety, and needed some "help" to get to the varieties we eat today. GMOs are simply the result of applying modern science in combination with what we've learnt from different cultures over thousands of years, to speed this process and hopefully prevent famine and starvation.

I'm not saying all GMOs are good for you, but I just wanted to counter this idea that we don't know what effects GMOs have on us -- we've been eating GMOs for millenia. Edit: I should also strain that I fully support questioning GMOs and holding them to a high standard as a society, especially when the modifications are made for reasons which are to a high degree simply for profit. One example of that would be crops that are engineered to be infertile / yield no seeds.

PS: I'm more concerned about chemical pesticides, especially in the scale at which they're used. Microplastics, heavy metals, soil depletion, etc. Many modern agricultural practices are not good for the environment, objectively speaking. But I wouldn't just blindly lump GMO in the same group just because it's also modern.

1. https://www.newswise.com/articles/tiny-genetic-tweak-unlocke...

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#175

Post by csmattryder »

hef19898 wrote: post #143
yudlejoza wrote: post #65

Pick a random essential nutrient. For instance, take zinc. Human body needs it. It needs to be taken in. You need to ensure the right food items, or the right supplements, doesn't matter. Where does that source come from? plants? animals? imported? produced? What goes into that? What's the prevalent intake level in developed countries? developing countries? what should be the right intake level? where (which parts of…

Or just stop, or reduce as much as possible, the amount of crap we eat? There is no reason why meat has to be that low cost. Or that we cannot cook ourselves with fresh ingredients, ideally grown and sourced locally. Nutrition, being a basic of human survival, has been sovled for millenias. We just lost it with pushing industrialized food production, of any kid, way to far over the point needed to get rid of starvati…

> Or that we cannot cook ourselves with fresh ingredients, ideally grown and sourced locally.

Anecdotally, over the last four years I went from eating pre-packaged ready meals every day to knowing my local butcher and cooking properly, and I feel a thousand times better than I used to.

People ask what future generations will cringe about from our lives today and prepackaged foods, ready meals, and fast-food will be my pick. Zapping a plastic container in a microwave for 3 minutes cannot be good for the food, the container or human eating it.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#176

Post by DoreenMichele »

eyko wrote: post #174
DoreenMichele wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost 95 percent of the soybeans grown in the U.S. are genetically modified. https://www.thedailymeal.com/travel/8-most-genetically-modif... In 2007, over half the world’s soybean crop was genetically modified; a higher percentage than any other crop. https://worldofgenetics.weebly.com/genetically-modified-soyb... Asians are probably eating less GMO soy (than Americans) and we don't really know what those genetic mo…

> They are typically made to improve profit in some fashion, not to improve human health. The main goals of GMOs are to increase yield and protect against disease / pests, which is practically the same goal we've had for thousands of years of crop domestication. Take for instance wild pre-domesticated maize vs present day non-GMO maize[1] and you'll see what "natural" crop selection does. Not only do we select for st…

we've been eating GMOs for millenia.

That's a little like saying "There's zero difference between traditional animal husbandry and cloning."

Sorry, I think there is a meaningful distinction between traditional human intervention in plant varieties and the more recent intervention called GMO. Most of the world seems to agree that there is a distinction, enough so that we invented new language for what it is we are doing.

Edit in response to your edit:

But I wouldn't just blindly lump GMO in the same group just because it's also modern.

That's an ugly thing to say and it's not far from a personal attack. There's no blindness on my part. I'm not lumping anything in just because it's modern.

I have a genetic disorder and pay enormous attention to the details of my diet because of it. I react poorly to soy products. Research and experience suggest that my firsthand negative experiences with soy may be related to the fact that most soy in the US is GMO.

My views here have nothing at all to do with unfounded assumptions, ridiculous neurotic views of "modern" things or anything of the sort.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#177

Post by inter_netuser »

techbio wrote: post #51
inter_netuser wrote: post #40

This affects not only humans, but the entire ecosystems. This disruption is happening right now, and is the cause of the die off of many species. It's a true emergency. TODAY.

Preservation of state is not a feature of evolution, and as elegant and informative a theory as it may be, it has as long a history of negative selection as of positive survival.

Are you condoning the destruction of our earth for short term profits?

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#178

Post by fogihujy »

esja wrote: post #101

Can these endocrine disruptors also contribute to gender dysphoria?

It sounds plausible that anything with the ability to disturb hormone production could also indirectly affect things like sexuality and one's gender identity. A quick googling suggests it has been suggested before, and that it's a highly controversial topic as it indicates that something is inherently wrong with being transgender.

At best, it's something that needs much more research before any conclusions can be drawn.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#179

Post by forgotmypw17 »

voqv wrote: post #171
jonplackett wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes absolutely! Still doing the dietary things for her. She gets to have hot baths though, and wear tight fitting underpants. FYI anyone else reading, if you have a boy Teflon is really something you should avoid.

I wonder if it's Teflon in general or damaged Teflon pans - many people do not used them correctly, overheat them and have damaged coatings that leak chemicals. You can go check perfectly fine pans having 1-star Amazon reviews "Pan sticking after a month!".

Based on random website I found googling, it starts to break down and release PFOA around 300F, which is easy to achieve if the pan is not filled with water.

Re: Falling sperm counts, declining egg quality, and endocrine disruptors

#180

Post by loa_in_ »

XiJInPaddington wrote: post #18
vincentmarle wrote: post #2

> Store food in glass containers, not plastic. Above all, don’t microwave foods in plastic or with plastic wrap on top. Avoid pesticides. Buy organic produce if possible. Avoid tobacco or marijuana. Use a cotton or linen shower curtain, not one made of vinyl. Don’t use air fresheners. Prevent dust buildup. Vet consumer products you use with an online guide like that of the Environmental Working Group. I really want t…

Because its the same thing as a person setting your house on fire then advising you not to breathe in the smoke. Advice like telling people we are drowning in plastic because we don't recycle, telling people with no access to public transportation to minimize the use of cars, telling people with no access to healthcare to take care of their bodies, telling people that grew up in a glorified prison they call public sc…

Who is "they"?
Post reply on HN