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

Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#541

Post by skwirl »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #483
thehappypm wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another lesson from your story (similar to many of my friends’) is to just have kids younger. It sounds like you started at around 35 — if people started at 30, even, fertility is higher.

Problem is that a lot of people aren't in a position to have kids at 30 mainly due to economic reasons.

This common explanation never made sense. Lower income is correlated with higher fertility within the US, within every country, across the world, and (seemingly) throughout history.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#543

Post by et-al »

ipdashc wrote: post #505
Knufen wrote: post #478

I did my Master Degree in Organic Chemistry where we tried to develop a male contraceptive pill. I spend a lot of time studying sperm so here is a short list of thing to avoid regarding sperm quality (not ranked): 1. Eating and drinking from plastics (This includes aluminum cans which are plastic lined) [a] 2. Heating food in ANY type of plastic [a] 3. Caffein intake [b] 4. Sugar intake [c] 5. NOT exercising regularl…

I think I'm missing something. On the Results in study [b], they say > Semen parameters did not seem affected by caffeine intake, at least caffeine from coffee, tea and cocoa drinks, in most studies. Conversely, other contributions suggested a negative effect of cola-containing beverages and caffeine-containing soft drinks on semen volume, count and concentration. If tea and coffee don't cause an effect, but cola and…

Could be correlated to issue 1 with plastic containers. In the US, soda generally comes in aluminum cans or 2L plastic bottles, whereas coffee and tea aren't.

Anyways, I still think sedentary lifestyles and stress play a larger role than plastics, but those are harder to isolate and control for researchers.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#544

Post by spaceman_2020 »

abyssin wrote: post #377
thehappypm wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another lesson from your story (similar to many of my friends’) is to just have kids younger. It sounds like you started at around 35 — if people started at 30, even, fertility is higher.

I agree. We shouldn’t pressure people to make children early, but make sure they understand the consequences of delaying. I’m surrounded by couples of 30-35 year old that are struggling to have children. They had no idea it would be so hard.

I’m 35, wife is 34. We’ve had no problems conceiving but it hasn’t been smooth sailing post conception at all. Had one molar pregnancy, one missed miscarriage of a Mono/Di twin, and we’re now onto our third term.

Although these issues can prop up at any age, the statistical chance of something going wrong keeps going up. Moreover, there’s the constant fear with every miscarriage that we’re getting even older and even more likely to run into bigger problems.

I’m honestly surprised by how little people talk about these issues.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#545

Post by caeril »

afavour wrote: post #450
Aeolun wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, kids may be incompatible with a lot of lifestyles, but I wouldn’t call them inherently expensive. You just have to adjust your expectations.

I dunno how you can say that. When children are young you have two options: - both parents work, you pay for childcare - one parent drops out of the workforce, takes care of children at home neither of these is cheap. Decades ago it was realistic for one parent's salary to cover the whole family but these days salary stagnation and increased costs of e.g. housing makes it much more difficult.

No. Absolutely wrong.

Homes are much larger now than in 1955. Cars are being purchased with far more (expensive) features, and they are driven for fewer miles before being "upgraded". We eat out much more. Even when we eat in, we eat more luxurious meals. We buy Frappuccinos daily, we buy clothing much more frequently, we impulse shop significantly more, we utilize medical services much more frequently, we take far more, and more luxurious vacations, we rack up ludicrous levels of student debt for degrees that have no hope of servicing said debt, etc, etc, etc.

We are wealthier today than at any point in human history. The myth that all homes must be two-income is predicated on the outrageous lifestyles we choose, NOT due to anything inherent in "society" or "the economy".

Our insane consumerist appetite is what's preventing one household member from staying home, nothing else.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#546

Post by DrThunder »

It's obesity 100%. You can try to blame microplastics all you want but plastics have been around for a long time now and the amount of people having issues in the last generation has skyrocketed along with the obesity epidemic.

You cannot sit around on screens all day, eat unhealthily, never lift weights, never do any cardio and expect to have enough testosterone to reproduce.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#547

Post by lr4444lr »

Knufen wrote: post #478

I did my Master Degree in Organic Chemistry where we tried to develop a male contraceptive pill. I spend a lot of time studying sperm so here is a short list of thing to avoid regarding sperm quality (not ranked): 1. Eating and drinking from plastics (This includes aluminum cans which are plastic lined) [a] 2. Heating food in ANY type of plastic [a] 3. Caffein intake [b] 4. Sugar intake [c] 5. NOT exercising regularl…

Comments like this from commenters like this are why I love HN.

Does BPA-free plastic improve anything? What about containers of non-prepared food? I can see not eating directly from any, but I think it's pretty hard in the developed world to rid ourselves of plastics entirely in the storage of foodstuffs.

Also, do we know whether the changes in sperm quality you mention affect congenital childhood maladies? (I realize this is probably beyond your field somewhat.)

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#548

Post by dang »

Eleison23 wrote: post #512
xienze wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and my wife was 38 at the time of conception. This sounds obvious, but apparently isn’t to a lot of younger people. 38 is considered quite old to start having children (yes it happens, but it’s called a “geriatric pregnancy” for a reason), and I’m sure it contributed to the difficulties conceiving. A lot of young folks have been convinced that child birth can be put off more or less indefinitely while you pursue a…

Quoted post unavailable.

Please stop posting flamewar comments and ideological battle comments to HN. You've unfortunately done quite a lot of that. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#549

Post by patall »

JPKab wrote: post #368
patall wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you determine that? As far as I have heard from people working in fertilization clinics, they can help pretty much all couples that have problems with conceiving due to male fertility issues. You need to go there in the first place, but once you request help, you get it.

So that's your take? "This thing that humans have done for eons without medical assistance now requires it and that's totally fine. Nothing to see here." Really?

No, you do not understand. What I am saying is that we understand very well what is happening. 'The science is there'. What does not exist is the policy (to prevent it) and we only react when absolutely necessary. Like with poverty, to give another example.

Re: Sperm counts worldwide are plummeting faster than we thought

#550

Post by dzonga »

mschuster91 wrote: post #467
rconti wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems fairly natural that a couple in most societies (current and historical) would be better able to provide for their children the older they are. The main exception I can think is family support; having younger grandparents and great grandparents could be an advantage, I guess? I'm not sure I'd look at a society where people have lots of children so they can put them to work and say "yeah, this is the way socie…

> It seems fairly natural that a couple in most societies (current and historical) would be better able to provide for their children the older they are. When I was born in 1991 and my sister in 1995, a simple police officer and a nurse in half-time could provide for two children with ease, in one of what was even back then one of the most expensive cities in Germany. Today, me (IT worker) and my s/o (public health a…

actually you need more market based rent. remove restrictions that incentivize people not to build housing. tax the rich on land value - which means not have empty lots build a lot of houses encourage a dynamic market that rewards labor and boom you've achieved low rents, high wages
Post reply on HN