
Sperm Count Dropping in Western World - infodroid
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sperm-count-dropping-in-western-world/
======
cameldrv
My belief is that the primary cause is environmental chemicals, specifically
Phthalates and BPA (and related chemicals). The science on this is fairly
conclusive. We can show that these chemicals bind to estrogen receptors, that
they're present in everyone's body, and that if you're acutely exposed to a
higher dose, your testosterone goes down. In my opinion, these chemicals are
having social and cultural effects beyond sperm counts. As individuals, there
are some things you can do, but some studies have shown that about the best
you can do with personal actions is a 50% reduction. The most effective things
are to try not to handle store receipts on thermal paper, and wash your hands
after you do, and avoid anything that has been microwaved in plastic.
Generally reducing heavily processed and fast food is next, because you can't
know about things like ingredients flowing through PVC tubing that leaches
Phthalates.

Ultimately we are in dire need of regulation of these substances, especially
where there is food contact. I'm not very optimistic under trump. Someone
clever though might be able to come up with a campaign about chemicals
stealing your manhood that might resonate with conservative voters.

~~~
dekhn
The linkage between consumption of these chemicals, and their exact nature of
harm, is not well established- it's not "fairly conclusive" at all. What we
have is a bunch of in vitro and in vivo studies, but not actual
epidemiological evidence of the quality required to make rational policy
decisions.

If you believe otherwise, I'm happy to ready any high quality studies you can
find. Pleaes don't just cherry pick a few studies, be careful in doing your
review.

~~~
kindadumb
"be careful in doing your review." Says the lazy poster who just made a bunch
of claims himself and didn't cite anything!

~~~
theptip
The burden of proof is on the one making unsupported claims, not on the one
questioning the unsupported claims.

(It's tedious to post supporting studies on every post, so there's nothing
nefarious about claims being initially unsupported.)

I do agree that the "be careful..." comment is perhaps open to being
interpreted as snarky, though it's always hard to infer the intent in a forum
such as this.

~~~
naravara
>The burden of proof is on the one making unsupported claims, not on the one
questioning the unsupported claims.

When public health issues are concerned, the burden of proof is on the ones
saying exposure does not present any risks worth worrying about. The FDA
doesn't usually come in with the approach that we should just try everything
out and see how it goes.

~~~
dekhn
the FDA is actually very permissive when it comes to food - generally, things
are allowed to be in it unless there is strong evidence it's harmful. It's the
opposite with drugs.

~~~
naravara
It’s permissive about foods that are derived from things that are already
generally regarded as safe.

If you come up with some kind of new petrochemical food-item to mimic tofu
they’ll want you to get some pre-market approval first. If you’re starting up
a new large food business, you’re also going to be subject to inspection to
make sure your processes are safe and you’re not adulterating your products,
intentionally or unintentionally, with stuff that might not be safe.

------
simonsarris
People offering human-centric explanations like cell phones: Note also that
the sperm quality of dogs has decreased 30% since 1988.

[https://elpais.com/elpais/2016/08/09/ciencia/1470755907_2432...](https://elpais.com/elpais/2016/08/09/ciencia/1470755907_243246.html?rel=mas)

[https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31281](https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31281)

This suggests its more environmental, chemical, diet-based, etc.

~~~
Raphmedia
Perhaps global warming could play a role. It affects reptiles a lot (limiting
fertility, making it so that there are more females than males, turning males
into females, etc.)

~~~
DanAndersen
From the article:

>In contrast, no significant decline was seen in South America, Asia and
Africa.

Presumably on average these regions are also seeing similar temperature
increases. I'd think that whatever the cause is, it's not something that is
affecting people on a global scale.

Also, temperature-dependent sex determination is only seen in a few species,
and not in mammals as far as I know:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature-
dependent_sex_dete...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature-
dependent_sex_determination)

------
rsync
Unless this is adjusted for activity levels (western folks are _extremely
sedentary_ \- especially in the US) and weight I am not sure it is
interesting. Obesity is negatively correlated with male fertility[1] and 3/4
of the US is obese or overweight[2].

[1]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3521747/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3521747/)

[2] [https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-
statisti...](https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-
statistics/overweight-obesity)

~~~
felixbraun
Countries with low obesity levels show the same trend [1]; just look at e.g.
Denmark (18.2%) [2].

[1]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10655308](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10655308)
[2] (PDF)
[http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/243294/D...](http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/243294/Denmark-
Who-Country-Profile.pdf)

~~~
AstralStorm
This suggests an environmental factor or a different dietary one. Probably not
BPA or such, there would be more of a difference between western countries.
Plus Asia would show it too. (Heck, they make and use a lot of these
plastics.) Not atmospheric pollution either apparently (see French result).

Electromagnetic wave pollution perhaps?

~~~
schiffern
>Probably not BPA or such, there would be more of a difference between western
countries.

Why do you say that? Most western countries use plastic and receipts (thermal
paper), which are the main sources.

And BPA isn't the only xenoestrogen. PCBs, dioxins, and many agricultural
biocides are too.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoestrogen#Common_environmen...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoestrogen#Common_environmental_estrogens)

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/xenoestroge...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/xenoestrogen)

------
mgberlin
I've personally become concerned recently with the abundance of BPA and it's
effect on the endocrine system of men. Between disposable water bottles,
aluminum can liners, and food stored in plastic containers, there's a huge
amount of exposure to this endocrine disruptor. The article doesn't mention it
in particular, but I think it's worth being cautious over.

~~~
cameldrv
If you're specifically worried about BPA, perhaps a larger exposure is
handling cash register receipts. Don't take em if you don't need em, and wash
your hands before you eat anything if you do need to handle them.

~~~
manmal
That might explain why I've watched almost all newcomer cashiers in our local
supermarket gain weight quickly after starting their job. Of course, the
stress might also be to blame.

------
whalesalad
Are cell phones in our pockets to blame? The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. –
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27601711](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27601711)

More info here:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27076112](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27076112)

Also here:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26949865](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26949865)

And here:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26206279](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26206279)

Here too:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24982785](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24982785)

More fuel for the fire:
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24927498](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24927498)

~~~
scottLobster
Given that this decline apparently started in 1973, I'd say they're probably
not the deciding factor.

~~~
AndrewKemendo
I feel like something happened in the early 70s that just made progress slow
way down. I keep seeing bad trends start in the 1970s - like stagnant wage
growth (1971), increased inequality (1971) etc...

~~~
scottLobster
Don't forget the dietary recommendations changed telling people to eat loads
of carbs and avoid fat (and as a side effect, most natural sources of
protein). That might be directly related to this actually.

~~~
AstralStorm
That wouldn't affect dogs as much.

~~~
52-6F-62
A lot of cheap dog food is made of largely grains / corn.

------
jessaustin
It's tempting to decry how we've disrupted the environment in which we live.
(Apparently, since there are roughly 200 comments on that theme...)

A more interesting potential cause of the sperm drop would be the human
environment changing in a _beneficial_ way. That is, it might be that sperm
production is negatively correlated with other competitive traits. If that
were the case, then we would expect the availability of modern medicine to
drive a reduction in sperm count, as competitive-but-previously-infertile
individuals are now better able to reproduce. After all humans are a
K-selected species.

Of course this is silly, because not enough time has passed for these effects
to emerge in the human population. However, we do see these effects in
livestock. Thoroughbred horses released into the wild would quickly die off,
since female fertility has dropped precipitously in a breeding context of "if
the mare runs fast enough, we'll spare no expense getting her pregnant".

------
debacle
It would be interesting to see a study that compares the drop in sperm count
to the drop in testosterone, to see if the drop is statistically significant
or just a symptom of the drop in testosterone.

~~~
jxramos
I just had some funny dark humor thought that men today and increasingly
moving forward on average just ain't as manly as those of the past.

------
Zarath
Turns out modernity is an extremely unhealthy environment for humans,
especially men. Despite the narratives being thrown at you, we live in an
incredibly "feminized" society where social stigma/violence/shaming are more
powerful for the average person than plain old physical violence.

~~~
livingparadox
Why is social pressure necessarily feminine and violence necessarily
masculine?

~~~
PeterisP
The propensity to aggression, violence and excessive risk taking are
biologically related to sex hormone levels, and "masculine/feminine" seem to
be quite accurate words to use since e.g. feminine men would actually express
this less than average men, and masculine women would express this more than
average women.

------
marze
It'd be interesting to take those with the highest levels today and look for
any lifestyle differences.

------
carsongross
Turns out it wasn't commies that were going to corrupt our precious bodily
fluids, but rather post cold war end-of-history ennui.

------
bantunes
Interested in potential causes for this. Our polluted cities? Just stress? Bad
diet?

~~~
Reason077
Environmental pollutants? Endocrine disruptors? Internet porn?!

Most of us are probably eating healthier than 40 years ago (Heart disease is
way down), so not sure it's diet. Unless of course its all the chemicals and
contaminants that we're getting with our food...

~~~
Fishman343
You say eating healthier, but obesity and diabetes are at all time highs in
most of the western world, I don't think it's that cut and dry.

~~~
andreime
We're also a lot more sedentary. I am convinced without being able to produce
proof, that this is the biggest problem - the lack of physical work.

I used to believe we eat shit, but my ancestors were really poor and basically
ate just a few food types most of their life. I think I've come a long way and
am convinced that, even if I were to eat a very occasional McDonalds, it'd
still be eating a lot better. It's a lot more diverse and that really makes a
difference. Don't know about you but I very rarely eat the same thing two days
in a row.

~~~
Fishman343
Nutritionally I see what you mean and definitely agree, people are taller than
they used to be and until recently have lived longer. But all of the benefits
a nutritionally diverse and rich diet brings are easily undone (and more) by
also consuming enough sugar to become obese. This is why the current
generation of obese kids at school have a lower life expectancy than their
parents despite better healthcare and nutrition in their early years.

This is why I think that jumping on the "BPA must be the problem!" answer to
low count question is a bit ridiculous, especially when people are becoming
more unhealthy by the day. People who eat more processed sugary foods and
drinks that come in BPA containing packaging are also more likely to be obese
and unhealthy too.

Lacking physical work also does not account for all of the weight gain we are
seeing at the moment - obesity rates remained stable in the '60s and '70s when
we lived similarly lazy lives. (1)

1\.
[http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr043743#t=article](http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsr043743#t=article)

------
jostmey
\-- Sorry for the comment --

I've deleted it

~~~
tannerc
Having children is just one of many ways you can make an impact and "leave
something behind" for the future.

~~~
abainbridge
Indeed. The excessive number of people on Earth is currently causing a major
extinction event
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction)).
Some might say that not having a kid is the best way to "leave something
behind" for the future.

It's probably preferable to have some negative feedback in the human
population explosion, without having to resort to wars.

------
DonHopkins
Why not just compensate by ejaculating more often?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk)

------
trhway
it is biologically connected and nicely correlates with the falling
testosterone levels. In addition to environmental chemicals, testosterone
levels are very significantly affected by behavioral/social factors. Given
that society becoming more civil is at the same time a result and a cause of
lowering testosterone levels, i think that despite temporary setbacks, like
the recent success of the "Make the sperm count great again" campaign, the
writing is on the wall here. Anyway, given the power of current and future
technology, the count of 1 is enough, and may be even that would become too
unnecessary big.

------
bcg1
Why are we to assume this is a bad thing, or that it is even something that
won't be sorted out by natural selection?

~~~
nashashmi
I'm upset with your question. Technology is moving faster than the pace of
evolution! We know very little of how evolution works to be certain we will
adapt.

Besides, why are you so keen on rendering the people who were not born before
the age of current tech as a class unfit in our current context?

------
candles12345
Could this just be due to maturation in an environment that prohibits and goes
against masculinity to large extent?

~~~
remir
We would have to define what is considered "masculinity", but I would say
society definitely prohibit aggressivity, especially as more people are
educated and can communicate better, more women entered the work force but
also the working conditions today are more comfortable.

It would be interesting to compare testosterone levels of inmates versus men
of the "outside" population. Inmates live in a much more aggressive
environment, and I bet that influence their testosterone level.

------
artur_makly
its the drugs in our drinking water :
[http://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/health/03iht-
snwater.1....](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/health/03iht-
snwater.1.5126782.html)

------
kevlar1818
As someone watching The Handmaid's Tale right now, this is especially scary
stuff.

------
sjs382
I guess it's time to finally finish watching _The Handmaid 's Tale_...

~~~
petepete
Blessed be the fruit.

------
onecooldev24
I think feminism is responsible for this. A man's mental health can
drastically affect his testosterone levels.

------
jlebrech
basic biology, plenty of hormones floating around so you're not so essential
to the survival of the species.

~~~
jordache
yeah right.. evolution observed in the tiny span of time that is recorded
modern science?

~~~
jlebrech
genetics doesn't have to observe anything for millions of years to observe to
results of evolution.

~~~
JPLeRouzic
You are downvoted, but I believe science is on your side. Just one recent
article on the "Island rule":

[http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/284/1857/2017...](http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/284/1857/20171065)

~~~
Sleeep
The Atlantic tomcod in the Hudson River has evolved immunity to the PCBs
dumped in the river by General Electric.

[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110217-hudso...](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110217-hudson-
river-pcb-fish-evolution-water/)

------
stillhere
I would not call modern society "Western". It has deviated far too much from
its traditions.

------
merkaloid
Isn't this good anyway? Because of overpopulation?

~~~
swsieber
No. Birthrates have been dropping, but this makes getting pregnant less
predictable. There are other forces at work reducing the birthrate, and I
think those would be enough without complicating people's lives.

~~~
justadeveloper2
I would say the biggest issue with declining birth rates are social and
psychological in nature and NOT physiological. People simply work too much,
for just one example.

------
smrxx
This _could_ be due to population size. Isn't there a species of fish where a
male becomes a female when there are no other females left? It seems plausible
that some mechanism is in place to self regulate.

~~~
meerab
If this theory was correct the males in India and China would be affected more
than males in the western world.

~~~
djtriptych
Not if population density is the trigger. How could the body evolve to be
aware of national boundaries?

~~~
maxerickson
North America has low population density relative to most of the world.

Probably even more so if you do some sort of aggregation of the density that
people live at rather than averaging population across land area. Suburbia and
such.

~~~
dom0
> North America has low population density relative to most of the world.

Well the quotient N(north america) / A(north america) is low, but this value
does not have to match the average or median population density in areas
around samples.

In other words, yes, America is a big country, but it's big cities are just as
densely populated as big cities anywhere else.

~~~
maxerickson
_Well the quotient N(north america) / A(north america) is low,_

It's infuriating that you choose to reply like this without accounting for
both paragraphs of my comment. I mean, I'll just let it go, but c'mon.

I would say that US cities tend to be less dense and that Americans don't tend
to live in urban centers as much as people in other countries.

~~~
dom0
Sorry, I must have misread it. Looking at some charts, you have a point there.

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/World_po...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/World_population_density_1994_-_with_equator.png)
(1994)

------
dreamdu5t
I think it's simple: fat unhealthy men have lower sperm counts and America has
way more fat unhealthy men over the last 40 years. Doesn't look like the meta
analysis dealt with this.

~~~
izzydata
We can only hope. This would be a great example of natural selection at work
if fat unhealthy people couldn't reproduce and thinner healthy people could.

~~~
nateconq
Only in our current environment. If food was scarce, wouldn't those who can
store energy better be more likely to survive?

~~~
izzydata
I get what you are saying, but I don't think being fat is evidence of being
able to survive in an environment of food shortages.

~~~
dragonwriter
Polycystic ovarian syndrome, which contributes to obesity in women, seems to
have adaptive advantages in famine of the type speculated upthread (and also
including increased fertility then, though decreased fertility in abundant
food situations.)

It's not too much of a stretch to consider that there may be metabolic
conditions in men linked to obesity risk that have the same kind of advantages
in reduced-food-supply situations.

