17 ms·

Scientists warn of sperm count crisis

61 points by cs702 14y ago

lutusp 14y ago
What? This is being described as a "crisis"? It's the best news I've heard all year. We should celebrate! The world's population is completely out of control, all estimates of future environmental catastrophe turn out to be overly optimistic, we're drifting into a state of perpetual war because of population pressures, and someone laments a decline in sperm count without the slightest grasp of how funny that is? Read and weep, children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation
- pathy 14y ago
  A bit less pessimistic view is presented by Hans Rosling at a relatively recent TED talk. http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.html http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.h... Well worth watching. Sperm count is unlikely to affect the population growth anyway, what we need is to get people out of poverty and proper family planning with access to proper birth control. Then we can "control" the population.
  - wesley 14y ago
    What we need is a 1 child policy like in China.
    - pathy 14y ago
      That does lead to other problems, like putting a strain on the welfare system of countries when there suddenly is a huge decrease in the number of people that support those who have retired. Look at Japan where there are fewer and fewer supporting more and more. It is kinda working for now but what will happen in 20 years? Who knows.
      - kalms 14y ago
        My guess? We'll gradually shift back into larger households, with several generations living under one roof. Not that bad, when you come to think of it.
    - potatolicious 14y ago
      http://www.brycealcock.com/random/TriviaStats/ChinaPopulation.html http://www.brycealcock.com/random/TriviaStats/ChinaPopulatio... Because it's demonstrably successful at curbing population growth rate? Because during periods of the most aggressive enforcement of the one-child policy, China had its highest growth rate in recent history, 2-2.5x that of the US? And now, during its period of least aggressive enforcement, but with a rapid pace of industrialization and wealth injection, the growth rate has fallen dramatically? http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=ja&l=en http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=ja&l=en Or perhaps we want to look at Japan, which without forced abortions, property confiscation, and brutal acts of repression have managed to achieve a negative growth rate? No matter which way you slice the data, the trend is clear: industrialization, wealth, and stability decrease growth rates, and do so far better than any number of guns and Bibles you can point at people.
      - stcredzero 14y ago
        > Because during periods of the most aggressive enforcement of the one-child policy, China had its highest growth rate in recent history, 2-2.5x that of the US? The fact that China would think to enforce such a policy should give one pause.
    - citricsquid 14y ago
      I don't think that policy is so great. People don't have children just because they can, we need to educate people about children and population growth. My aunt and uncle have an adopted daughter from China, she was abandoned as a result of the one child policy: the policy didn't stop her from being born, but it stopped her from having her biological family.
  - lukifer 14y ago
    Don't forget educating women, which tends to result in fewer children per household. I am concerned, though, that the temporary lull in overpopulation will be broken by belief systems that encourage large families; by definition, those with a genetic or memetic instinct to have many children will out-populate those without that instinct. (I have a soft spot for the Mormons, but they come to mind here.)
    - rohansingh 14y ago
      Memes aren't strictly inheritable in the same way that genes are. For example, it is completely plausible to advance the argument that children in large families decide to have fewer offspring due to their own childhood experiences. I'm not saying that this is definitively the case or that I have any evidence for it, but it is just as plausible as the conjecture that a propensity for a large number of offspring is perfectly inheritable.
      - lukifer 14y ago
        Even if memes are not genetically heritable, they are still transmissible, and therefore still subject to selection pressures. And the more children these families have, the broader the attack surface for large-family beliefs to infect the next generation. Moreover, I would suggest that genetics do influence tendencies for adopting some memes over others, especially as regarding the instinct to spread genetic material, which is very ancient. I can't cite any scientific support for this idea, but the likelihood seems very strong.
- Alaskan005 14y ago
  Thanks for the link, I would have never known without Wikipedia...out of all places. /s Sperm count falling by one third in 25 years is much scarier, suggests a horrible trend for us. As for overpopulation, people usually had /have a lot of kids because of high mortality rates. By the way, who is going to work so that pension check gets to you ;) ?
- mikeash 14y ago
  Drifting into a state of perpetual war? Isn't the current period the most peaceful in known history?
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > Drifting into a state of perpetual war? Isn't the current period the most peaceful in known history? Let's look at the evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_confli... The only reason we aren't aware of the number of military conflicts taking place is because they aren't on the evening news. And yes, by any objective measure, this is a more warlike time than any in prior history, simply because there are more people available and willing to fight.
    - glomph 14y ago
      I think many would disagree with you on your definition of what makes a time 'warlike'. I think proportions involved in war would make a lot more sense than absolute numbers. I found this talk very interesting on a similar topic: http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violen...
    - mikeash 14y ago
      That's not actually evidence related to the assertion at hand. For that, you'd need a historical comparison, which that list does not provide. You may be right about absolute numbers, but absolute numbers are pointless here. From what I've seen before, in terms of the relative number of people killed in war compared to the overall population, this is the most peaceful time known. If 2x as many people get killed in wars, but there are 4x as many people alive, that world is more peaceful, not less.
      - vadman 14y ago
        I don't entirely agree that "absolute numbers are pointless here". If you look at the amount of human suffering, your world is 2x worse.
- rayiner 14y ago
  What overpopulation crisis? Current UN projections have population peaking not to much higher than now. China's population is expected to peak in 2026 then start shrinking. Most of Europe is facing a depopulation crisis.
  - tubbo 14y ago
    Traffic still sucks everywhere. Therefore, population crisis. When I can get to work at 7am in the same time it takes me to drive home from the same location at 8pm, I will begin to believe that we are facing a "depopulation crisis". ;-)
  - grannyg00se 14y ago
    How is depopulation a crisis?
    - semiquaver 14y ago
      Ask Detroit.
      - grannyg00se 14y ago
        Working people moving elsewhere for work is not the same as a general population decline we'd see from reduced birth rates. Besides....I heard there are plans to regreen entire city blocks.
    - tobinfricke 14y ago
      crisis: "a crucial stage or turning point in the course of something" Most of our social institutions rely on having an increasing or at least stable population. We need young people to support retirees, etc.
    - rayiner 14y ago
      The most immediate answer is that it makes a European-style system of social insurance for older people difficult when the ratio of working people to retirees decreases. The broader answer is that it upends economic expectations. Say I'm thinking of building an office tower. If I know there will be fewer workers in 10 years, instead of more, I'm less likely to build it. If I'm pricing stock in a company, and I know there will be fewer customers in 10 years, instead of more, then I'm going to value that stock lower. What happens to the value of Facebook stock if we realize that there will be fewer and fewer teenagers as time goes on? The economy of the present is hugely dependent on expectations about the future. Finally, though I don't think any European country is in danger of facing this yet, you need a certain critical mass of people to build a truly world-class city with world class arts, culture, etc. Cities smaller than about a million people don't have the consumer base or the tax base to really offer world class amenities. Now, this is admittedly a matter of aesthetics, but if you look at a place like Detroit, which went from 1.8 million to less than half that, you can see that the city is not just a smaller version of itself, but something lesser entirely. And it's not just because of Detroit's poverty. Nobody wants to invest in a city that's shrinking. Contrast Detroit to Philadelphia. Philadelphia is one of the poorest major cities in the country, but it's population very slowly inched up during the 2000's. And while it's not the site of a high-end construction boom like say Toronto, it's a flourishing city. People are opening up new restaurants, new shops, etc, and reshaping downtown to be a much more livable place than it was just ten years ago.
- bcoates 14y ago
  Wow, that Wikipedia article is awful, and a fantastic demonstration of how hobbyhorse subjects on Wikipedia tend to get filled with crap. Contra that shitty graph at the top of the article, population diverged from the historical trend of exponential growth in the 1950s. Worldwide birth rates have peaked. The largest cohort of babies the world has ever seen was in the 80s. The population is now growing solely due to increased lifespans. Much to the disappointment of everyone waiting gleefully for mankind to suffer for its many sins, the Malthusian crisis has not happened, and will not ever happen.
  - eliasmacpherson 14y ago
    If Malthus' warning was heeded, the Irish Famine that occurred less than ten years after his death may have been avoided. Ireland's population of 8 million, to Britain's 14 million, dropped by estimates of 25% through disease, emigration and starvation. This was on the doorstep of the dominant British Empire. Saying the Malthusian crisis will not ever happen is hubris.
    - sabraham 14y ago
      Poor example-- the Famine should be known as the Starvation. There was plenty of food to ration to the Irish, even on Irish land; the British instead shipped it home, or fed it to cattle and then shipped that home, and let the Irish starve instead.
    - bcoates 14y ago
      The Irish Famine was caused by a mixture of a routine crop failure and awful policies both leading up to and during the blight. Ireland's population was not extraordinarily large compared to its production capacity at the time. Crop failures haven't stopped happening, populations have risen quite a bit since the 19th century, but mass starvation still happens or doesn't happen entirely due to policy not a literal shortage of food.
      - eliasmacpherson 14y ago
        A man made Malthusian crisis is still a Malthusian crisis, crop failure and improper agricultural policy have a bearing on how big a population can subsist. 1% of the world's then population passed away in the Irish famine. Ireland's population is now 5 million and Britain's around 60. Ireland's population was extraordinarily large compared to the subsistence farmer's yields in 1845. Here's a chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IrelandEuropePopulation1750.PNG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IrelandEuropePopulation17... Ireland may have been a net exporter of food during the famine, but I would hope you agree that policy can bring about a very literal shortage of food.
- return0 14y ago
  No, i don't think we should celebrate about such a serious health issue. The data is alarming and future studies should focus on identifying the source of this trend. The decline is reported in developed countries (France and Britain), which already have at-or-below level replacement birth rates. The best way to reduce population growth in the developing world is to bring people out of poverty.
- chr1 14y ago
  who will go to mars, if there will be not enough to fill earth?
- orthecreedence 14y ago
  You beat me to it. While the resource to person ratio for our current population may be somewhat sustainable, that does not take into account the output of humans, such as trash, waste, unnatural pollutants, and (sorry, but it's pertinent) carbon gases. So while humans may be fine at our current population, the earth and its other tenants are not fine. Humans are the most destructive force in nature, and the less of them there are the better, for our own survival as well as the rest of the planet. Add the impending climate change into the mix (once again, our fault), which will most likely bring droughts and famine, and your resource-to-person ratio drops significantly, making the human population as it is now dangerously high. I really think dropping human population is a good thing. It will mean less conflicts and resource contention in the next 300 years as deserts spread and oceans rise.
dexter313 14y ago
Children of Men here we come! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/
- ComputerGuru 14y ago
  That was one of the most profound movies I ever watched, I also highly recommend it. It is moving, beautiful, and makes you rethink everything we take for granted.
  - otibom 14y ago
    And the single take scenes were brilliant.
- malkia 14y ago
  I was thinking about that movie when reading the article :)
jeroen 14y ago
Original article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of-sperm-count-crisis-8382449.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of...
icegreentea 14y ago
The study was preformed on sperm banks in France. This means the results probably generalize to all developed/industrialized nations. What would be nice would be some studies to look for this effect in other societies. It would certainly help dial in on root causes.
napoleoncomplex 14y ago
There was an article in The Economist about this as well[0], which points out something that most other sources I've seen seemed to have skipped over: "...much of the effect could be caused by changes in how sperm quality is measured.. the World Health Organisation’s manual on the subject has been revised four times since it was first published in 1980..." "...a continuing investigation of Danish conscripts, is notable for having been established with a consistent method of measurement from the start. Its data show no changes over the years. And Dr Rolland and Dr le Moal admit that, despite the apparent drop in sperm counts they found, there was no increase in the number of infertile men during the period of their study." I haven't actually dived into this new study to see if the authors accounted for these factors. Even if they did, it seems odd that the one study which has maintained the same method of measurement is the one that shows no changes. [0] http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21567879-yet-another-study-suggests-sperm-numbers-are-falling-rich-countries-countdown http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/2156787...
- huggah 14y ago
  Those revisions have actually enabled the problem to stay hidden longer; they've reduced the sperm count threshold at which men are considered "normal". You may be referring to technical issues, such as distinguishing live from dead sperm, or measuring motility---but WHO numbers don't reflect that.
yason 14y ago
Male energy is in crisis. In the modern world boys aren't allowed to be boys to make sure they will become men grown tame. Boys are grown by women—and these days also men who have adopted the women's way of growing kids. We think that male energy is aggressive and offensive, and it must be suppressed and tainted, while simultaneously we have lost our icons of what real manhood entails. We don't have rites of manhood like indigenous people had: the boys were cut off their mothers and their mothers let go of the boys, they started living with men, and the rites eventually transformed a boy into a man. THis doesn't happen anymore. And if you, instead, grow a boy to a man the woman way, what you get is not a man but an overly feminine male who is at loss with his manhood and who has two balls that are barely working.
- stbtrax 14y ago
  This is such a stupid argument that I don't know where to begin. Do you seriously think performing male rites of passage will somehow increase sperm count? You come off as an old curmudgeon that resents advances in women's rights and the lgbt movement and sees this as some sort of threat to old practices which were somehow more masculine in your mind.
- freyrs3 14y ago
  > THis doesn't happen anymore. And if you, instead, grow a boy to a man the woman way, what you get is not a man but an overly feminine male who is at loss with his manhood and who has two balls that are barely working. This reasoning seems a bit specious.
- rmrfrmrf 14y ago
  Oh, Lord. HN is turning into Reddit more and more by the minute.
  - icebraining 14y ago
    If your account is less than a year old, please don't submit comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. (It's a common semi-noob illusion.) http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
sbierwagen 14y ago
Blogspam. OP at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of-sperm-count-crisis-8382449.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of...
return13 14y ago
There is a real good german/french documentary on this subject named 'Men in danger': "A program which looks at some of the factors which may explain why sperm production in males has dropped 50% in 50 years, and explores an important question currently facing scientists; could chemical molecules in our environment be affecting our ability to reproduce? Aside from the huge drop in the amount of sperm production over the last five decades, scientists have also recorded a dramatic rise in the number of testicular cancers and a disturbing increase in the number of congenital malformations in male reproductive organs - two trends echoed in wildlife studies. This suggests the cause is environmental and not genetic. For Niels Skakkebaek, Danish doctor and researcher, the male reproductive and infertility problems we are currently facing are ‘as important as global warming.' (From France, in English) (Science) M CC WS" Here is at least an english trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQfduzOmctI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQfduzOmctI And a review: http://healthhighway.blogspot.de/2008/03/men-in-danger-sbs-documentary.html http://healthhighway.blogspot.de/2008/03/men-in-danger-sbs-d... Germans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFBbbItpdc8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFBbbItpdc8
droithomme 14y ago
Great movie about this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_Men http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_Men Seriously though what is the problem, we have large complex societies and fertility drops dramatically. There's a natural limit and Malthusian ethics of genocide and eugenics are unnecessary. Good news all around.
- nazgulnarsil 14y ago
  Malthusianism has been debunked since before any of us were born. Humans are on average wealth producing.
ok_craig 14y ago
I would be interested in learning whether this issue is universal for all men, or specific to men of certain demographics. Anyone have any insight?

61 points by cs702 14y ago

What? This is being described as a "crisis"? It's the best news I've heard all year. We should celebrate! The world's population is completely out of control, all estimates of future environmental catastrophe turn out to be overly optimistic, we're drifting into a state of perpetual war because of population pressures, and someone laments a decline in sperm count without the slightest grasp of how funny that is? Read and weep, children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation

pathy 14y ago
A bit less pessimistic view is presented by Hans Rosling at a relatively recent TED talk. http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.html http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies.h... Well worth watching. Sperm count is unlikely to affect the population growth anyway, what we need is to get people out of poverty and proper family planning with access to proper birth control. Then we can "control" the population.
- wesley 14y ago
  What we need is a 1 child policy like in China.
  - pathy 14y ago
    That does lead to other problems, like putting a strain on the welfare system of countries when there suddenly is a huge decrease in the number of people that support those who have retired. Look at Japan where there are fewer and fewer supporting more and more. It is kinda working for now but what will happen in 20 years? Who knows.
    - kalms 14y ago
      My guess? We'll gradually shift back into larger households, with several generations living under one roof. Not that bad, when you come to think of it.
  - potatolicious 14y ago
    http://www.brycealcock.com/random/TriviaStats/ChinaPopulation.html http://www.brycealcock.com/random/TriviaStats/ChinaPopulatio... Because it's demonstrably successful at curbing population growth rate? Because during periods of the most aggressive enforcement of the one-child policy, China had its highest growth rate in recent history, 2-2.5x that of the US? And now, during its period of least aggressive enforcement, but with a rapid pace of industrialization and wealth injection, the growth rate has fallen dramatically? http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=ja&l=en http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=ja&l=en Or perhaps we want to look at Japan, which without forced abortions, property confiscation, and brutal acts of repression have managed to achieve a negative growth rate? No matter which way you slice the data, the trend is clear: industrialization, wealth, and stability decrease growth rates, and do so far better than any number of guns and Bibles you can point at people.
    - stcredzero 14y ago
      > Because during periods of the most aggressive enforcement of the one-child policy, China had its highest growth rate in recent history, 2-2.5x that of the US? The fact that China would think to enforce such a policy should give one pause.
  - citricsquid 14y ago
    I don't think that policy is so great. People don't have children just because they can, we need to educate people about children and population growth. My aunt and uncle have an adopted daughter from China, she was abandoned as a result of the one child policy: the policy didn't stop her from being born, but it stopped her from having her biological family.
- lukifer 14y ago
  Don't forget educating women, which tends to result in fewer children per household. I am concerned, though, that the temporary lull in overpopulation will be broken by belief systems that encourage large families; by definition, those with a genetic or memetic instinct to have many children will out-populate those without that instinct. (I have a soft spot for the Mormons, but they come to mind here.)
  - rohansingh 14y ago
    Memes aren't strictly inheritable in the same way that genes are. For example, it is completely plausible to advance the argument that children in large families decide to have fewer offspring due to their own childhood experiences. I'm not saying that this is definitively the case or that I have any evidence for it, but it is just as plausible as the conjecture that a propensity for a large number of offspring is perfectly inheritable.
    - lukifer 14y ago
      Even if memes are not genetically heritable, they are still transmissible, and therefore still subject to selection pressures. And the more children these families have, the broader the attack surface for large-family beliefs to infect the next generation. Moreover, I would suggest that genetics do influence tendencies for adopting some memes over others, especially as regarding the instinct to spread genetic material, which is very ancient. I can't cite any scientific support for this idea, but the likelihood seems very strong.
Alaskan005 14y ago
Thanks for the link, I would have never known without Wikipedia...out of all places. /s Sperm count falling by one third in 25 years is much scarier, suggests a horrible trend for us. As for overpopulation, people usually had /have a lot of kids because of high mortality rates. By the way, who is going to work so that pension check gets to you ;) ?
mikeash 14y ago
Drifting into a state of perpetual war? Isn't the current period the most peaceful in known history?
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Drifting into a state of perpetual war? Isn't the current period the most peaceful in known history? Let's look at the evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_confli... The only reason we aren't aware of the number of military conflicts taking place is because they aren't on the evening news. And yes, by any objective measure, this is a more warlike time than any in prior history, simply because there are more people available and willing to fight.
  - glomph 14y ago
    I think many would disagree with you on your definition of what makes a time 'warlike'. I think proportions involved in war would make a lot more sense than absolute numbers. I found this talk very interesting on a similar topic: http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violen...
  - mikeash 14y ago
    That's not actually evidence related to the assertion at hand. For that, you'd need a historical comparison, which that list does not provide. You may be right about absolute numbers, but absolute numbers are pointless here. From what I've seen before, in terms of the relative number of people killed in war compared to the overall population, this is the most peaceful time known. If 2x as many people get killed in wars, but there are 4x as many people alive, that world is more peaceful, not less.
    - vadman 14y ago
      I don't entirely agree that "absolute numbers are pointless here". If you look at the amount of human suffering, your world is 2x worse.
rayiner 14y ago
What overpopulation crisis? Current UN projections have population peaking not to much higher than now. China's population is expected to peak in 2026 then start shrinking. Most of Europe is facing a depopulation crisis.
- tubbo 14y ago
  Traffic still sucks everywhere. Therefore, population crisis. When I can get to work at 7am in the same time it takes me to drive home from the same location at 8pm, I will begin to believe that we are facing a "depopulation crisis". ;-)
- grannyg00se 14y ago
  How is depopulation a crisis?
  - semiquaver 14y ago
    Ask Detroit.
    - grannyg00se 14y ago
      Working people moving elsewhere for work is not the same as a general population decline we'd see from reduced birth rates. Besides....I heard there are plans to regreen entire city blocks.
  - tobinfricke 14y ago
    crisis: "a crucial stage or turning point in the course of something" Most of our social institutions rely on having an increasing or at least stable population. We need young people to support retirees, etc.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    The most immediate answer is that it makes a European-style system of social insurance for older people difficult when the ratio of working people to retirees decreases. The broader answer is that it upends economic expectations. Say I'm thinking of building an office tower. If I know there will be fewer workers in 10 years, instead of more, I'm less likely to build it. If I'm pricing stock in a company, and I know there will be fewer customers in 10 years, instead of more, then I'm going to value that stock lower. What happens to the value of Facebook stock if we realize that there will be fewer and fewer teenagers as time goes on? The economy of the present is hugely dependent on expectations about the future. Finally, though I don't think any European country is in danger of facing this yet, you need a certain critical mass of people to build a truly world-class city with world class arts, culture, etc. Cities smaller than about a million people don't have the consumer base or the tax base to really offer world class amenities. Now, this is admittedly a matter of aesthetics, but if you look at a place like Detroit, which went from 1.8 million to less than half that, you can see that the city is not just a smaller version of itself, but something lesser entirely. And it's not just because of Detroit's poverty. Nobody wants to invest in a city that's shrinking. Contrast Detroit to Philadelphia. Philadelphia is one of the poorest major cities in the country, but it's population very slowly inched up during the 2000's. And while it's not the site of a high-end construction boom like say Toronto, it's a flourishing city. People are opening up new restaurants, new shops, etc, and reshaping downtown to be a much more livable place than it was just ten years ago.
bcoates 14y ago
Wow, that Wikipedia article is awful, and a fantastic demonstration of how hobbyhorse subjects on Wikipedia tend to get filled with crap. Contra that shitty graph at the top of the article, population diverged from the historical trend of exponential growth in the 1950s. Worldwide birth rates have peaked. The largest cohort of babies the world has ever seen was in the 80s. The population is now growing solely due to increased lifespans. Much to the disappointment of everyone waiting gleefully for mankind to suffer for its many sins, the Malthusian crisis has not happened, and will not ever happen.
- eliasmacpherson 14y ago
  If Malthus' warning was heeded, the Irish Famine that occurred less than ten years after his death may have been avoided. Ireland's population of 8 million, to Britain's 14 million, dropped by estimates of 25% through disease, emigration and starvation. This was on the doorstep of the dominant British Empire. Saying the Malthusian crisis will not ever happen is hubris.
  - sabraham 14y ago
    Poor example-- the Famine should be known as the Starvation. There was plenty of food to ration to the Irish, even on Irish land; the British instead shipped it home, or fed it to cattle and then shipped that home, and let the Irish starve instead.
  - bcoates 14y ago
    The Irish Famine was caused by a mixture of a routine crop failure and awful policies both leading up to and during the blight. Ireland's population was not extraordinarily large compared to its production capacity at the time. Crop failures haven't stopped happening, populations have risen quite a bit since the 19th century, but mass starvation still happens or doesn't happen entirely due to policy not a literal shortage of food.
    - eliasmacpherson 14y ago
      A man made Malthusian crisis is still a Malthusian crisis, crop failure and improper agricultural policy have a bearing on how big a population can subsist. 1% of the world's then population passed away in the Irish famine. Ireland's population is now 5 million and Britain's around 60. Ireland's population was extraordinarily large compared to the subsistence farmer's yields in 1845. Here's a chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IrelandEuropePopulation1750.PNG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IrelandEuropePopulation17... Ireland may have been a net exporter of food during the famine, but I would hope you agree that policy can bring about a very literal shortage of food.
return0 14y ago
No, i don't think we should celebrate about such a serious health issue. The data is alarming and future studies should focus on identifying the source of this trend. The decline is reported in developed countries (France and Britain), which already have at-or-below level replacement birth rates. The best way to reduce population growth in the developing world is to bring people out of poverty.
chr1 14y ago
who will go to mars, if there will be not enough to fill earth?
orthecreedence 14y ago
You beat me to it. While the resource to person ratio for our current population may be somewhat sustainable, that does not take into account the output of humans, such as trash, waste, unnatural pollutants, and (sorry, but it's pertinent) carbon gases. So while humans may be fine at our current population, the earth and its other tenants are not fine. Humans are the most destructive force in nature, and the less of them there are the better, for our own survival as well as the rest of the planet. Add the impending climate change into the mix (once again, our fault), which will most likely bring droughts and famine, and your resource-to-person ratio drops significantly, making the human population as it is now dangerously high. I really think dropping human population is a good thing. It will mean less conflicts and resource contention in the next 300 years as deserts spread and oceans rise.

dexter313 14y ago

Children of Men here we come! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/

ComputerGuru 14y ago
That was one of the most profound movies I ever watched, I also highly recommend it. It is moving, beautiful, and makes you rethink everything we take for granted.
- otibom 14y ago
  And the single take scenes were brilliant.
malkia 14y ago
I was thinking about that movie when reading the article :)

jeroen 14y ago

Original article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of-sperm-count-crisis-8382449.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of...

icegreentea 14y ago

The study was preformed on sperm banks in France. This means the results probably generalize to all developed/industrialized nations. What would be nice would be some studies to look for this effect in other societies. It would certainly help dial in on root causes.

napoleoncomplex 14y ago

There was an article in The Economist about this as well[0], which points out something that most other sources I've seen seemed to have skipped over: "...much of the effect could be caused by changes in how sperm quality is measured.. the World Health Organisation’s manual on the subject has been revised four times since it was first published in 1980..." "...a continuing investigation of Danish conscripts, is notable for having been established with a consistent method of measurement from the start. Its data show no changes over the years. And Dr Rolland and Dr le Moal admit that, despite the apparent drop in sperm counts they found, there was no increase in the number of infertile men during the period of their study." I haven't actually dived into this new study to see if the authors accounted for these factors. Even if they did, it seems odd that the one study which has maintained the same method of measurement is the one that shows no changes. [0] http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21567879-yet-another-study-suggests-sperm-numbers-are-falling-rich-countries-countdown http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/2156787...

huggah 14y ago
Those revisions have actually enabled the problem to stay hidden longer; they've reduced the sperm count threshold at which men are considered "normal". You may be referring to technical issues, such as distinguishing live from dead sperm, or measuring motility---but WHO numbers don't reflect that.

yason 14y ago

Male energy is in crisis. In the modern world boys aren't allowed to be boys to make sure they will become men grown tame. Boys are grown by women—and these days also men who have adopted the women's way of growing kids. We think that male energy is aggressive and offensive, and it must be suppressed and tainted, while simultaneously we have lost our icons of what real manhood entails. We don't have rites of manhood like indigenous people had: the boys were cut off their mothers and their mothers let go of the boys, they started living with men, and the rites eventually transformed a boy into a man. THis doesn't happen anymore. And if you, instead, grow a boy to a man the woman way, what you get is not a man but an overly feminine male who is at loss with his manhood and who has two balls that are barely working.

stbtrax 14y ago
This is such a stupid argument that I don't know where to begin. Do you seriously think performing male rites of passage will somehow increase sperm count? You come off as an old curmudgeon that resents advances in women's rights and the lgbt movement and sees this as some sort of threat to old practices which were somehow more masculine in your mind.
freyrs3 14y ago
> THis doesn't happen anymore. And if you, instead, grow a boy to a man the woman way, what you get is not a man but an overly feminine male who is at loss with his manhood and who has two balls that are barely working. This reasoning seems a bit specious.
rmrfrmrf 14y ago
Oh, Lord. HN is turning into Reddit more and more by the minute.
- icebraining 14y ago
  If your account is less than a year old, please don't submit comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. (It's a common semi-noob illusion.) http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

sbierwagen 14y ago

Blogspam. OP at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of-sperm-count-crisis-8382449.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/scientists-warn-of...

return13 14y ago

There is a real good german/french documentary on this subject named 'Men in danger': "A program which looks at some of the factors which may explain why sperm production in males has dropped 50% in 50 years, and explores an important question currently facing scientists; could chemical molecules in our environment be affecting our ability to reproduce? Aside from the huge drop in the amount of sperm production over the last five decades, scientists have also recorded a dramatic rise in the number of testicular cancers and a disturbing increase in the number of congenital malformations in male reproductive organs - two trends echoed in wildlife studies. This suggests the cause is environmental and not genetic. For Niels Skakkebaek, Danish doctor and researcher, the male reproductive and infertility problems we are currently facing are ‘as important as global warming.' (From France, in English) (Science) M CC WS" Here is at least an english trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQfduzOmctI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQfduzOmctI And a review: http://healthhighway.blogspot.de/2008/03/men-in-danger-sbs-documentary.html http://healthhighway.blogspot.de/2008/03/men-in-danger-sbs-d... Germans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFBbbItpdc8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFBbbItpdc8

droithomme 14y ago

Great movie about this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_Men http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_Men Seriously though what is the problem, we have large complex societies and fertility drops dramatically. There's a natural limit and Malthusian ethics of genocide and eugenics are unnecessary. Good news all around.

nazgulnarsil 14y ago
Malthusianism has been debunked since before any of us were born. Humans are on average wealth producing.

ok_craig 14y ago

I would be interested in learning whether this issue is universal for all men, or specific to men of certain demographics. Anyone have any insight?