Jump to content

I have wondered why for some time. This indicates something..


woolybanana
 Share

Recommended Posts

Perhaps it's down to more people being around now compared to any other time in history.

The fact it's become more socially acceptable so people are coming out more ie before we didn't hear so much about people wanting to become the opposite sex through fear of being judged for example.

It's become technologically possible so people are having the change done.

Think there's many more reasons than just that explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started reading the article as far as:

'Sperm counts are falling so fast that young men are less fertile than their fathers and produce only a third as much, proportionately, as hamsters'.

Then couldn't be bothered to read more nonsense. Did the journo write that for a bet I wonder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not bothered to read the article - sorry - but I do have a friend who says that girls these days have no figures (curves - fellahs!!) and they look more and more like lads - and she reckons it is all to do with whatever they put in the water these days (and what gets into in from running off farmers' fields etc), so if you think about it, it may work in both directions, and give both sexes the same masculine type figure than ever before.  Who knows!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Devon"]

'Sperm counts are falling so fast that young men are less fertile than their fathers and produce only a third as much, proportionately, as hamsters'.

Then couldn't be bothered to read more nonsense. Did the journo write that for a bet I wonder?

[/quote]

The problem with science reports in the press is that the science is dumbed down. The usual explanation for this is so that the lay reader can understand it. My suspicion is that it is so the journalist thinks he can understand it. All too often, science journalism reads like a message being delivered in a foreign language that the writer does not understand. I think this is the case with the Telegraph article. 

A quick bit of Googling found the following site www.fertility-docs.com, which belongs to an American fertility clinic. The site mentions the “Hamster Test”:

 

“In this test, the species specific barrier to penetration (not fertilization) is removed from the ova (eggs) of the hamster. These oocytes are then exposed to prepared sperm from the man being tested. There is some feeling that if a man's sperm are able to penetrate the hamster eggs in the laboratory, there is a higher likelihood that his sperm will ultimately be able to fertilize a human egg if so exposed. “

 

The Hamster Test is a test of the sperm’s ability to penetrate an egg, not of the relative fertility of male human and male hamsters. 

 

As for the feminisation of little boys? Well, all fertilised eggs are female, where there is a Y- chromosome, however, developing female structures are “masculinised”, for example, developing ovaries become testes etc. So the female embryo is turned male. Some people believe that hormones used in food production are escaping into the environment and are “feminising” male foetuses.  

 

Perhaps producing unbeatable South African athletes?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Clarkkent"]

As for the feminisation of little boys? Well, all fertilised eggs are female, where there is a Y- chromosome, however, developing female structures are “masculinised”, for example, developing ovaries become testes etc. So the female embryo is turned male. Some people believe that hormones used in food production are escaping into the environment and are “feminising” male foetuses.  

 

Perhaps producing unbeatable South African athletes?

[/quote]

I think perhaps that is what my friend was on about .....  but the other way round, hormones "masculinising" females.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...