Sperm Counts Are Low in Men Whose Mothers Ate Beef

[LeftyMom]

Source: Bloomberg.com

American men whose mothers indulged in hamburgers and steaks while pregnant have a lower sperm count, suggesting the hormones given to cattle may make people less fertile, researchers wrote in a study.

The concentration of sperm in the semen of men whose mothers ate beef more than seven times a week was 24 percent lower than men whose mothers ate less, said researchers led by Shanna Swan, director of the Center for Reproductive Epidemiology at the University of Rochester in New York.

Men with low sperm counts were three times more likely to have mothers who ate red meat more than seven times a week, the study found. The findings may be the ``tip of the iceberg'' of revelations showing the impact of hormone use among animals, said Frederick vom Saal, a professor of biological sciences at the University of Missouri.

``The risks associated with exposure during development to hormonal residues in beef should be revisited'' by regulators, vom Saal wrote in a commentary accompanying the study, which was published on line today in the journal Human Reproduction.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=awHvkDk_AIyA&refer=us

[China_cat]

1. At a time with rampant overpopulation

this is a -bad- thing?

[LeftyMom]

2. Of course it is. Screwing up our kids hormones isn't a good idea.

[don954]

3. One thing i have found shocking in my recent hormone chemical research

is how low of a dosage is required to cause change. I read a case of a 2 year old who absorbed an average of just 13ng testosterone induced precocious puberty. Its amazing that all the hormones we use in our food haven't caused even more severe issues...

[erpowers]

42. What About Cancer

I and some of my family members believe the high levels of Cancer these days is due to the hormones put in food. So I think there are other bigger problems that are coming from hormones in food. Howevr, it seems that certain industries do not want it to come out that there either is or may be a connection between hormones in food and Cancer in humans. There are laws that prevent people from openly saying that hormones in animals cause Cancer even though there is research that shows that female cows that are given growth hormones tend to develop ovarian Cancer. I think due to the law the research is not enough evidence to allow people to say growth hormones in food causes Cancer in humans. From what I heard there has to be undeniable proof that the hormones cause Cancer for someone to speak out against it.

[central scrutinizer]

4. What about the daughters?

Too much research seems to be by men, for men and about men.

[China_cat]

5. That's because only men count.

[LeftyMom]

6. Sperm count is cheap and easy to measure.

Problems with ovulation, problems with eggs, etc are much harder to detect.

I think in this case it's more a matter of what's practical to examine, in much the same way that the easiest way to study ambient pollution in our bodies is to look at breastmilk, not so much because there's a special interest in lactating mothers as because it's the easiest source of human fats to study.

[femmedem]

29. However, it's easy to check age of onset of menses.

And, in fact, girls have been reaching puberty dramatically earlier than in previous generations. No one knows why. Exposure to environmental hormones from pesticides? From birth control pill hormones excreted into the water supply? Or too much fat in the diet? Now we have a new possibility.

Emeritus Professor Norbert Kluge of the Universität Koblenz-Landau wrote in der Internet publication "Beiträge zur Sexualwissenschaft und Sexualpädagogik" that girls in 1992 had their first period on average at 12.2 years old and in 2010 will have it around 10 or 11 years of age.

Researchers noted the trend 140 years ago. In 1860 the average menarche happened at 16.6 years, in 1920 at 14.6, in 1950 at 13.1 and 1980, 12.5 years.

http://www.mum.org/menarage.htm

[Donnachaidh]

7. isn't it the MEN who decided to put hormones in the beef?

Hey -- blame the moms anyway. Typical reaction from a male-dominated society. :shrug: :puke:

[Threedifferentones]

11. Riiiight

Nothing in the article says moms should have known better, and I will bet the study itself doesn't say that either. In fact the article seems quite inconclusive, and doesn't really "blame" anybody for anything, although one might say it implicity convicts American beef producers of not really caring whether the hormones they use in animals are safe or not.

But don't let that stop you from thinking men are working for the subjugation of women at all times, please.

[ryanmuegge]

23. No kidding. Leave it to some to turn everything into a gender oppression issue.

[Xipe Totec]

14. Not true

http://enhs.umn.edu/5200/estrogen/women.html

[nodehopper]

38. there is an excellent novel about just that called "My Year of Meats"

[TX-RAT]

8. I have to ask.

At what point are these cattle given hormones. I've been in the ranching business for over 25 years, and have never given any of my cattle hormones, nor does anybody else around here that I'm aware of.

[BlueIris]

9. Really? Good for you.

No, seriously, good for you.

[AnneD]

13. I think you see it more in dairy ....

and feedlots prior to slaughter. Feed lot cattle are also given antibiotics and this is why we are seeing antibiotic resistant strains of E-coli. Read carefully any pre packaged feed or growth pellets. That is the source of hormones. Many farmers don't use it but you can bet your last bale of hay that these large Agribusinesses do it.

[Kali]

20. me niether - on the other hand

this stuff doesn't work unless you have abundant or superabundant feed - so it tends to be used more in feedlot situations. I don't know anybody that uses the shit, but the advertizing for it sure is heavy.

[JuniperLea]

36. I was going to ask the same thing

I spent many a summer on my aunt's ranch in Idaho and never once did I see or hear of that cattle getting hormones or anti-biotics. Unless it's already in the feed...

I try to only buy heirloom beef and pork... generation upon generation of animals that have never had hormones or anti-biotics.

[w4rma]

10. Ew. New slogan: "Beef. It makes you less of a man."

I'm really glad I've been beef-free since I first heard that the feds were *preventing* tests for Mad Cow in our beef supply, about four-or-so years ago.

[depakid]

24. Beef is just an all around bad deal

Along with the numerous adverse health effects, cattle ranching is also one of humankind's most environmentally destructive practices.

As to Mad Cow, I have no doubt that we're going to see major problems down the line. My only question is how many cases will there be- and what will the epi curve(s) look like.

[AnneD]

12. As a School Nurse...

I have been greatly concerned with early onset puberty. Puberty, esp early onset can fuse togather still growing bones thus stunting growth among other thing. A research study on this was done in Puerto Rico. A direct link to hormone fed chicken (main source of protein)and early onset puberty was made. Kids that frequently ate chicken vs those that ate more fish were less likely to have early onset.

[kath]

15. But then, the fish is full of mercury. So you can't win...

[AnneD]

17. This study was in the.....

80's. I also fish are still less tainted (depending on the species and feeding grounds. These kids showed no signs of mercury poisoning.

[youngdem]

26. Eat small fish. Much lower mercury concentrations. Shorter time for buildup.

[alarimer]

30. Not all fish contain mercury

Only the top predator-type species: tuna, swordfish, shark, mackerel. Salmon, catfish, tilapia have no serious amounts of mercury in them (of course there are other environmental problems associated with farmed salmon in particular, but that's another thread).

[shraby]

16. Bad science! Most mothers eat beef

pregnant or not. How could they possibly link the two?

[LeftyMom]

18. Well, you need a test population and a control group.

You make sure they're otherwise similar, and you compare results to see how the variable effects your hypothesis.

That the test population is a small fraction of the overall population really isn't a big deal at all, as long as you can scare up enough of them to be statistically significant.

[FlaGranny]

19. Maybe this could be

the answer to the overpopulation problem. :evilgrin:

Seriously, eating beef more than 7 times a week is eating a lot of beef. I don't think I've ever done that in my life. I've always enjoyed peanut butter too much for that. I rarely eat red meat nowadays unless it is grass fed and hormone free. I try to stay away from feedlot meat.

[Kali]

21. Surprise! It needs more study.

Other Factors

Other factors such as pesticide use and lifestyle may have played a role in lowering sperm counts, and more research is needed, wrote Swan, who has studied environmental effects on reproductive health for two decades.

``Whether prenatal exposure to anabolic steroids is responsible for our findings in whole or in part could be clarified by repeating this study in men born in Europe after 1988, when anabolic steroids were no longer permitted in beef sold or produced there,'' Swan said.

The men's own diets didn't have an impact on sperm quality, and the shape and mobility of the sperm were unaffected, the study showed. Any research relying on self-reported food consumption is prone to error in how that intake is measured.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kali - normally I don't quote folks with an obvious bias but in this case the guy is spot on: ...

``It is widely accepted that food recall can be notoriously poor from even a day or a week before, let alone multiple decades,'' said Randy Huffman, vice president of scientific affairs for the Washington-based American Meat Institute, in a statement.

The study ``should be viewed with a giant dose of skepticism,'' he said. ``This appears to be a health study in search of a health problem.''

[Miss Chybil]

22. I ate beef and my sons don't seem to have a fertility problem. nt

[rinsd]

25. "mothers ate beef more than seven times a week"

More than 7 times a week? That's alot of beef eating!

[WindRavenX]

33. good lord! That can't be healthy!

7x a week?? Damn.

[BootinUp]

27. Geebus H crise

We evolved eating beef and other red meats! This is just silly. There is some other factor they are overlooking.

[w4rma]

28. You're overlooking the hormones that they have historically recently started injecting into

cows. It's not the beef. It's the additives.

When you eat hormone injected muscle/fat, you are digesting the extra hormones, too.

[BootinUp]

31. I am not sure ingesting hormones

is the same thing as a direct injection...

Plus the hormones were injected into living animals and processed already. Sounds a little paranoid to me.

[w4rma]

34. "Processed" by the "living animals" makes them safe?

And how does this "processing" of synthetic hormones within the "living animals" work, mr. "I'm not sure" biochemist?

[BootinUp]

35. I am not a biochemist

But I am aware that hormones have to be produced all the time by ones own body to stimulate certain functions. It suggests that hormones are not something that hangs around in the body like some kind of poison. They likely breakdown and are secreted along with other bodily wastes. As for your emphasis on the word "synthetic" it doesn't scare me or something. Synthetic things do not all have the same characteristics. You use that word like someone who is against plastic bags.

[olddad56]

32. Maybe they are eating the wrong kind of meat.

[Countdown_3_2_1]

37. I call Bullsh*t on this article

No freaking way.

[Crayson]

39. Tough choice....

If you eat meat while pregnant, your boy is gonna be sterile.
If you don't eat meat, he's gonna lack iron and protein.

Why you people don't just eat EVERYTHING and EACH in healthy doses.

Everything is poison and nothing is poison, it's the dose, as you certainly know.
I'm tired of those "don't eat this, neither that nor that" discussions.

Some people should just stop eating at all.
^_^

[LeftyMom]

40. Nah, neither iron nor protein is a big issue for those who don't eat meat

Well, iron can be for people who replace the meat with a crapton of dairy, but if you aren't a cheesatarian, it's generally not an issue.

[shrike]

41. Mormons and Catholics excepted

No disrespect meant to anyone, but the old-style Catholics I used to know came from non-veggie families and produced seven, eight, nine kids or more in rapid succession.

My nephew recently converted to Mormonism and those folks pop out a lot of kids. I don't know if they have any dietary restrictions, but I don't think they're vegetarians.