Why aren't we talking about the male fertility crisis?

Discussion in 'Manflu Corner' started by jade35, Oct 31, 2018.

  1. jade35

    jade35 Member

    Location:
    S E Cornwall
    Link to an article in the DT - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/arent-talking-male-fertility-crisis/


    On Wednesday, as part of Fertility Network UK’s #YouAreNotAlone Fertility Week, the charity will focus specifically on men: reminding us that while male infertility is as prevalent as female, it often goes unspoken and untreated, leaving men in a lonely struggle with the emotional, physical and financial fall-out.

    “For some guys, there is an incredible sense of shame involved, because we attach siring a child to masculinity so closely,” Voysey says.

    The author and broadcaster has always been happy to identify himself as “the problem” in his and his wife, Merryn’s infertility struggle, in the hope that he can help shift this taboo, much the way we have with male depression.
     
  2. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    At last! An answer to Dr David Attenborough's concerns over the human population explosion!
     
    bovrill and multi power like this.
  3. Frodo2

    Frodo2 Member

    I think it may be as big if not bigger problem
     
  4. DrWazzock

    DrWazzock Member

    Location:
    Lincolnshire
    Grandfather had 6 kids. But between all of us male cousins we have only produced 2 offspring. As my brother said, if we were sheep, you wouldn't buy a tup from this family.

    It's something that's never worried us though. It's just one of those of things.
     
    Farmer_Joe, Sharpy and Frodo2 like this.
  5. tr250

    tr250 Member

    Location:
    Northants
    Well I would be sat inside eating my tea and watching tv instead of being dragged round the village trick or treating :banghead:
     
    Chae1, Dry Rot and DrWazzock like this.
  6. Japan has a bit of problem in that respect i think.
     
  7. Treemover

    Treemover Member

    Location:
    Offaly
    The handmaids tale comes to mind
     
  8. Frodo2

    Frodo2 Member

    Japan, China, South Korea, most of western Europe, all have a reproductive rate below 2. As other economies develop I can't see why couples won't make the same decision, which if not reversed will result in mankinds extinction in a surprisingly short timescale. Prior to that it will cause some interesting economic issues.
     
    Bury the Trash likes this.
  9. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    So a reproductive rate of 2?

    Muliply each generation by two and in about twenty generations you have a million...and you reckon that will lead to extinction?
     
  10. Frodo2

    Frodo2 Member

    Sorry meant for each female or couple.
     
  11. Reproduction rates and fertility aren't the same thing are they?
     
    Pieces_of_Eight likes this.
  12. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    Lemmings would probably agree that there is a correlation.
     
    Frodo2 likes this.
  13. Phil P

    Phil P Member

    Location:
    North West
    If each couple in the world has two children the population would neither increase or decrease it would stay the same.
    They would have to have three or more children to increase the population. If every couple only has one child the population would decrease. It’s a pyramid affect. But as said this has nothing to do with fertility!
     
  14. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    Eh?

    So my parents (two people) have four children.
    2+4=2??

    Now, please correct me, but that looks like a population increase to me unless my parents immediately die after reproducing!

    And reproducing has nothing to do with fertility? So infertile couples are capable of having as many children as fertile couples?

    I don't know what you're on, but put me down for a kilo!:rolleyes:
     
    Cowcalf likes this.
  15. Frodo2

    Frodo2 Member

    Apologies if in post 2 this thread has gone of topic, but even if each couple has 2 children, the population will still fall, as some will be infertile, or choose not to have children. Perhaps not as dramatic as the rate of population growth in the 20th century, but still significant.
     
    Phil P likes this.
  16. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    From wiki, "The last 100 years have seen a massive fourfold increase in the population".

    Doesn't look as if it's declining to me though I accept the rate of increase may be falling. But that is not the same thing as falling numbers.

    If numbers are falling, why do they need to buld all these new houses?

    I think I'll stick with Sir David Attenborough if you don't mind.
     
    Chasingmytail likes this.
  17. Phil P

    Phil P Member

    Location:
    North West
    I’m talking in generations and basic maths. And I’m generalising as it’s not a perfect world an some people will have lots of kids and others non, also it wouldn’t be an equil male/female split.

    However
    If every family have 1 child each and there’s an equal male/female split, then that next generation would half.

    If ever family has 2 children 1 male 1 female, the next generation would stay the same.

    Like I say this isn’t really anything to do with fertility and is digressing from the subject, it is basic maths though.
     
    Frodo2 likes this.
  18. Dry Rot

    Dry Rot Member

    Location:
    Scotland
    Well, I'm talking numbers.

    If my flock of 100 ewes had 98 lambs last year and they have 100 this year, that's an increase of 2% but if none died and I didn't sell any I'd have my original flock, plus my lambs, so that's 100+98+100, while you'd only have two!:LOL:
     
    Phil P likes this.
  19. But thats reproduction not fertility!!
     
    Phil P likes this.
  20. Phil P

    Phil P Member

    Location:
    North West
    I think your forgetting the death rate in the population. So for example -
    you now have two generations, your 100 first generation sheep and 98 lambs, your first generation are now to old and want to retire or the die of old age but your 98 second generation produce 96 lambs so your population initially will increase but over time is on a down slope and eventually wood start to drop dramatically if the trend continued. We’re straying well of topic here again :facepalm:


    Ps, to keep it on topic, what if 2% of your lambs are infertile each year? ;)
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2018
    Frodo2 likes this.

Share This Page