# Assault on the male (effects of xenoestrogens)



## 22575 (May 23, 2011)

@Khar


----------



## 22575 (May 23, 2011)

@_Vaan_ 
@_Navis Amoris_ 
@_Btmangan

_Thoughts and further insights/information are more than welcome!


----------



## Khar (May 21, 2011)

@unsung truth, thank you for sharing this documentary with us! For those wondering, it came out in 1993. I've done a quick bit of reading and wrote this out rather quickly (as likely seen by the post times, considering I needed to see this documentary and watch 45 minutes before writing), sorry if there are any errors or confusion within as a result thereof!

Four points before I begin: 

1) Notice the importance of animal testing in this documentary. This is one of the reasons why the medical research community is so adamant in supporting the use of animal testing -- those studies mentioned which did not use animals directly were oncological studies, likely using samples collected through animal testing. A well regulated and operational animal testing system produces excellent scientific and medical results important to all of mankind and large portions of the environment. 

2) There is a bit of an anti-industry line, and I would point out that if there is a problem with statistics which cannot be remedied by the authors then the criticism is well founded. Likewise if there isn't a firm foundation for demands of companies. When this topic first came to the public eye, 20 years ago, it had been a decade or more since a lot of these things had happened and there wasn't a wealth of information then. Today, we know a lot more, and it's been the research of the last 10 years, a full decade after this documentary came out, that our understanding and results have been advanced the most. This is not to say that industry is a paragon of virtue, nor that the documentary was unfair, but it would take ten documentaries to look at the research here and they had to save time -- I think this was definitely acceptable and just wanted to provide limited potential context. 

3) Listen closely to what they say. They are rarely definite on anything, and this is important for one thing -- as scientists, they were commenting from available data. They do not pass judgement, nor make definitive statements. Today, we do know things like obesity play a role in fertility, and growing obesity rates in many of the countries this began in skewed results a little. This is still a problem and something we should, as a society, look at. In fact, many point out in related publications to this just how important it is to look at the big picture of complex systems and diseases.

4) Throughout this paper I link to scientific studies on PubMed, the world's leading resource and database on medicine, including toxicology. I would like to point out, this is after only a few hours of research, so I'm not sure on the veracity or accuracy of some statements or interpretations of mine (with point 3 in mind, I really should never be). I lack expertise on this topic. In addition, I noticed that I might have been auto-authorized for access to these journal entries -- it may be all anyone else gets is abstracts, and I apologize for this. 

All in all, I like this documentary. The damage to the environment done by pesticides became a hot topic over the past two decades, with most countries banning compounds like the ones described here. That list which scrolls during the documentary of pesticides is a much reduced list today -- few are actively used, even in developed countries, and mostly only used in cases of severe issues which need rapid fixing (fire ant colonies in homes, for example, Africanized beehives). Thanks to sound scientific research and international government actions, we did do what was needed -- many of these compounds are no longer in common use. 

As for nonylphenols, many nations (those who actually use plastics extensively) have already limited their use, setting up regulations to test waterways to the microgram and set a mandatory block which is much lover than in the tests we see here today. In addition, the pthalates are being phased out across North America and the EU, and due to our import regulations, extensive pressure is on Asian nations to phase them out as well. While slow, it is a necessary process, for environmental and health concerns. As mentioned in the documentary, everyone was so shocked that this was actually causing a problem not just because scientists considered it benign, but because it was so widely used. 

This is not to say the matter is done and settled with, not even on the research front. The mass majority of potential oestrogenic compounds are still under regulated to some degree. In part because research is still going on to find links between "known" estrogen-like compounds and negative impacts, with mixed results (note, xenoestrogens in studies linked are synonymous with endocrine disruptors). As mentioned, there are many different methods of impact available, even in how genes are expressed due to interaction with hormones. In addition, the results of some studies mentioned, for example increased levels of xenoestrogens in cancer patients, have not been duplicated (an important aspect of peer review and the scientific process), or have too weak of a correlation to be sure. The last study I just linked concludes that more study is required, since there is a lack of statistical significance to be sure either which way. It is not the only one making an urgent call for further research, with the latest call coming in 2005. Exactly what can impact fertility on the male side, and is there enough of it in the environment? 

For those wondering, Danish men, who were mentioned in this film, now show* around 41 million sperm/mL as a median, and a little over 57 million sperm/mL as the mean. Other studies have noted 1 in 5 men now have significant difficulties reproducing, with many below 20 million sperm/mL. However, pesticides are not the only method being explored -- for example. The Independent actually ran a not too bad article* on this recently, noting that it was very hard to connect fertility rates with any one thing. While there have been incidents where we can connect them, the situations are either unusual, or have complicating factors. 

However, it is entirely safe to say that the wealth of information of the scientific community overwhelmingly supports a singular conclusion; there has been a decrease in the fertility of men, both in general and in the developed world, and that it has caused a significant decrease in sperm count. In addition, there is a multitude of connections being made in the scientific community, from what is causing it, through what else is happening to men. Finally, a conclusion firmly in the hands of science for decades has been the persistence of and the eventual concentration of contaminants, and how they can persist for incredibly long periods of time, with evidence from everything from heavy metal accidents to pesticides. 

Has the scientific community answered the rallying call? On both fronts, generally, yes. Infertility in men brings in hundreds of papers a year from all corners of the world, and xenoestrogens have also had quite a few hundred new papers over the years. But it is a massive task.

_Because of the documented functional changes or disruptions to animals, mechanistic explanations are needed for the actions of each xenoestrogen. Such knowledge will allow us to predict, prevent, and perhaps remediate their suspected effects on human and animal health. There is a need for studies of all potential xenoestrogens in detail, to fill in the matrix of what tissues they act in, and then what mechanistic pathways they use in those tissues to either disrupt or mimic hormone action. <snip> Federal regulations about the allowable exposures for xenoestrogens must be based on sound data that takes into consideration all the mechanistic pathways via which these compounds mediate effects.​_~ Source​
Today, some papers (like this one here) focus heavily on the topic and cross cite to many other studies, and many do come to the conclusion that there are deleterious impacts to human health. It's even been asked if this stuff impacts everything from asthma and allergies through cardiovascular disease with mixed results. Perhaps the next meta analysis or government paper we see will urge greater response, even as governments already respond to this. The evidence is intriguing, and the risks are very big. 

While the information present on the human front is somewhat confused, one of the leading reasons for the end of use of many of these compounds was because of the environmental and ecological studies. From zebrafish through peregrine falcons (the most infamous DDT example), we discovered just how damaging many pesticides were. It has been a lot easier, in some cases, to identify clear environmental harms which required intervention and legislation. This is actually one of my pet peeve problems -- as a son of a farmer on my maternal side, the ideas presented intrigue me, and the evidence of its issues is a hot spot issue. I feel one of the leading problems of the modern world is the use of pesticides in the agricultural industry, not only in what is being used, but how even the safer ones are misapplied or overused. From that point of view, I would personally push for greater government involvement in the production, research, regulation, and application of pesticides. 

My conclusion? Regardless of the current state of medical research, I think there is cause for concern. The need for pesticides is not going to die off, as its needed to support the productivity and production necessary to support the human race. We cannot divorce something so essential from agriculture so quickly, especially given context of famine, economic growth in developing nations and the like. To some degree, this is why I am not as opposed to GM foods as many people are. Alternatives to conventional pesticides which are "naturally" made have lower efficacy and retain much of the same harmful features. We also cannot ignore the numerable environmental hazards already connected to them, and the potential for health concerns to find cemented and consistent issues with them -- and no doubt some would say we have already, and I'd be hard pressed to argue with them. I do find some of the evidence to be very compelling, personally, and believe that there is truth to the claims that it is impacting human fertility, and perhaps causing other health issues. I cannot be sure from the current state of research and discussion, especially given my lack of research on the topic. 

Not just further research, but greater oversight, greater government involvement and greater regulation is necessary, in my mind. The overuse and misuse of pesticides is a major issue aside from this altogether, but it does add a sense of urgency. Ecosystems can retain contaminants for many generations, and actions are needed now to slow down known issues, and further potential issues. And the next generation of developed farmers, who will now yield from all parts of the world, need to know what is ahead of them. 

_* Please note, these sources are not directly academic, and do have a noted aim in their sites which could cause them to be biased. This is towards only two links, The Independent article and the one on current Danish sperm counts, which does appear to cite an academic source but I did not have time to confirm and corroborate. Corrections would be welcomed. _


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Whoa.... what? Short version please. Pesticides or something are killing my manhood? Which, and how do I avoid?


----------



## Zerosum (Jul 17, 2011)

This issue was first discovered in the 80s.. The only way around it is to grow your own veggies and meat..


----------



## Navis Amoris (Feb 21, 2010)

I've read a number of articles on this over the course of the years (didn't watch the video though; I haven't had much time the last weeks), and after spending a lot of time thinking about it and trying to avoid it, I decided to just accept it. There have been cases of male fish developing female genitalia because of these xenoestrogens in their habitat, so I guess I'm happy I'm not a fish. 

I did have my testosterone and estrogen levels checked last year though. Thankfully everything was still in order. I guess the main thing I do to limit my exposure as much as possible is drinking mineral water rather than other beverages (especially tap water) and eating organic meat. Seeing as I'm not well-versed in this field at all, I decided to leave the actual solving of the problem to people more qualified than myself. :tongue:


----------



## wuliheron (Sep 5, 2011)

Hasn't prevented any wars or overpopulation that I can see.


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

So we've basically screwed ourselves royally.


----------



## 22575 (May 23, 2011)

Thanks @_Khar_ !
Here is the journal article on sperm count of Danish men:
High frequency of sub-optimal semen quality in an unselected population of young men
It is printed in an Oxford journal on Human Reproduction, so it looks legitimate.

It's good to see that the EU and US have taken action on nonylphenols and pthalates! (Do you have a source on this per chance?)


----------



## Bote (Jun 16, 2010)

Good thing I live in a not so high tech country. Here we still get meat and veggies from villages and they are grown by old school methods. Fruit is the issue though, since it comes mostly from the West.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

Souled In said:


> Whoa.... what? Short version please. Pesticides or something are killing my manhood? Which, and how do I avoid?


You are at risk if you eat foods exposed to pesticides, plastic resins as well as factory farmed meat, fatty foods. Oh and avoid soy products and beer too.

Basically you should become a organic-vegan if you don't want to grow man-boobs and your balls to shrink.

The Anti-Estrogenic Diet - avoid estrogen foods


----------



## chip (Oct 12, 2011)

Xenoestrogens cause horrible horrible things more in women. Thus why I have depression and severe anxiety. I will be taking a natural oil progesterone just to get things right and try to make my own natural soaps, shampoos etc to avoid these things. They're not just in meat, either. They are in SO many things.


----------



## chip (Oct 12, 2011)




----------



## chip (Oct 12, 2011)

As mentioned in the video above; xenoestrogens also make fish into hermaphrodites.


----------



## chip (Oct 12, 2011)

Snow Leopard said:


> You are at risk if you eat foods exposed to pesticides, plastic resins as well as factory farmed meat, fatty foods. Oh and avoid soy products and beer too.
> 
> Basically you should become a organic-vegan if you don't want to grow man-boobs and your balls to shrink.
> 
> The Anti-Estrogenic Diet - avoid estrogen foods


Also getting rid of anything lavender oil and tea tree oil.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Snow Leopard said:


> You are at risk if you eat foods exposed to pesticides, plastic resins as well as factory farmed meat, fatty foods. Oh and avoid soy products and beer too.
> 
> Basically you should become a organic-vegan if you don't want to grow man-boobs and your balls to shrink.
> 
> The Anti-Estrogenic Diet - avoid estrogen foods


Silly person, you can't be a man and a vegan.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Reading science is better than watching it on YouTube.


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> Reading science is better than watching it on YouTube.


But that would imply that you're truly educated on a topic.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

koalaroo said:


> Reading science is better than watching it on YouTube.


The paywalls tend to put most people off though. :frustrating:


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Snow Leopard said:


> The paywalls tend to put most people off though. :frustrating:


This is true. The alarmist stuff on YouTube is just ... ugh.


----------



## William I am (May 20, 2011)

FWIW to post this months after the thread died, tap water is extremely carefully monitored, and is probably a lot safer to drink than anything that's been in a plastic container for months. First and foremost, most bottled water is actually bottled TAP water. Soft plastic bottles are the most questionable because of the chemicals (like pthalates) used to soften the plastic.

If you must filter your own water with an under-counter filter system or a tap add-on. Short of that, buy it locally, fill it in hard-plastic bottles, store it for less than a week or so in these, and read their water quality report and compare it to the locally available tap water.


----------

