Household chemicals can cause infertility in men
Last reviewed: 23.04.2024
All iLive content is medically reviewed or fact checked to ensure as much factual accuracy as possible.
We have strict sourcing guidelines and only link to reputable media sites, academic research institutions and, whenever possible, medically peer reviewed studies. Note that the numbers in parentheses ([1], [2], etc.) are clickable links to these studies.
If you feel that any of our content is inaccurate, out-of-date, or otherwise questionable, please select it and press Ctrl + Enter.
There is new evidence that household chemicals, usually easily detected around us, can cause a decrease in the fertilizing capacity of the male seed. Thus, the testing of rams, systematically exposed to the usual household chemicals like cosmetics, detergents and various pollutants, showed that 42% of the animals had abnormalities that could lead to a sharp decrease in the number of live sperm in the ejaculate.
Details of the study are published in the International Journal of Andrology.
Some chemicals produced by humans can interfere with the communication system inside the body and potentially have a negative effect on health and well-being. It is also believed that some of them may be responsible for reducing the fertilizing capacity of the male seed; this may also explain the growing demand for in vitro fertilization (IVF).
Scientists representing the Universities of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, the James Hutton Institute (all - Great Britain) and the French National Institute of Agricultural Research, turned their attention to the testes of sheep that were constantly influenced by the typical for the average person in terms of the spectrum and concentration of household chemicals to which we are exposed from conception to puberty. According to the researchers, they were extremely surprised to find in 42% of animals the most diverse deviations, capable of leading to infertility. Moreover, the revealed changes, firstly, were not the same for all the affected individuals, and secondly, they were not noticed during any indirect tests, including a test of the level of the male hormone in the blood.
Now scientists are wondering why the impact of these "everyday" chemicals is so negative for some and does not affect other individuals. In addition, I would like to emphasize once again the underlying conclusion drawn by the authors of the study: in spite of the fact that the concentration of each individual chemical in the surrounding environment can be extremely low, it is hardly possible to predict with certainty all the health consequences to which lead to a permanent cumulative impact of a complex mixture of such substances ...
