What's causing the 'feminisation' of men.

[Sally]

I came across this article recently which may be of interest to some people, regarding chemicals and drugs.

"Independant.co.uk — In 1991, a Danish scientist presented the results of a study to a World Health Organisation conference, showing that the sperm counts of Western men had fallen by about a half over the previous 50 years. Professor Niels Skakkebaek of the University of Copenhagen could offer no explanation for the findings, but neither could he dismiss them as a mere statistical fluke. More than a decade later, scientists are still trying to explain the apparent feminisation of modern man.
There is now mounting evidence that something quite serious is happening to male fertility, and not just in sperm counts. It encompasses a range of disorders of the male reproductive system, and medical researchers have even coined a name for it - testicular dysgenesis syndrome.

The syndrome is a collection of disorders that manifest themselves at one of two stages in life. At birth, it appears as cryptorchidism - the incomplete descent of the one testis or both testes into the scrotum - or a disorder of the penis in which the opening does not develop at the tip, a disfigurement called hypospadia. Later in life, after adolescence, testicular dysgenesis syndrome can appear as more generalised disorders such as low sperm counts, infertility, or cancer of the testes.

There is ample data to suggest that these disorders are on the increase. Cryptorchidism is the most common congenital malformation in children of either sex, affecting between 2 and 4 per cent of baby boys, and hypospadias are the second most common congenital malformation in children. Low sperm counts now affect up to one in five young men, and testicular cancer is the most common cancer of young men, and its incidence has increased steadily over the past 60 years. In fact, were it not for the fact that testicular cancer is so curable, it would be the biggest killer of young men after road-traffic accidents, according to Dr Richard Sharpe, a male-fertility specialist at the Medical Research Council's Human Reproductive Sciences Unit in Edinburgh.

Sharpe is one of several experts in the field who believe that there could be a common basis for all these different problems of the male reproductive system. He suggests that all the disorders stem from a problem arising at the key stage in the development of the male foetus during early pregnancy. "From epidemiological studies, we know that each of the disorders is a risk factor for all the others, and that they share several pregnancy-related risk factors," Sharpe says. "Most importantly, we know that they share hormonal risk factors, in particular anything that interferes with the production or action of androgens and testosterone [the male sex hormones] during the sexual differentiation process of the foetus that occurs in the womb."

In other words, the suggestion is that there is something happening early in the development of the male foetus that interferes with the key steps enabling it to develop into a healthy, fertile male. Ever since Professor Skakkebaek made his discovery on sperm counts, environmentalists have suggested that it could be "gender-bending" chemicals - endocrine disrupters - in the environment that are the cause of the gradual feminisation of men. But despite intense research to find these endocrine disrupters, the precise reasons for the problems have not so far been identified.

Some scientists believe that the culprit may just as likely be a change in lifestyle, rather than exposure to some new environmental chemical. John Ashby, from the Syngenta Central Toxicology Laboratory in Macclesfield, says that the focus on an environmental cause may be quite wrong. "The human [reproductive] conditions cannot at the moment be associated with a named chemical," says Ashby. "There are many lifestyle changes that could be contributing to these conditions, for instance increased smoking among young women."

Another possible lifestyle factor that could be playing a role is the significant increase in the intake of dietary fat over the past 50 years. Fat is linked with oestrogens - the female sex hormone - and more fat means more oestrogens, which means a possible increase in the risk of interference with the proper development of male reproductive organs. "The trends on dietary fat are up, and the implications are great for endocrine disruption," says Ashby.

Nevertheless, work on animals has led to the discovery of some chemicals in the environment that could be playing an important role. Sharpe cites his work on chemicals called phthalates, substances used by industry to soften plastics. He has been able to create a set of disorders in laboratory animals that mimic human testicular dysgenesis syndrome by exposing pregnant mothers to certain phthalate esters at a key stage of foetal development.

"Phthalates are the most common environmental chemical. They are in the air around us," says Sharpe. However, he points out, it is too early to jump to the conclusion that this is the cause of the problem. "At present, doses that are 100- to 500-fold higher than the highest reported human exposure are required to induce such effects, and we do not have any proof that phthalates can induce such effects in humans," he says. "Nevertheless, phthalates are everywhere in our environment, we are all exposed, and the highest exposure appears to be in young women of reproductive age."

But although the jury is out in terms of what is causing the reproductive problems among humans, the same is not the case for the feminisation documented among wildlife, according to Professor Peter Matthiessen of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Windermere. "People are cautious about saying that there are definite effects on humans, but we have hard evidence for effects on wildlife in all groups, from invertebrates to mammals," he says. "It's a real-world issue, not just a theoretical worry. It's actually happening. The effects range from relatively trivial biochemical changes, probably of no ecological significance, to huge changes in populations and communities of organisms."

Most work has centred on the rise of hermaphrodite fish in British rivers, which seems to have happened as a result of the increase in natural and synthetic oestrogens pouring into the aquatic environment from sewage effluent. "Most of the effects seem to be occurring in the aquatic environment. We're not sure why. It might be due to not enough work being done in the terrestrial environment, but I think it is a genuine effect and something do to with the exposure of water-breathers," says Matthiessen.

The contraceptive pill being flushed down the toilet is one obvious reason for the increase in oestrogens in the environment. Natural oestrogens break down relatively easily, but synthetic oestrogens are designed to withstand the rigours of the human intestine - the same traits that prevent them from being broken down by microbes in sewage-treatment works.

The crucial question is whether this environmental chemical, or any others suspected of being endocrine disrupters, are actually getting back into the human food chain to affect foetal development in pregnant women.

Richard Sharpe is keen to assert the importance of not jumping to conclusions. "I'm concerned that people run away and say that because we are investigating something, and because it can cause a similar disorder in animals, then it must cause it in humans," he says. It is in everyone's interest to focus on the disorder rather than on the potential culprits, he says. "If we assume guilt, the real culprit may be able to carry on causing harm while we get side-tracked."

Although scientists have made great strides in understanding endocrine disruption since Professor Skakkebaek's sperm-count study was first brought to the public's attention in 1991, they have still a long way to go before they can explain what is actually happening to the fertility of the human male. "

Kind Regards.

Sally.

[Elizabeth]

Sally,

Thanks for that post. That was really interesting. I had no idea that was going on. I think it may be a pretty gaurded secret because it has really gotten no publicity at all.

I was born a month premature to a 24 year old woman who already had 5 children ages 1-8, with a husband who worked out of town. I was born with cryptorchidism and it did not decend until I was 10 or 11. I had no idea that, that was associated with feminisation. And was even more surprised to find out that the animal kingdom is experiencing the same thing.

Great post.

Love always,
Elizabeth

[Sally]

Hi Elizabeth,

Over the last few years there has indeed been quite a lot of publicity regarding the diminishing Y chromosome, but of course it's been mainly in documentaries, medical journals and the associated books and magazines, so I suppose the majority of society really haven't had it drawn to their attention in a large way.

As we know, it takes a man to carry a Y chromosome, and it takes the Y chromosome to make sperm, which is necessary for human reproduction. So men are essential to the future of the species.

But researchers have found that, over the millennia, the Y chromosome has lost most of it genes.

Each of our cells contains 23 pairs of chromosomes. Twenty-two of those pairs are matched pairs, shared by men and women. The 23rd is different.

In women, the 23rd pair is made up of two X chromosomes. In men, it's made up of an X chromosome and a Y chromosome. That Y chromosome determines maleness in humans -- it holds genes necessary for forming testes and making sperm.

The fact that it doesn't have a matching pair poses a bit of a problem for the Y chromosome.

All the other chromosomes come in two copies. Every time a cell divides, mistakes in genes can creep in. In paired chromosomes, that means that if there is a mistake on one chromosome, a cell can always get the correct gene sequence from the other chromosome.

Over time, mistakes have crept into the Y chromosome, too. But every time a gene on the Y chromosome went bad, it basically disappeared. Scientists theorize that the X and Y chromosome started out with about the same amount of genes -- about 1,000. Today, the Y chromosome has less than 80 genes.

Some geneticists think the Y chromosome is now little more than a genetic wasteland that will eventually just disappear. If that were to happen, it would certainly spell the end of sexual reproduction.

But David Page of MIT's Whitehead Institute vigorously disagrees. "At the same time that it's continuing to lose genes, it's found some new ways of replenishing itself," Page says.

Last year, Page and his colleagues reported a finding that brightened the outlook for the future of men: The Y chromosome has been secretly creating backup copies of its most important genes. These are stored in the DNA as mirror images, or palindromes -- which read the same way forwards and backwards. ("Madam, I'm Adam" is a famous example.)

In Y chromosome palindromes, the first half contains the gene and the second half contains the same information, just in reverse.

That means that many of the genes on the Y chromosome may occur as pairs. Page says members of these pairs appear to be swapping out or recombining with each other -- allowing the genes to repair themselves when they get damaged.

Page also says this may help explain why these genes have been able to persist despite millions of years of assault from random mutations. And, he says, it means that hopefully the Y chromosome won't simply keep shrinking away until it disappears altogether.

I think it's quite fascinating and there's so much more to be discovered as scientists look further into genes, chromosomes etc.

Kind Regards.

Sally.

[Beauty]

Hi Sally,

Great thread! That was very interesting and a very good read. I always wonder about things like that. It helps me to be optimistic, as I think I stated yesterday somewhere, there will be a "why" before my take my life ticket to the station and head home. (before I keel over)

Puberty was weird for me. All the other guys took off with their growth and voices. Meanwhile I stayed the same. Until I was about 18 I'd get called ma'am whenever I'd call places. Also when I was going through puberty my sexual organs were very small. I was so embarrassed I wouldn't get undressed around anyone. When I was 14 things changed and things became very happy with the results down there. It's kind of odd how torn I am between regretting now they grew, but at the same time feeling so much like a guy because they did. Being TG'd is so weird.

Ok, I babbled, but the reason I brought it up was because in the article it talked about things that made me remember my puberty days.

Thanks for posting the article Sally!!!

Beauty

[DonnaT]

I read somewhere, not long ago, that studies have shown changes/mutations to the Y chromosome (right arm?) over the generations, because only the male provides the Y chromosome, have resulted in the feminization of the male species.

[TamaraSegunda]

Well, it was an interesting article, but I'm dubious about the facts presented.

I can't deal with all of them, but here's the one that struck me:
It is empirically obvious that there is insufficient data to conclude that sperm counts are declining across the entire population of any country. Only a very small subset of men ever have their sperm count tested. Of those that do get it done, the first question that comes to mind is, "why?" Wouldn't it be likely that if you have a sperm count done, it's because you're already concerned about the likelihood of a fertility problem? Moreover, it's only in recent years that small numbers of men have been willing to present to a doctor with the possibility of male infertility -- probably because lots of men still don't know the difference between infertility and impotence. In fact, I suspect that the "growing incidence" of all the anomalies cited simply represents a growth in the number of reported incidences, which in turn, correspond to the (very belated) spread of the information age to the medical establishment.

Finally, I guess the thing that set me off was the thesis of the article that somehow these conditions equate to "feminisation." You could as easily dredge up a bunch of statistics to show that women in Western society are becoming more masculine, simply by defining various physical or behavioral parameters as masculine. I'm not buying it.

Still, it was a fun article, in a National Enquirer kind of way.

Tamara Segunda

[Sally]

Whether we 'buy' it or not is immaterial to what research figures reveal. Worldwide figures are difficult to collate, so lets just focus on the US alone, and I'm talking about inferility, not impotency.

Fertility clinics around the world are a booming growth business. Just in the US alone there are about 100,000 pregnancy attempts on infertile couples each year, but figures available up to the 1st of Feb, '05, show that only 177,000 babies have been registered as being born through this process in the US.

Research figures collated, show that on average in the US, between 10% to 15% of all couples experience some form of infertility problem and in approximately 40% of these cases male infertility is the major factor. Another 40% of infertility problems are the result of the womans reproductive system and the remaining 20% involve couples who both suffer reproductive problems.

Research figures collated show that 1/25 American men are infertile. More than 90% of male infertility in the US is due to low sperm counts, poor sperm quality or both.

Much research is now focusing on defective genes on the Y chromosome. Of interest, for example, is a group of deletions in certain regions of the Y chromosome known as AZF, which may prove to be a major genetic cause of severe male infertility. Genetic factors are proving to be important contributors to male infertility, there is ample scientific research to show that genetic conditions may be inherited or caused by environmental assaults or both.

The primary suspects in the link between environmental assaults and infertility are oxygen-free radicals, also called oxidants, there have been reports that significant levels of oxidants occur in the semen of about 25% of infertile men.

Whilst it's common knowledge that sperm counts can fluctuate due to genetics, health reasons, medications, climate, stress etc, and scientists don't fully agree on whether male fertility is on the increase or not, they do agree that the average Y chromosome now has 90% less genes than when testing was first recorded and is growing weaker. Well, there has to be a reason for the decline and there has to be some effects due to the decline.

With the huge number of fertility clinics and sperm banks now in operation right around the world, plus the huge number (millions) of males now being tested worldwide in them, I'd disagree with the assumption that " small numbers of men have been willing to present to a doctor with the possibility of male infertility. " So I disagreed with the orginal writer of the article when he said that only small numbers of men ever had their sperm count done. Naturally people who write in medical journals sometimes write biased articles towards their own way of thinking, but for me, with the growing amount of scientists around the world involved in their own personal experiments in this field, and the greater number of them coming to the same conclusions, the weight of scientific evidence is growing as to the continued weakening of the Y chromosome, whereas the X chromosome has never altered in it's gene count and strength since records of testing began.

But as always, time will tell which of the scientists got it right, it's good to get all views.

Kind Regards.

Sally.

[Violet]

Gaia self-regulates. We are 6 billion and growing, we shed poisons like cats shed fur, and now people are surprised this is coming back to bite us in the a$$? IMHO, we need fewer fertility clinics and more vasectomies.

[Curly(SO)]

I was reading an article in the Times newspaper a few days ago, that some of you may find interesting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFrien ... 02,00.html

(This is only free to view till the 14th, unfortunately)

It is by Simon Cohen-Baron, Professor of Developmental Psychopathology and Director of the Autism Research Centre at Cambridge University and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.

He co-wrote the book 'Pre-natal Testosterone in Mind: Amniotic Fluid studies.

This pioneering study looks at the effects of prenatal testosterone on postnatal development and behavior. Hormonal effects on behavior have long been studied in animals; the unique contribution of this book is to suggest a connection between human fetal hormones and later behavior. It details for the first time testosterone's effect on social and language development, opening a new avenue of research for cognitive neuroscience.

The authors look at samples of amniotic fluid taken during amniocentesis at 16 weeks' gestation, and relate the fetal level of testosterone (which is present in fetuses of both sexes, although in different quantities) to behavior at ages 1, 2, and 4 years. They argue that the amniotic fluid provides a window into the child's past -- a chemical record of that child's time in the womb -- that allows informed prediction about the child's future brain, mind, and behavior. This is not the retrospective speculation of psychoanalysis, they point out, but an opportunity to study development prospectively and trace developmental precursors and causes of later cognition.

The study suggests that prenatal levels of testosterone affect a range of later behaviors in children, from the inclination to make eye contact with others to the size of the vocabulary. It also suggests that prenatal testosterone level may be related to the development of typically "masculine" and "feminine" behaviors. The study's ongoing research explores whether fetal testosterone has any link with the risk of developing autism. Connecting endocrinology and psychology, the authors propose that there is a biological component to behaviors often thought to be produced by the social environment.

Also, he is author of 'The Essential Difference: The Truth about the Male and Female Brain', which has caused some controversy. As some of you know, I'm not a big fan of pointing out the differences between the sexes, I don't like stereotyping to be re-inforced by generalizing, but scientific studies like this I'm happy with!

There is also a participant study (Sex and Gender Project) that is taking place, if anyone is interested.

http://www.cambridgepsychology.com/gender/

Love,
Curly(SO)

[Violet]

Kewl, those tests were fun. Won't reveal my scores as that might bias people, let's just say at least one of the tests really startled me and gave me something to think about...