Nipate
Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: RVtitem on October 22, 2014, 02:31:19 PM
-
Vegetarian men may be harming their chances of conceiving children, a multi-year US study has revealed. Researchers believe the reasons may include vitamin deficiencies and the presence of female hormones in soy, which is popular among vegetarians.
Noting that Seventh-Day Adventists, members of a strict Protestant sect, live 10 years longer than average Americans, researchers at Loma Linda University, itself a Seventh-Day Adventist institution, hypothesized that diet was a possible reason. Many of the sect’s followers are encouraged to go vegetarian, as most meat is considered “unclean.”
For the experiment, researchers monitored 443 meat-eaters and 31 vegetarians and vegans between 2009 and 2013, initially assuming that the vegetarians’ sperm would be healthier, and a contributing factor to the longevity of their offspring.
But the results, to be published in Fertility and Sterility journal on Wednesday, came as a surprise.
“We found that diet does significantly affect sperm quality. Vegetarian and vegan diets were associated with much lower sperm counts than omnivorous diets,” said lead study author Eliza Orzylowska. “Although these people are not infertile, it is likely to play a factor in conception, particularly for couples who are trying to conceive naturally, the old-fashioned way.”
http://rt.com/news/197896-vegetarians-sperm-quality-research/
-
That means they must try harder to conceive children. It would appear to be some sort of trade-off. The meat-eater needs strong sperm because he wont be around long. The vegan gets to enjoy more sex without frequent unwanted pregnancies.
-
Termy.. seriously? :D
I bet you that study is rubbish.
-
Interesting, but why are the sample populations so un-equal. Why the bias. This renders the result doubtful.
-
Misclassification bias. I suspect they began with somewhat equal sample sizes then participants went on meat, so they dumped them in the meat group not to underpower the study. You see trials (if this is a trial, haven't read the article) need to pre-register with a pre-determined consent process. Common sin is dumping treatment groups (vegetarian) into controls (meat and vegie). Technically meat people don't have a meat only diet. So there's a confounder from onset. Vegie only diet peeps tend to have pre-existing disorders like cancer and other nutrition issues if they don't take adequate supplements. This is perhaps more a study on supplement behaviour among vegetarians. But I guess that's not hot like meat vs vegie.
-
Misclassification bias. I suspect they began with somewhat equal sample sizes then participants went on meat, so they dumped them in the meat group not to underpower the study. You see trials (if this is a trial, haven't read the article) need to pre-register with a pre-determined consent process. Common sin is dumping treatment groups (vegetarian) into controls (meat and vegie). Technically meat people don't have a meat only diet. So there's a confounder from onset. Vegie only diet peeps tend to have pre-existing disorders like cancer and other nutrition issues if they don't take adequate supplements. This is perhaps more a study on supplement behaviour among vegetarians. But I guess that's not hot like meat vs vegie.
In that case then this fails to be a research. Total waste of time and energy.
-
No research is "perfect" they all have imperfections. It's a matter of summing up their imperfections and looking for a trend. If this research was replicated and I'm sure there's a handful like it. You weigh them relative to each other and if it's way off then yes, it would be considered a total waste of time and energy.
-
The study is may be funded by mc donalds and other human fattening corporations. MC nuggets and mc shit sales have been dropping down because of increased veg population.
-
Thats funny. I was thinking about who funded them. I thought about the meat industry doing the funding but the McD angle is hilarious. Most men do not become vegetarians untill they are in their forties and early fifties. If they have not sired all their children at that time then they probably have more serious issues than low sperm count.
The study is may be funded by mc donalds and other human fattening corporations. MC nuggets and mc shit sales have been dropping down because of increased veg population.
-
imagine if indians were eating meat, they would be twice as many as they are now. China should ban meat eating instead of that one child per couple policy. Family planners should also look into this and advice couples who do not want babies to cut down on the meat instead of those pills