General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Mom's Hormone Loaded Beef puts Son's Sperm Sount at Stake

Started by Jbuch · · Last activity · 2 posts · 116 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
28 March 2007
Last activity
28 March 2007
Original author
Jbuch
Posts
2
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
116
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–2 of 2
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Correlation of high beef consumption during pregnancy and low sperm
    count is sons with greater fertility problems.

    May be due to anabolic steroids used in USA to fatten cattle $$$$$$$$$$

    Small effect, but significant.

    USDA may need to reexamine allowed limits on injected hormones in meats.

    Schettler noted that there was room for a lot of inaccuracies in the
    mother's recall of her diet [two decades earlier], "but what that tends
    to do is bias the study toward not finding anything.

    ==============================================================================

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-sci-sperm28mar28,1,6123909.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

    Mom's beef puts son's sperm count at stake
    By Thomas H. Maugh II, LA Times Staff Writer
    March 28, 2007

    'Tip of the iceberg'

    Men whose mothers ate a lot of beef during their pregnancy have a sperm
    count about 25% below normal and three times the normal risk of
    fertility problems, researchers reported Tuesday.

    The problem may be due to anabolic steroids used in the United States to
    fatten the cattle, Dr. Shanna H. Swan of the University of Rochester
    Medical Center reported in the journal Human Reproduction. It could also
    be due to pesticides and other environmental contaminants, she added.

    If the sperm deficit is related to the hormones in beef, Swan's findings
    may be "just the tip of the iceberg," wrote biologist Frederick vom Saal
    of the University of Missouri-Columbia in an editorial accompanying the
    paper.

    In daughters of the beef-eaters, those same hormones could alter the
    incidence of polycystic ovarian syndrome, the age of puberty and the
    postnatal growth rate, he said.

    "It's a small effect, but it is a significant effect," said Dr. Ted
    Schettler, an environmental health specialist at the Institute for
    Global Communications in San Francisco. "It's not surprising. The more
    you look at dietary factors, the more you turn up interesting
    information about how diet during pregnancy affects lots of aspects of
    human health."

    Six growth-promoting hormones are routinely used in cattle production in
    the United States and Canada: the natural steroids estradiol,
    testosterone and progesterone, and the synthetic hormones zeranol,
    trenbolone acetate and melengestrol acetate. At slaughter, not all of
    these hormones have been metabolized.

    Diethyl stilbestrol was also used in this country from 1954 to 1979,
    when it was banned after tests showed that minks fed chicken waste
    containing DES became infertile.

    The Food and Drug Administration limits how much hormone residue is
    permissible in beef. Those limits may need to be reexamined if Swan's
    findings can be confirmed, Vom Saal said.

    The use of these hormones in beef was banned in Europe in 1988, and the
    United States has disputed the EU's attempts to ban imports of U.S. beef
    containing hormones.

    Studies in rodents have shown that even a trace of estrogen in the
    uterus from food can affect an offspring's sperm count, but no one has
    previously tried to study the question in humans.

    Swan and her colleagues studied 387 partners of pregnant women in five
    U.S. cities, including Los Angeles. Each man provided a sperm sample and
    his mother filled out a questionnaire about her food consumption during
    pregnancy.

    Swan concedes that women may have difficulty recalling their diets more
    than two decades earlier, but pregnancy may be an exception. "When you
    are pregnant, you are very aware of what you eat," she said.

    The mothers were asked how often they ate beef and other meats. On
    average, they ate beef about 4– times per week, and other meats much
    less frequently.

    They found that, in general, the more beef a woman ate, the lower her
    son's sperm count. For women who ate beef at least seven times a week,
    the son's sperm averaged 24.3% below normal. And even though those sons
    produced a pregnancy, they were three times as likely to have consulted
    a fertility doctor.

    The researchers found no link to the mother's smoking, employment
    outside the home or the number of children she had. There was not enough
    data on other meats to reveal a potential association.

    Schettler noted that there was room for a lot of inaccuracies in the
    mother's recall of her diet, "but what that tends to do is bias the
    study toward not finding anything. So the fact that she found [a
    relationship] was kind of a surprise to me."

    The finding applies only to North American women, Swan said, because
    beef-producing practices vary widely elsewhere.

    Swan emphasized that the study needs to be confirmed, adding that it is
    too soon to recommend that pregnant women not eat beef. But if a
    pregnant woman wants to be cautious, she said, she could switch to
    organic beef or other high-protein food.

  2. Jbuch said:

    Correlation of high beef consumption during pregnancy and low sperm
    count is sons with greater fertility problems.

    May be due to anabolic steroids used in USA to fatten cattle $$$$$$$$$$

    Small effect, but significant.

    USDA may need to reexamine allowed limits on injected hormones in meats.

    Schettler noted that there was room for a lot of inaccuracies in the
    mother's recall of her diet [two decades earlier], "but what that tends
    to do is bias the study toward not finding anything.

    I have long conjectured that the growth ingredients added to beef and
    other meat animals during "accelerated growth and fattening" could have
    something to do with:

    1) gradual gain of height in the population

    2) gain of weight in the population (now considered obesity)

    Of course, I still have no data, but this study appears to make the
    conjecture that hormone additions to meat animal diets may not be "a
    really good thing".

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.