Columnist Ben Maldonado traces the eugenicist history of Ray Lyman Wilbur. (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)

On Jan. 22, 1916, Ray Lyman Wilbur became the third president of Stanford University. In his inaugural speech, Wilbur promised that Stanford would aim for control of those unnecessary diseases that devour the very marrow of the [human] race and would lead in the fight against oppression, evil, ignorance, filth. These words would have perhaps been less ominous if Wilbur was not a eugenicist.

Between 1916 and 1929 and between 1933 and 1943, Ray Lyman Wilbur served as Stanfords president, leading the same university where he received his bachelors and masters degrees. A physician by training, Wilbur was influential in the development of Stanfords School of Medicine, first as dean then as university president. Wilburs key academic focus was public health: studying the health of America and methods of bettering it. This interest showed clearly in both his work at Stanford and in the Hoover Administration, where he served as Secretary of the Interior.

Wilburs interest in public health, however, also inspired his support of eugenics, the science of human improvement through selective breeding. As historian Martin S. Pernick has argued, public health and eugenics often historically went hand-in-hand what better way could there be of creating an ideal population than controlling who could reproduce and who could be born? Besides being a member of many health associations, Wilbur was also a prominent figure in eugenic organizations, such as the American Eugenics Society and the Eugenics Research Association, and often combined these two pursuits. As he put it in his 1937 article on the health of Black people, a pair of healthy grandfathers and of healthy grandmothers is the greatest personal asset a human being can have. In the name of public health, eugenic policies were therefore a necessity to Wilbur: We would not dream of treating a strain of race horses, he argued before Stanford alumni in 1935, the way we treat ourselves.

This emphasis on eugenics as a form of public health advocacy manifested in Wilburs work in the Hoover Administration as well. As historian Wendy Klein recounts, Wilbur served as conference chair at the 1930 White House Conference on Child Health and Protection, a massive convention attended by thousands of experts on child health, development and education. In his opening speech, Wilbur used eugenic language to emphasize the importance of fit future citizenry, encouraging the United States to become a fitter country in which to bring up children. Wilbur was not just supporting the health of children; he was supporting the goal of breeding eugenically fit children. As he put it in a 1913 speech, Wilbur believed that the products of the marriage of the weak and the unfit, of the criminal, of the syphilis and of the alcohol that fill many of our most splendid governmental buildings must largely disappear.

One of Wilburs greatest contributions to Stanford University as president was the development of the Stanford University School of Medicine, turning it into an organization at the forefront of medical education as well as eugenic education. Wilbur believed that all medical students should be taught the science of eugenics. He encouraged medical universities to study both the health and economic impact of the physically and mentally handicapped, promoting extensive research on eugenics. He presented before the Medical Society of the State of California in 1922, and argued that physicians must be educated to understand the importance of eugenically fit genetic material, for if it deteriorates a family or a race soon dies out. This genetic material must therefore be protected through eugenic means such as the sterilization or segregation of the unfit. With his development of the medical school, Wilbur aimed to emphasize the necessity of racial health in the name of eugenics.

Wilbur was also deeply concerned with race relations and the role of the United States in international affairs. In a 1926 speech, he expressed fear that white women were degenerating and becoming incapable of producing breast milk due to a reliance on dairy milk when nursing. For Wilbur, this was exceptionally frightening as the Chinese, who were immigrating to the American West (to the displeasure of many eugenicists) continued to use breast milk with their babies. Wilbur saw this as a eugenic threat to white dominance. If dairy production were to be halted, Chinese populations would overtake white populations a eugenicists nightmare.

Wilburs concerns with Chinese immigration led him to chair a 1923 survey looking into the potential dangers of Asian immigration into the American West. This Survey of Race Relations, as it was called, was led by many Stanford affiliates, and its findings were presented at a conference on Stanfords campus. Looking at both Chinese and Japanese immigration, this study chaired by Wilbur sought to objectively determine the value of allowing Asian immigrants to travel, stay, and reproduce in the United States. In the end, the survey concluded that Asian immigration was, for the time being, acceptable due to the cheap labor immigrants provided, but interracial marriages and reproduction were deeply discouraged. These attempts to objectively determine the value of immigrants to society was emblematic of a larger eugenic trend to quantify the value of human existence.

Wilburs belief in public health and the objective research of racial health inspired his promotion of eugenic thought. His legacy shows clearly the interconnections of medicine, public health and eugenic thought, and how many projects in the name of human health with noble intent were shaped by racist and ableist assumptions. Though he was less explicitly racist than some of his peers at Stanford, Wilbur still promoted the sterilization of unwanted people and still studied the potential dangers of non-white immigration. Today, Wilbur Hall bears his name, honoring his presidency and contributions to the University. I cannot help but wonder how many residents of that hall would be deemed unwelcome by its namesake.

Contact Ben Maldonado at bmaldona at stanford.edu.

We're a student-run organization committed to providing hands-on experience in journalism, digital media and business for the next generation of reporters.Your support makes a difference in helping give staff members from all backgrounds the opportunity to develop important professional skills and conduct meaningful reporting. All contributions are tax-deductible.

Visit link:
Eugenics on the Farm: Ray Lyman Wilbur - The Stanford Daily

Sperm count is kind of a big deal right now in the United States. According to a recent and terrifying study published in the journalHuman Reproduction Update, sperm counts in the United States, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand are all plummeting.

And by plummeting, we mean plummeting. Sperm counts have decreased on average by over 50 percent.

For 20 Bad Habits That Are Lowering Your Sperm Count, click here.

The average cost of in vitro fertilization in the U.S. is currently about $11,000 to $12,000, and the prevalence of these procedures is equally concerning. More women are using in vitro methods of fertilization to get pregnant than ever before; this could in part be due to the high mortality rate of sperm making fertilization less likely through more natural methods.

There are many hypotheses out there about what men could do better to preserve their sperm. They range from reasonable to ridiculous drinking Mountain Dew, for example, has no proven effect on your sperm at all. However, some sperm-massacring habits that at first sound ridiculous are not to be messed with.

Read the original:
20 Bad Habits That Are Lowering Your Sperm Count - The Daily Meal

Welcome to the Center for Human Reproduction (CHR), a leading fertility center located in New York City. CHR is known as a fertility center of last resort, primarily serving patients who have previously failed treatments elsewhere. Among CHRs areas of special expertise are treatments of older ovaries, whether due to advanced female age or premature ovarian aging (POA), immunological problems affecting reproduction, repeated pregnancy loss, endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), tubal disease, male factor infertility, etc.

Our unique approach to infertility treatment explained by Dr. Norbert Gleicher

CHRs widely respected physicians and scientists have greatly contributed over the years to advances in reproductive medicine and infertility. "Firsts" developed at CHR included the idea of vaginal egg retrieval, which was performed at CHR for the first time and published in the reputable medical journal The Lancet. CHR investigators also pioneered the concept of tubal catheterization to recanalize obstructed fallopian tubes, first published in the prestigious journal JAMA. The most influential recent contribution of CHR research to infertility treatment was the introduction of supplementation with DHEA in women with poor ovarian reserve. This treatment has revolutionized fertility care, and is now widely utilized all over the world.

CHRs success is based on the close collaboration of clinicians and basic scientists who, first, try to understand the underlying pathophysiology of a problem, then try to find a therapeutic remedy. Without this kind of translational research, it would be impossible to achieve the progress CHR has experienced in its treatment outcomes over the last 10-15 years.

Our success is best represented by our patients voices. Success stories and patient reviews offer an opportunity to see what some patients have to say about CHR.

CHRs physicians and scientists are well recognized by peers all over the world, not only because of the centers large number of scientific publications but also because of the clinical outcomes CHR achieves in what, likely, represents the most adversely selected patient population of any IVF center in the US, if not the world. Multiple honors received by CHRs physicians and scientists in the US and overseas are a reflection of CHRs worldwide recognition as a leading fertility center. Please see the individual physicians' and scientists CVs for detail.

Besides offering you what we consider important basic information about infertility and fertility treatments, CHR also strives to keep the fertility community informed about current developments. For that purpose, we publish a monthly newsletter, the CHR VOICE and a bi-monthly newsletter exclusively addressing fertility preservation issues, the Fertility Preservation News. CHR also regularly publishes position papers on generally controversial issues within the profession, called OPINIONs. They are known not always to concur with opinions expressed by other colleagues. To subscribe to any of these publications, please contact us.

As a service to the medical community of Greater New York City, CHR hosts a monthly continuing medical education lecture series, the GrandRounds, usually featuring prominent scientists and/or physicians in reproductive medicine or related areas as speakers. CHRs GrandRounds represent a rare interdisciplinary and trans-institutional opportunity for physicians and scientists to meet socially, while being exposed to state-of-the arts scientific presentations, as CHR extends complimentary admission to lecture and a subsequent dinner to residents, Obstetricians/Gynecologists and Reproductive Endocrinologists in active practice and scientists working in related areas.

Last Updated: January 15, 2015

See the original post here:
About CHR :: Nation's Leading Fertility and IVF Center ...

For only the second time ever in medical literature, a human has contracted a rare infection of Thelazia gulosa an ocular parasite that turns the eyes into a breeding ground for squiggling worms.

While this is only the second documented case in humans, given both known infections took place within two years of one another, scientists say we could be looking at a newly emerging zoonotic disease type in the US.

In a startling case report documenting the second infection, scientists from the CDC's parasitic diseases division tell the story of a 68-year-old patient from Nebraska who spent her winters in the warmer climate of California's Carmel Valley.

During these sojourns, she enjoyed trail running, which is what she was doing one day in early February 2018, when something unpleasant happened. As she rounded a corner on a steep trail, she ran directly into a swarm of small flies.

"She recalls swatting the flies from her face and spitting them out of her mouth," the researchers explain in their case report.

The strange episode didn't end there, though; in fact, it may have only just gotten started.

The following month, the woman noted irritation in her right eye, and the cause of the discomfort didn't take long to reveal itself.

While washing her eye with tap water, she flushed out a transparent, motile roundworm measuring about half an inch in length (about 1.25 cm).

It wasn't alone. Further inspection revealed another worm in her eye (which she was also able to extract), and the next day she visited an ophthalmologist, who fished out a third, and prescribed her an antibiotic ointment to treat any bacterial infections.

A couple of weeks later, she returned home to Nebraska, still feeling continued irritation and a "foreign body sensation" in both eyes. Another ophthalmologist examination diagnosed her with mild bilateral papillary conjunctivitis, but wasn't able to detect any additional nematodes.

T. gulosa female worm, revealing ovaries containing spirurid eggs and larvae at bottom-left. (Bradbury et al., Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2019)

Nonetheless, the patient found and removed a fourth worm from her eye shortly afterward, and luckily her conjunctivitis subsequently resolved.

That fourth worm was the last ever found in the woman's eyes, and for that she might consider herself lucky. At least, in the only previous human case of the same infection, 14 worms were discovered lurking in the 26-year-old patient's eyes.

Analysis of one of a nematode sample collected from the Nebraska patient confirmed her case was the second known instance of the parasitic T. gulosa infection (aka the cattle eyeworm), and revealed a literal litter of surprises besides.

"The worm was identified as an adult female T. gulosa," the authors write.

"Importantly, eggs containing developed larvae were observed in utero, indicating that humans are suitable hosts for the reproduction of T. gulosa."

Other kinds of Thelazia species have been known to infect humans before in the US, causing the disease Thelaziasis, although documented cases are rare.

If you do have these worms squiggling around in your eye, though, you don't want to delay in getting them out of there, the researchers warn.

"In long-term untreated infections, chronic irritation caused by the passage of adult worms over the cornea may result in keratitis, loss of visual acuity, or even blindness," the team explains.

"In reported cases where the infesting nematodes have been removed from the eye within one to two months of first observation, the associated conjunctivitis has resolved and no long term clinical effects have been observed."

In cases like these, it's relatively impossible to determine for sure just how a patient got infected, but in both the human cases, the probable cause is known.

Thelazia eyeworms are transmitted between animals by species of flies. Most commonly, in the case of T. gulosa, they are known to carry the infection to cattle.

As such, if you're in the vicinity of cattle (like the farm-visiting patient in the first case, who practised horse-riding) or have the misfortune of running face-first into a swarm of flies in a rural area (like the second patient), you just might stand a chance of contracting the parasite.

How significant is the threat? From what we know so far, the incidence of these infections in humans remains extremely rare, although the temporal coincidence of these two cases could be significant.

In cattle, T. gulosa infections have been identified in several US states, as well as Canada, Europe, Asia, and Australia, but testing for the parasite in these regions may not be considered a strict priority.

"The reasons for this species only now infecting humans remain obscure," the authors explain.

"Monitoring of thelaziasis in cattle does not occur, and therefore it cannot be determined if there is an increasing prevalence of T. gulosa infections among domestic cattle which is resulting in zoonotic spillover events into humans and other unusual hosts. Renewed surveillance studies on domestic and wild ruminants would assist in better elucidating the situation in those hosts and would indicate what regions of the United States further human infections might occur in."

The findings are reported in Clinical Infectious Diseases.

Read the original:
Woman Finds Parasitic Worms in Her Eyes After Running Through a Swarm of Flies - ScienceAlert

Research into reproductive biology is one of the most fascinating corners of medicine and science; my interest in this field was one of the driving forces behind my decision to go to medical school. Work in this field has resulted in life-changing treatments for infertile patients. More than one million babies have been born in the US to otherwise infertile couples, thanks to lab-assisted techniques like in-vitro fertilization (IVF).

At the same time; there remains a massive amount of research to do. Treatments for women whose number of eggs are prematurely low (diminished ovarian reserve), understanding of the causes and treatments of low or zero sperm counts (azoospermia) in male patients, non-surgical male contraception all of these topics are incompletely understood at present. As a result, infertile patients continue to suffer.

A recent study (Levine et al., Human Reproduction, 2017) draws attention to this knowledge deficit; the study authors reviewed the entire body of existing research on male sperm counts published between 1973 and 2011. Their analysis reveals a startling trend: throughout the Western world, in both fertile men and infertile men seeking treatment, sperm counts dropped by almost 50% across these four decades.

This new study raises obvious questions: why might this decrease be occurring? Is this trend indicative of other ongoing changes in mens health? Are there obvious causes of this trend and can they be acted upon? As a researcher in this field, I know the importance of answering that last question what might be the causes and what do we do about them and I know that there is already ongoing research on this front. But certainly more is needed.

Possible explanations include lifestyle factors (increasing obesity, tobacco use and its lingering effects), aging demographics of people pursing family building, environmental exposures to substances including plastics, hormones, radiation and radio frequency networks, and biological changes the results of what we call epigenetic change from fertility or hormonal treatments. Several factors could potentially be at play at the same time.

Unfortunately, obtaining an answer to this conundrum is challenging at best. There are unique barriers to answering these questions through experiments (including the obvious fact that experiments to prove these theories cannot be performed in humans). Even if we had an answer as to a single culprit, the further question of What can we do about it? seems even more daunting.

That being said, I remind people whenever I can that no field of research is more important than understanding the biology of conception. Cancer research, cardiovascular health research these fields will enable us to live longer. But, of course, that ceases to be important if a hypothetical fertility crisis results in fewer or even no babies being born. Understanding human fertility is a vital part of understanding the cycle of human life and death.

Interestingly, our fertility research is governed by the American Society of Reproductive Medicine, whose first national meeting was held almost 75 years ago. I often point out that the meeting topics on male fertility at that first meeting are still being discussed at our current meetings. The need for further research in our field was already urgent. Dr. Levines study makes that need even more vital.

I am asked repeatedly what I tell my patients about this study. I remind people that healthy behavior is the easiest intervention patients can opt into. Studies have found that smoking cessation, sleep hygiene, and diet promote healthy sperm count. That being said, we will continue to test for potential causes of male fertility and we will act upon the causes that are correctable.

I know that this recommendation constitutes basic common sense, and it is the advice that I would give to a friend or a family member. But in the back of my mind, every time I am saying this to someone, I am asking myself the question of how we can do more or be better. What further research study will help us to better understand both the worldwide trends in fertility and problems each of my individual patients face? Hopefully the conversation this study has started will enable that research to become a reality.

The rest is here:
Alarming drop in sperm counts needs more study - Gant Daily

U.S. scientists have succeeded in alteringthe genes of a human embryo to correct a disease-causingmutation, making it possible to prevent the defect from beingpassed on to future generations.The milestone, published this week in the journal Nature,was confirmed last week by Oregon Health and Science University(OHSU), which collaborated with the Salk Institute and Korea'sInstitute for Basic Science to use a technique known asCRISPR-Cas9 to correct a genetic mutation for a heart condition.Until now, published studies using the technique had beendone in China with mixed results.

CRISPR-Cas9 works as a type of molecular scissors that canselectively trim away unwanted parts of the genome, and replaceit with new stretches of DNA."We have demonstrated the possibility to correct mutationsin a human embryo in a safe way and with a certain degree ofefficiency," said Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a professor inSalk's Gene Expression Laboratory and a co-author of the study.To increase the success rate, his team introduced the genomeediting components along with sperm from a male with thetargeted gene defect during the in vitro fertilization process.

They found that the embryo used the available healthy copy ofthe gene to repair the mutated part.The Salk/OHSU team also found that its gene correction didnot cause any detectable mutations in other parts of the genome a major concern for gene editing.Still, the technology was not 100 per cent successful it increased the number of repaired embryos from 50 per cent, whichwould have occurred naturally, to 74 per cent.The embryos, tested in the laboratory, were allowed todevelop for only a few days."There is still much to be done to establish the safety ofthe methods, therefore they should not be adopted clinically,"Robin Lovell-Badge, a professor at London's Francis CrickInstitute who was not involved in the study, said in astatement.

Washington's National Academy of Sciences (NAS) earlier thisyear softened its previous opposition to the use of gene editingtechnology in human embryos, which has raised concerns it couldbe used to create so-called designer babies. There is also afear of introducing unintended mutations into the "germline,"meaning cells that become eggs or sperm."No one is thinking about this because it is practicallyimpossible at this point," Izpisua Belmonte said. "This is stillvery basic research let alone something as complex as whatnature has done for millions and millions of years ofevolution."An international group of 11 organizations, including theAmerican Society of Human Genetics and Britain's Wellcome Trust,on Wednesday issued a policy statement recommending againstgenome editing that culminates in human implantation andpregnancy, while supporting publicly funded research into itspotential clinical applications.The latest research involved a gene mutation linked tohypertrophic cardiomyopathy, the most common cause of suddendeath in otherwise healthy young athletes. It affects around 1in 500 people.Salk's Izpisua Belmonte, emphasizing that much more study isneeded, said the most important practical application for thenew technology could be in correcting genetic mutations inbabies either while they are still in utero or right after theyare born."It is crucial that we continue to proceed with the utmostcaution, paying the highest attention to ethicalconsiderations," he said.

Canada's Assisted Human Reproduction Actbans any manipulation of the human genome that can be transmitted to the next generation.

Go here to see the original:
Scientists alter genes of human embryo to correct disease-causing mutation - CBC.ca

This article was originally published on The Conversation, an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts. Disclosure information is available on the original site.

Author: Francoise Baylis, Professor and Canada Research Chair in Bioethics and Philosophy, Dalhousie University

Shoukhrat Mitalipov, a reproductive biologist at Oregon Health and Science University, is nothing if not a pioneer. In 2007, his team published proof-of-principle research in primates showing it was possible to derive stem cells from cloned primate embryos. In 2013, his team was the first to create human embryonic stem cells by cloning. Now, in 2017, his team is reported to have safely and effectively modified human embryos using the gene editing technique CRISPR.

Mitalipovs team is not the first to genetically modify human embryos. This was first accomplished in 2015 by a group of Chinese scientists led by Junjiu Huang. Mitalipovs team, however, may be the first to demonstrate basic safety and efficacy using the CRISPR technique.

This has serious implications for the ethics debate on human germline modification which involves inserting, deleting or replacing the DNA of human sperm, eggs or embryos to change the genes of future children.

Ethically controversial

Those who support human embryo research will argue that Mitalipovs research to alter human embryos is ethically acceptable because the embryos were not allowed to develop beyond 14 days (the widely accepted international limit on human embryo research) and because the modified embryos were not used to initiate a pregnancy. They will also point to the future potential benefit of correcting defective genes that cause inherited disease.

This research is ethically controversial, however, because it is a clear step on the path to making heritable modifications genetic changes that can be passed down through subsequent generations.

Beyond safety and efficacy

Internationally, UNESCO has called for a ban on human germline gene editing. And the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine the Oviedo Convention specifies that an intervention seeking to modify the human genome may only be undertaken for preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic purposes and only if its aim is not to introduce any modification in the genome of any descendants.

In a move away from the positions taken by UNESCO and included in the Oviedo Convention, in 2015 the 12-person Organizing Committee of the first International Summit on Human Gene Editing (of which I was a member) issued a statement endorsing basic and preclinical gene editing research involving human embryos.

The statement further stipulated, however, that: It would be irresponsible to proceed with any clinical use of germline editing unless and until (i) the relevant safety and efficacy issues have been resolved, based on appropriate understanding and balancing of risks, potential benefits, and alternatives, and (ii) there is broad societal consensus about the appropriateness of the proposed application.

Mitalipovs research aims to address the first condition about safety and efficacy. But what of the second condition which effectively recognizes that the human genome belongs to all of us and that it is not for scientists or other elites to decree what should or should not happen to it?

Modification endorsed

Since the 2015 statement was issued, many individuals and groups have tried to set aside the recommendation calling for a broad societal consensus.

For example, in February 2017, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine published a report endorsing germline modification. It states unequivocally that clinical trials using heritable germline genome editing should be permitted provided the research is only for compelling reasons and under strict oversight limiting uses of the technology to specified criteria.

Seeds of change in Canada

In Canada, it is illegal to modify human germ cells. Altering the genome of a cell of a human being or in vitro embryo such that the alteration is capable of being transmitted to descendants is among the activities prohibited in the 2004 Assisted Human Reproduction Act.

Worried that Canadian researchers may fall behind on the international scene and that restrictive research policies may lead to medical tourism, the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (with input from the Canadian Stem Cell Network) has begun to plant the seeds of change.

In its Human Germline Gene Editing report, CIHR hints at the benefits of changing the legislation. It also suggests professional self-regulation and research funding guidelines could replace the current federal statutory prohibition.

Future of the species

With the recent announcement of Mitalipovs technological advances and increasing suggestions from researchers that heritable modifications to human embryos be permitted, it is essential that citizens be given opportunities to think through the ethical issues and to work towards broad societal consensus.

We are talking about nothing less than the future of the human species. No decisions about the modification of the germline should be made without broad societal consultation.

Nothing about us without us!

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Disclosure information is available on the original site. Read the original article:

https://theconversation.com/human-genome-editing-we-should-all-have- https://the

Continue reading here:
Human genome editing: We should all have a say - National Post

Dr. Ryan Riggs sees them almost every day in his fertility clinic at Research Medical Center: Kansas City men struggling with low sperm counts.

Now he knows theyre part of a much larger trend that threatens the population stability of several developed nations, including the United States.

A large-scale study published last week in the journal Human Reproduction Update found that sperm counts declined 59 percent in men from the U.S., Europe, Australia and New Zealand over a 38-year period that ended in 2011. Men in less developed nations in Asia, South America and Africa exhibited no such decline.

This is amazing, Riggs said. I dont want to be an alarmist but what if, in another 40 years, the numbers are 50 percent lower?

The birth rate in the U.S. is already at a historic low, and Riggs noted that were it not for immigration, the country would be like some in Western Europe with declining populations and shrinking workforces struggling to support the needs of the elderly.

Riggs called the dropping sperm counts a societal, macro-epidemiological problem.

It has very significant and grave implications, Riggs said. It means Ill have patients in the short term, but in the long term its concerning.

Riggs opened Blue Sky Fertility last October after previously working at a large clinic called Conceptions Reproductive Associates in Colorado.

He said what he has seen personally fits with the results of the much larger study.

We certainly feel like we see an increasing frequency of gentlemen who have abnormal sperm counts, Riggs said. In fact, if you look at the data, in 40 or perhaps even 50 percent of couples, sperm is a factor in their struggle to conceive.

The studys authors expressed similar shock and concern at the results, but did not offer any possible explanations for the stark difference between men in the two cohorts.

Riggs pointed to two potential factors driving down sperm counts in developed nations: unhealthy diets and near-constant exposure to chemicals that alter hormone production.

I personally would look to the endocrine disruptors and obesity as significant factors impacting sperm health, Riggs said.

While its hard to avoid endocrine disruptors such as phthalates, which are in deodorants and perfumes and leach from all kinds of plastic products, Riggs said maintaining a healthy weight which has long been known to help with fertility is an important step to take before fertility treatments.

There are folks who come through my door and I have to advise them, Before we go down this route and potentially spend a lot of money, we need to optimize your health, Riggs said.

On a larger level, Riggs said he would be interested in more research to see if there are sperm count differences within different regions in the U.S. and to find out if immigrants sperm counts decline after they move to U.S. and how quickly.

See the original post:
Study shows Western men's sperm counts are in freefall and KC is no exception - Kansas City Star

Whats the weight?

Jenny Elia Pfeiffer/Getty

By Jessica Hamzelou

SINCE the first test tube baby arrived 39 years ago, an estimated 6.5 million children have been born thanks to IVF and similar techniques. But we are only just starting to learn about the long-term health of people conceived using assisted reproduction techniques (ART), who may have a higher risk of obesity in later life.

Today, 1 in every 30 babies in Japan is conceived by ART, says Tomoya Hasegawa of Tokyo Medical University. These babies are usually healthy, but tend to have a lower birth weight. Large studies that didnt look at conception method have previously found that low birth weight is linked to adult obesity and diabetes.

To investigate further, Heleen Zandstra of Maastricht Medical Centre, the Netherlands, and her team have been comparing the effects of using two different culture media to support the growth of early IVF embryos. Earlier they had found that one of these was associated with babies that were 112 grams lighter at birth than those beginning life in the other medium. Thats a big difference, considering babies only weigh about 3 kilograms, says Zandstra.

Advertisement

Now the team have followed up on these babies at the age of 9, recording the height, weight and fat mass of 136 children, as well as blood pressure and heart rate.

They were surprised to find that, while children conceived using each type of culture medium were around the same height, the BMI of the group that had been lighter at birth was an average of 0.9 lower than those who had been heavier babies. There was a difference in weight of 2 kilograms, says Zandstra.

Given that heavier children are more likely to develop obesity later on, the results are worrying

However, both groups were heavier than average 9-year-olds living in similar circumstances, and had more abdominal fat. Given that heavier children are more likely to become obese later in life, the results are worrying, says Zandstra, who presented her findings at the annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) in Switzerland in July.

At the same meeting, Hasegawa presented his analysis of 1830 children in Japan. His team found that babies conceived using ART were heavier than naturally conceived babies when they were born, but there was no real difference at 18 months. However, the ART children were heavier again at 6 years old. The results were surprising, says Hasegawa.

What this might mean for adult health in unknown. Louise Brown, the first person born via IVF, is only 39 we dont know yet what will happen to IVF-conceived people in their 50s, says Zandstra.

But people neednt be wary of fertility treatment. We know that IVF is safe, because we have so many children, says Arianna DAngelo, who coordinates the ESHRE group on safety in assisted reproduction. We shouldnt worry, but we should be doing more to monitor children. Studies might flag up problems later in life, says DAngelo.

This article appeared in print under the headline IVF babies grow up to be heavier

More on these topics:

Read the original:
IVF babies grow up heavier and may have higher risk of obesity - New Scientist

An international team of scientists analyzed data from men around the world and found sperm counts declining in Western countries. Hanna Barczyk for NPR hide caption

An international team of scientists analyzed data from men around the world and found sperm counts declining in Western countries.

Sperm counts appear to be plummeting throughout the Western world, according to a large study of men around the world.

An international team of scientists analyzed data from nearly 43,000 men in dozens of industrialized countries and found that sperm counts dropped by more than half over nearly four decades.

"I think that we should take this very seriously," says Shanna Swan, a reproductive epidemiologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. She helped conduct the study published in the journal Human Reproduction Update. "I think it's a wake-up call," Swan says.

Previous studies have suggested that sperm counts may be falling around the world. This study is the largest and most comprehensive to date. It was designed to resolve doubts about the earlier findings, Swan says.

"I've always been very skeptical of previous reports that have suggested that sperm counts are declining," says Allan Pacey, a professor of andrology at the University of Sheffield in England who was not involved in the new research. "I'm a bit more of a believer that sperm counts are declining than I was at this time yesterday," he says.

Even at the reduced sperm counts, infertility has not become a widespread problem. At the most, the lower levels of sperm may make it harder for some couples to conceive, Pacey says.

But there's no sign the decline is slowing, which means that male infertility could become a more common problem in the future.

"Since this is the best study that's ever been done, it is concerning that it suggests such a progressive and dramatic decrease in sperm counts over time," says Peter Schlegel, a professor and chairman of urology at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York. Schlegel serves as vice president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Schlegel stresses, however, that more research is needed to confirm the findings and try to determine possible causes.

"Since we don't know what could be causing it, it's worrisome," Schlegel says.

Swan and her colleagues combed the scientific literature for studies that had examined sperm counts and concentrations and screened more than 7,000 studies, excluding those that had shortcomings or flaws. The researchers then analyzed data collected by 185 studies of 42,935 men who provided semen samples between 1973 and 2011 in North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand.

One of the ways the researchers tried to alleviate concerns about previous studies was to include men who weren't just being tested at fertility clinics because they might be infertile. They included sperm counts from other men soldiers and college students, for example.

The analysis found an overall 52.4 percent decline in sperm concentration and a 59.3 percent decline in the total sperm count over the 39-year period. (Sperm concentration is the measure of the concentration of sperm in a man's sample how many millions of sperm are in a milliliter of semen. Total sperm count is the number doctors get when they multiply that by the volume of the sample.)

"I think these are extremely concerning findings," Swan says.

And Swan says it's not just the concern about fertility. A decreased sperm count has been linked to an increased risk for premature death, Swan says. So it may be a marker for other health problems, she says.

While no one knows why sperm counts and concentrations may be falling, there are a variety of theories.

Swan suspects that one factor may be exposure to chemicals while in the womb, which could harm the normal development of males' reproductive systems.

"The mother's exposure to a number of chemicals can alter the reproductive tract of baby boys significantly," she says.

But Pacey questions that theory and worries about alarming pregnant women unnecessarily.

"There's a real danger here that researchers publish papers like this, that are then reported irresponsibly, that then lead to people getting really paranoid about what may or may not be happening," Pacey says.

The problems many couples encounter when they attempt to get pregnant could be avoided if they started trying just a few years earlier, Pacey says.

Swan acknowledges that other factors could be playing a role. The global obesity epidemic could be cutting sperms counts, for example.

"There's also stress, which is related to sperm count," she says. "So there are a number of factors which you could cluster under the heading of 'modern living' that could be playing a role in what we're seeing."

There wasn't enough data from non-Western countries to reach any conclusions about whether sperm counts are falling there, too, Swan says.

Continue reading here:
Sperm Counts Plummet In Western Men, Study Finds - NPR

The internet was abuzz about sperm last week, thanks to a new study that revealed an alarming drop in sperm counts for men in Western countries. Does this mean men are becoming infertile? Will we have problems having babies? Its not time to panic at least, not yet.

To be clear: the findings are worrisome. The researchers dug through thousands of studies from around the world, and found that for men living in Western countries sperm count has plummeted by between 50 and 60 percent since 1973. (Sperm count is the amount of sperm in the semen released in one ejaculation.) But that drop still leaves the average sperm count within a healthy, fertile range.

Does this mean were heading into a Children of Men type of situation? says John Amory, a professor and fertility expert at the University of Washington, who was not involved in the study. I doubt that very much, Im glad to say. Still, infertility can have a serious, and negative impact on peoples lives, and its important to nail down whether it is indeed on the rise, and why. It should be seen as a wake-up call, agrees Michael Eisenberg, a urologist at Stanford University, but not necessarily the end of days.

Scientists have been debating whether sperm count has been going down for about 25 years, ever since researchers in Denmark published a study in 1992 showing a 50 percent drop in sperm count between 1940 and 1990. Since the odds of fathering a child tend to increase with sperm quantity (although quality matters, too), a fall in sperm count could mean an overall drop in male fertility.

Some believed this frightening claim, suspecting that the ongoing decline might be triggered by smoking and exposures to pesticides or components of plastics leaching into our food and disrupting hormones. But others disputed it, believing that sperms disappearing act was a result of the different way scientists have counted and studied semen over the years.

Researchers led by Shanna Swan, a reproductive scientist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, wanted to put the debate to rest. They screened more than 2,500 studies that reported sperm counts since 1973, filtering out papers that were too small, used dubious methods, or that specifically looked at infertile men. Instead, they picked studies that counted sperm the same way in semen collected from men who either didnt know if they were fertile, or who knew for certain that they were.

Then, they compared the results for men of the same age, from 1973 to 2011: the results show that for men living in Western countries, sperm concentrations and absolute sperm number have dropped between 52 and 59 percent. (Sperm concentration is the amount of sperm in a milliliter of semen; absolute sperm number is the amount in the total volume of a single ejaculation.) The findings were published in the journal Human Reproduction Update.

Heres why you shouldnt freak out: sperm concentration went from about 99 million sperm per milliliter of splooge in 1970 to 47 million sperm per milliliter in 2010. Theyre well within the fertile range, Amory says. Theyre falling from fertile to fertile. For reference, men can have a tougher time conceiving if sperm count falls below 40 million sperm per milliliter. The World Health Organization considers sperm concentrations less than 15 million sperm per milliliter of semen to be abnormally low.

But the study also didnt find any evidence that this decline was slowing down or stopping. That means that if sperm count continues to plummet, then we could see more men having problems conceiving. Its concerning its important we figure out whats going on, Swan says.

Thats because sperm counts are important for more than just fertility: sperm as the authors of the study put it are the tadpole-shaped canaries in the coal mine when it comes to health. Making sperm takes a complex series of events: it starts with producing hormones in the brain, which stimulates sperm production in the testicles. That sperm is then shuttled through a network of pipes, mixed with other ingredients, and shot out into the world. Its like a long chain of dominos, and if any have been knocked askew by, say, injury, infection, or any number of other unknown cases, they wont all fall neatly into place. So, if sperm counts are dropping, it could be a sign that something is damaging mens overall wellbeing. In fact, lower sperm counts have been linked to poorer health.

The current study couldnt get at exact causes. But its thought that if pregnant women are exposed to cigarette smoke, certain pesticides, and ingredients in plastics that can disrupt hormones, it may have long-term effects on a male fetuss future fertility. For adult men, obesity and smoking may also lower sperm counts although we dont know for certain.

This study is a start toward settling the debate, but there are still some caveats: men can produce different amounts of sperm even at different points throughout the day, for instance. And theres more to fertility than just number of sperm sperm wiggliness and shape, for example, are important, too.

To figure exactly whats going on, we need more research. If the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were to actively collect data on semen over time, that could go a long way toward confirming a decline and helping researchers spot possible causes, Eisenberg says. Its concerning as a species, and it needs to be tracked more rigorously, he says. If its confirmed, we should be very concerned and find a way to stop it.

See the original post here:
Yes, sperm counts may be dropping, but it's not time to panic yet ... - The Verge

Updated| When the first humans left Africa around 100,000 years ago, they got shorter.

The evolutionary shift helped them cope with the colder conditionsa more compact body size helped protect them from frostbite, whileand shorter limbs would be less breakable when they fellbut it also appears to have come with a downside: arthritis.

In a study published in Nature Genetics on Monday, scientists at Stanford University, California, have shown how variants within the GDF5 gene, which are related to reduced growth, was repeatedly favored by our ancestors as they migrated out of Africa and across the continents.

Tech & Science Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek Tech & Science delivered to your inbox

But GDF5 has also been linked with osteoarthritis,a degenerative joint disease that affects an estimated 27 million Americans. Risk increases with ageit is sometimes referred to as wear and tear arthritisbut it also has a strong genetic component.

Previous research has shown how mutations in part of the GDF5 gene cause malformation in bone structure in mice. In humans, it has been associated with a shortness and joint problems, and two changes in particular are linked with a heightened risk of osteoarthritis.

In the latest research, the scientists find GDF5 provided an evolutionary boost for our ancestors, with arthritis apparently a byproduct of it."The gene we are studying shows strong signatures of positive selection in many human populations," senior author David Kingsley said in a statement

"It's possible that climbing around in cold environments was enough of a risk factor to select for a protective variant even if it brought along an increase likelihood of an age-related disease like arthritis, which typically doesn't develop until late in life."

A display of a series of skeltons showing the evolution of humans at the Peabody Museum, New Haven, Connecticut, circa 1935. Study finds humans became shorter when they first left Africa 100,000 years ago. Hulton Archive/Getty Images

To better understand GDF5, the team studied the DNA sequences that might affect how the gene is expressedspecifically those that are known as promoters and enhancers. From this they found a previously unidentified region they called GROW1.

When they looked for GROW1 in the 1,000 Genomes Project databasea huge database of genetic sequences of human populations around the worldthe team found a single change that is very common in European and Asian populations, but is hardly ever seen in Africans. The team then introduced this change to mice and found it led to reduced activity in the growth of bones.

They then looked at the change to the genetic variant over the course of human evolution, and found it had been repeatedly favored after Homo sapiens left Africa between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago. The team says the benefits of being shorter in colder conditions probably outweighed the risk of developing osteoarthritis in later life.

Because evolutionary fitness requires successful reproduction, alleles that confer benefits at young or reproductive ages may be positively selected in populations, even if they have some deleterious consequences in post-reproductive ages, they wrote.

Researchers believe this change could help explain why osteoarthritis is rarely seen in Africa, but is more common in other populations.Concluding, Kingsley said: "Because it's been positively selected, this gene variant is present in billions of people. So even though it only increases each person's risk by less than twofold, it's likely responsible for millions of cases of arthritis around the globe.

"This study highlights the intersection between evolution and medicine in really interesting ways, and could help researchers learn more about the molecular causes of arthritis."

Lots of factors are involved in how human height evolved. Jamie/Flickr

Christopher Ruff, Director of the Center for Functional Anatomy andEvolution at Johns Hopkins University School ofMedicine, says that while the findings are fascinating and provocative, there are some caveats that should be considered.

For example, the first anatomically modern humans found outside of Africa (in the Middle East, and later in Europe and then East Asia) were all quite tallheight only declined after the Upper Paleolithic (20,000+ years later), he tells Newsweek.Therefore, while the gene coding for shorter stature may have been present in these populations, it certainly wasn't selected for until much later.

"Populations living in Europe today are among the tallest in the world, in some cases exceeding even the very tall Upper Paleolithic people. This has been interpreted as a response to improved living conditions over the last 150 years, with very recent populations reaching their full genetic potential. This implies, however, that the genetic potential is there, i.e., that they are not predestined to be short.

Finally, modern African populations vary greatly in height (even excluding Pygmies), he continues. Some of this is doubtless due to environmental conditions, but it also suggests other genetic factors at work.So, I think the evolutionary basis of stature variation is likely to be quite complex.

This story has been updated to include quotes from Christopher Ruff.

See more here:
Human Evolution: Africa Exodus Made Homo Sapiens Shorter and ... - Newsweek

In the future, when a couple wants to reproduce, they will not make a baby in a bed or in the backseat or a car, or under a Keep Off the Grass sign, says Henry Greely, the director of the Center for Law and the Biosciences at Stanford Law School.

Instead, they will go to a clinic. Using stem cells from the couples skin or other non-reproductive organs, scientists will be able to make eggs and sperm, which will be combined into embryos. Each of those embryos will have its own gene sequence, Greely says. The parents will be asked: What do you want to know about these embryos? And theyll be told.

Twenty or 30 years from now, parents will be able to screen their potential kids for genetic abnormalities, pre-disposal to disease, sex, and even cosmetic features like hair, eye, and skin color, Greely claims. The new way of baby-making will save women the pain of going through fertility treatments, he says, and it will prevent disease, save health-care costs, and give non-traditional families more chances to have children. If this reproductive future comes to pass, it will also come with a tangle of moral, legal, and medical questionsones that wont be easy to resolve, despite what Greely may think.

When Greely tells people about his theorywhich is the subject of his 2016 book, The End of Sex and the Future of Human Reproductionthey tend to say, This is Gattica, or this is Brave New World, he said during an interview with the New York Times reporter Carl Zimmer on Monday at the Aspen Ideas Festival, which is co-hosted by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic. Greely is skeptical of this argument. This is not designer babies. This is not super babies. This is selecting embryos, he said.

Greely gets some of his confidence from the limits of science. Geneticists likely wont be able to predict kids behavioral traits, he said, like their aptitude for math or agility on a sports field. But they may be able to anticipate some traits, like intelligence, in broad strokes. Being able to tell parents that this embryo has a 60 percent chance of being in the top half [of their school class], this embryo has a 13 percent chance of being in the top 10 percentI think thats really possible, he said.

Scientists have been screening embryos using a process called preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, for two and half decades, Greely said. This allows for the detection of some genetic diseases, as well as determining the sex of the embryo. Up until now, it has been expensive and arduous, but with new technologyincluding the expanded use of stem cellsit will become easy, he said. The people most likely to lead the way on easy PGD are those with fertility trouble, he argues, or those who cant have their own biological kids, including same-sex couples. For these people, the process seems to be a clear potential win: Once hopeless, they may soon be able to have biological children of their own.

But if the process does indeed advance in the way Greely predicts, it will come with big ethical challenges. Safety is a big issue, he said. Coercion is a big issue: Will you be forced to do this? No matter how easy PGD becomes, it will always be expensive, meaning that babies from rich families would gain even more advantages over other people before they leave the womb. The procedure also challenges the disability-rights movement, Greely pointed out: It implicitly suggests that some traits, and thus some people, are preferable to others.

Theres very little about our modern lives that a God from 3000 years ago would have expected.

Some critics may also claim this process is against Gods will, Greely added. I dont have a lot of confidence in the intellectual strength of that argument, but I think it has a lot of visceral support.

Despite Greelys skepticism, this seems to be the greatest potential objection to a world of skin-cell babies and intensive genetic screening: It assumes that the creation of life is a matter of pipettes and petri dishes, not something greater. While the widespread use of contraceptives has largely divorced sex from procreation, this process would represent the final severing. As Greely pointed out, the very meaning of sex would change. Most people have sex and it doesnt result in a baby, he said. They do it because they like it. They do it as a token of love. They do it because theyre forced to. They do it to make money. Pleasure, ultimately, will be a main driver of sex, he added.

For the many peoplereligious or notwho believe that life is not ultimately a matter of science, the world of easy PGD may seem disorienting, even morally disturbing. But Greely didnt think religious or moral arguments could persuade someone like him, or society more broadly, that easy PGD isnt a good idea.

If you, coming from a Catholic background, try to convince me, coming from a non-Catholic background ... that wouldnt work for me, he said. I need a more intellectual argument than one based on my faith or the tablets brought down from the mountain for me say this. Theres very little about our modern lives thats natural or what a God from 3000 years ago would have expected or wanted, including all of modern medicine.

As head-spinning as these theoretical ethical challenges are, perhaps easy PGD wont be as common as Greely thinks. After all, he joked, were never going to get rid of teenagers in the back seat of a car.

See original here:
Making Babies, No Sex Necessary - The Atlantic

June 27, 2017 Illustration of two Pieris rapae, better known as cabbage white, butterflies during a mating dance where the male performs sweeps under the female to show off his bright violet wing colors that only the butterflies can see through their sophisticated visual system. The brighter the violet on the male's wings the more his nutrient package is rich with proteins, which are highly desirable by the females. Credit: Nathan Morehouse

When insects skip the light fandango their romantic foreplay often involves some pretty crazy things like hypnotic dance moves and flashy colors. In some species it ends with a complex ejaculate package that does more than fertilize offspring.

In the case of butterflies, the cabbage white Pieris rapae in particular, scientists have found male butterfly ejaculatea complex package designed to deliver spermalso contains a dose of valuable life-extending nutrients that female butterflies devour like candy.

But receiving this parcel of goodness comes at a costmale dominance.

It comes covered in a hard shell that takes three days to digest, during which time the female cannot mate again, says University of Cincinnati biologist Nathan Morehouse.

Recent interdisciplinary research led by Morehouse in the Morehouse Research Lab and Nathan Clark, biologist in the Clark Research Lab at the University of Pittsburgh looked closer at the complex structures and mechanisms within male butterfly ejaculates and the adaptive responses in the female butterfly reproductive tract.

The researchers hope these study findings will aid in understanding the complex human reproductive cycle and the occasional problems that originate on a molecular level. The authors published their co-evolutionary results in the June journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

"As scientists, we already knew that male butterfly ejaculates were three-fold complex structures we call spermatophorescomposed of an outer envelope, an inner matrix of fluids and a bolus of sperm," says UC's Morehouse. "What we didn't know and found through our research is that these three structures are distinctly different in protein composition, are separately stored in the male reproductive tract and are transferred sequentially to the female reproductive tract during mating."

Why such an elaborate process for such a tiny butterfly? Control over female reproduction, Morehouse says.

Because the spermatophore occupies much of the female reproductive tract, she cannot mate again until it is gone. Males make it tough for her by encasing the spermatophore in a hard shell. This delay benefits the male by assuring more of his sperm fertilize her eggs.

Method behind his madness

"In this set of species, and in many insects, they have what's called last male sperm precedence," says Clark. "When another male comes in and mates, his sperm either displaces the first male's sperm or pushes them to the back."

Occasionally, individual male seminal fluids and female enzymes won't work together efficiently, creating an imbalance that can result in low egg fertilization. The researchers say looking at how female butterflies have resolved this obstacle may open the curtain for correcting similar protein-enzyme imbalances in human infertility.

Using high-tech computerized technology such as mass spectrometry and older standard biochemical processes, the researchers determined that the tiny winged macho-men transfer 13 percent of their total body weight through their spermatophore complex during the mating process. But surprisingly, only 2 percent of that is actually sperm.

The rest of the complex goody bag of proteins, carbohydrates, lipids and other compounds play all sorts of other important roles in reproductionnot the least of which is a way for the males to prevent the female from mating again for about three to four days, says Morehouse.

On the flip side, he says females benefit much more by mating often for a number of reasons:

Females like a variety in the genetics of the offspring they produce, as some male genotypes are better than others and this assures her the most successful outcome.

Females crave the delicious protein nutrients males pass along during mating that provide life-extending cell repairsort of like going to a butterfly spaso the more the better.

These protein nutrients also help females build eggs. We estimate that a female who mates 2-3 times may build 30-40 percent of the eggs she lays from proteins the male transfers during copulation. So male mates are actually funding her reproduction.

"To keep a female from remating, the males have developed a hard outer shell around the precious nutrients that are especially desirable by females to repair their cells and live longer," says Clark. "This hard outer shell gets transferred behind the bolus of sperm and acts as a copulatory plug that prevents the female from being able to mate again with other maleshopefully insuring his sperm as the cocktail that fertilizes the female's eggs when she lays them."

Wait! Not so fast

"I was fascinated to discover that females are actually very well equipped to quickly digest the nuptial gift from the male," says Camille Meslin-Auclair, post-doctoral biologist who performed most of the analysis working at the University of Pittsburgh. "Even more fascinating are the mechanical and biochemical tools she possesses to dissolve this outer shell."

In an evolutionary twist of fate, these clever little females have developed an extraordinary way to break free from the male's control.

"We discovered a surprising mechanical chewing device inside the female reproductive tract lined with a spectacular array of tooth-like structures that can gnaw through the hard outer shell in a matter of hours," says Morehouse. "Without this mechanism we affectionately call the 'vagina dentata,' it would likely take a week or more to dissolve the hard protective shell with just her enzymes alone."

By looking at reproduction as both a source of cooperation and conflict between the sexes, the researchers are finding clues from this study on a behavioral and molecular level that can be an important link for solving certain unexplained causes of human infertility.

"Reproduction is a very interesting social interface where males and females have a conversation," says Morehouse. "That conversation often begins with courtship, but doesn't stop after mating happens.

"It becomes a negotiation between the molecules of both sexes for the shared goal of producing offspring."

As the researchers understand incompatibilities between butterflies on a molecular level, they plan to track how these creatures evolve and develop certain enzymes and proteins to solve this tug of war.

Morehouse and Clark hope new findings eventually unlock some of the mysteries of human infertility that exist on a similar stage between male seminal fluids and female reproductive enzymes.

"These cabbage white butterflies are one of the most common butterflies in the world and very common in Cincinnati," says Morehouse.

"There is magic all around us and the lovely thing about science is that sometimes clues that might actually help with health issues like human infertility can come from a butterfly in your own backyard."

Explore further: Firefly gift-giving: Composition of 'nuptial gifts' revealed, shedding light on postmating sexual selection

More information: Structural complexity and molecular heterogeneity of a butterfly ejaculate reflect a complex history of selection, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2017). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1707680114 , http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/06/16/1707680114.abstract

Female fireflies have long known that the best romances are with a male firefly who offers the most nourishing and largest "nuptial gift" - a protein-packed capsule of sperm that is rich with egg-producing and life-extending ...

Academy researchers Mikael Puurtinen and Lutz Fromhage at the Department of Biological and Environmental Science of the University of Jyvskyl and the Centre of Excellence in Biological Interactions have found out that ...

Beetles that copulate with the same mate as opposed to different partners will repeat the same behaviour, debunking previous suggestions that one sex exerts control over the other in copulation, new research has found.

All a question of timing: When bushcrickets mate, the male attaches a sticky package, the so-called spermatophore, to the female's abdomen. Alongside the sperm themselves, this 'bridal present' consists of a protein-rich ...

Male flour beetles increase their courtship effort and their sperm count if a female smells of other males according to a study published in the journal Behavioural Ecology.

The eggs of some butterfly and moth species vary to give females control over the paternity of their offspring, according to new research published today.

An ecological filter in a pond, such as voracious fish that feed on dragonflies and damselflies, can help ecologists predict how biodiversity loss may impact specific habitats, according to Rice University researchers who ...

Imagine going to the supermarket to stock up on groceries but coming home empty-handed because you just couldn't figure out how to work the shopping cart or figure out how to get to the ice cream tubs in the freezer aisle.

Nature makes the vibrant pigments manufacturers want for foods and cosmetics, but getting them from plants to the products we buy is so difficult that many manufacturers rely on artificial colors. Now, researchers at Rensselaer ...

Johns Hopkins researchers report they have uncovered a mechanism in amoebae that rapidly changes the way cells migrate by resetting their sensitivity to the naturally occurring internal signaling events that drive such movement. ...

For centuries evolutionary biologists have been considering a difficult question: why do some animals 'choose' not to have children and instead help others rear their young? Researchers from Royal Holloway, University of ...

If cellular identity is to be maintained, it is important that actively transcribed chromatin stretches remain in a loose configuration as long as these genes are needed. Marc Bhler and his group have uncovered a novel ...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read this article:
Biologist looks at butterflies to help solve human infertility - Phys.Org

When a human egg is fertilized, the result is never a newborn platypus. I didnt need four years of medical school, three years of pediatric residency, three years of neonatal fellowship, and close to two decades of medical practice to tell me that. In fact, high-school biology textbooks explain that all fertilized human eggs (zygotes), after approximately nine months, become newborn human babies unless something occurs to interrupt normal development.

This progression from fertilized egg to newborn is neither alternative science nor a rejection of long-standing medical knowledge. Yet in her paper Alternative Science and Human Reproduction, published this month in the New England Journal of Medicine, R. Alta Charo uses those labels to discredit anyone who acknowledges the biological truth about human development.

Charo attempts in her piece to discredit Donald Trumps pro-life executive-branch appointees. To this end, Charo, who is not a doctor, paints as ludicrous the claim that contraceptives can act as abortifacients by disrupting the natural process of pregnancy and ending a human life.

In reality, the progression of events from sexual intercourse to the creation of new human life is well established.

The process goes something like this: About six days after fertilization of the egg, and multiple cell divisions later, the zygote has become a cluster of cells (now called a morula). It has traversed the mothers fallopian tube and made its way into her uterus, where the process of implantation will then occur over the next four to five days. The various stages of development will continue to unfold until birth. Uterine implantation provides the ideal environmental mix for human development. If either a drug or a device disrupts implantation, the originating events that began approximately six days earlier are stopped, and the pregnancy is prevented from progressing.

So it follows that devices or medications that impede implantation effectively end or abort a pregnancy. This reality contradicts Charos argument that contraceptives abortifacient action is just a politically potent assertion by [Trump] appointees. The potency of the assertion derives from the fact that it is true. As Charo admits, one of the ways contraceptives work is to disrupt implantation.

The government and many physicians, however, define pregnancy as beginning only after implantation. As a physician myself, I prefer not to ignore the physical changes that occur between the moment fertilization occurs and implantation in the mothers womb. According to my embryology textbook, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects, the zygote represents the beginning of a human being.

From the moment of fertilization, the new human has unique DNA that serves as the cellular blueprint for the duration of his or her entire life. This medical fact does not depend on implantation: It depends entirely on the uniting of the parents DNA. Nor does this fact depend on an elected officials opinion or a lawyers or even a doctors opinion about when life begins.

Admittedly, zygotes dont look like humans. However, at the time of my grandmothers death, she didnt look much like her childhood pictures, and if we could have seen her as an embryo, she would have looked even less like the woman she developed into. But her DNA was intact at fertilization and remained intact throughout her life. My ability to recognize her at various stages of her life did not determine whether or not she was alive. The same is true for prenatal life and postnatal life.

There are multiple medical and legal papers arguing about when we should recognize life the moment we should acknowledge as the beginning of a life and what rights an individual does or does not have at different stages of life. Unfortunately, the arguments on these questions often reflect the ideological agenda of the arguer instead of the medical reality, which is that a unique life is created at fertilization. The distortion of this physiological truth, Charos article notwithstanding, is what makes human reproduction in our era the victim of alternative science.

READ MORE: Little-Known Facts about Roe v. Wade Planned Parenthoods Century of Brutality Planned Parenthoods Annual Report: Abortions Are Up, Prenatal Care Is Down

Robin Pierucci is a wife, a mother of three, and a practicing neonatologist. She is a member of Women Speak for Themselves.

Read more here:
When Does Life Begin? Pro-Choice 'Science' Ignores the Facts. - National Review

COVID-19, commonly known as the coronavirus, is the biggest story in the world right now, a global pandemic forcing radical changes in society. With people constantly talking about it, its no surprise that rumors and conspiracy theories are circulating all over the internet. Here are some of the more popular conspiracy theories and rumors, and what they get wrong.

The rumor: The Lancet, an old and distinguished medical journal, published a letter hypothesizing that anti-inflammatory drugs, like ibuprofen, might increase the risk of coronavirus infection by spurring the increase of a particular enzyme called ACE2.

French Health Minister Olivier Vran gave the idea an official backing with a tweet warning that ibuprofen could be dangerous.

The truth: The ibuprofen hypothesis was just that, a hypothesis. The Lancet letter was calling for investigation into the effects of drugs that stimulate ACE-2 .

One of the researchers involved, professor Michael Roth, later said, the letter does not constitute a recommendation to use certain drugs or not. Patients should always follow the instructions given by their physicians.

The World Health Organization (WHO) stated on March 18 that it does not currently have any evidence that ibuprofen exacerbates coronavirus. That said, ibuprofen has always had some negative side effects, and you should talk to your doctor if youre worried about them.

Story continues

The rumor: Conspiracy theories make for great drama, and what could be more dramatic than learning that the coronavirus was engineered in a lab, a mad experiment run amok, or even released on society intentionally. This theory is surprisingly popular: According to a Pew survey, 23 percent of Americans think the virus was created intentionally in a lab, while an additional 6 percent think it was made accidentally.

The truth: While it might be fun to imagine coronavirus is a government creation (it would certainly make for a great HBO miniseries), science suggests the truth is that coronavirus came about through boring, old-fashioned natural selection.

In a study published in Nature, researchers analyzed the structure of the coronavirus to glean insights into how it may have evolved, and whether it might really have been man-made. First, they examined the viruss ability to bind to an enzyme called ACE2, which is found in the lungs, heart, and other organs. Although the coronavirus binds well to ACE2, the researchers noted that computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal and that the combination of high affinity with room to improve is most likely the result of natural selection on a human or human-like ACE2 that permits another optimal binding solution to arise. This is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation.

The researchers also noted that, if humans had made the coronavirus, they would have used one of the previous human-compatible coronaviruses as a foundation, yet the genetic data indicates that COVID-19 was not derived from any previously used virus backbone. Instead, they find it likely that this coronavirus adapted, making the leap from animals (such as bats or pangolins) to humans.

The rumor: In times of plague, people naturally grow desperate for cures. Social media, with its lack of fact-checking, has been a breeding ground for rumors about miracle treatments to ward off the virus, including, shockingly enough, people recommending you drink bleach (dont).

The truth: Bleach is great for disinfecting household surfaces, not the inside of your body. People have turned to other supplements, such as colloidal silver, in the hopes of preventing the virus, but the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) maintains that these products are fraudulent and may even harm you.

Vitamin C has long had a reputation for boosting the immune system, and as a result, people are spreading claims that big doses of it can cure coronavirus. As Peter McCaffery, a professor of biochemistry, writes in The Conversation, although vitamin C is important for your body, past evidence indicates its unlikely that taking vitamin C will prevent or cure you of a COVID-19 infection.

The rumor: Coronavirus is no worse than the flu, and maybe even less dangerous. This is a common thread youll see in public discussions about the disease. Even President Donald Trump has compared the coronavirus to the flu, pointing out that the U.S. never shuts down over the latter.

The truth: There are certainly similarities between the coronavirus and the flu. Both can have similar symptoms (fever, cough, body aches, fatigue, pneumonia) and both can be spread through droplets.

For coronavirus skeptics, the flus high yearly numbers are a reason to dismiss coronavirus panic. There are a few reasons that the coronavirus is causing so much more panic, however. First, what we call the flu is actually a variety of different strains of viruses, whereas the coronavirus is just one virus, yet capable of doing all this damage. Second, coronavirus appears to spread more than the flu; the coronavirus has a reproductive number between 2 and 2.5, meaning that each person who gets it will infect 2 to 2.5 others, whereas the seasonal flu has about a 1.3 reproduction rate.

Finally, while the flu does kill a staggering number of people every year, it has a much lower mortality rate than the coronavirus so far. In fact, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testified to Congress that coronavirus has a mortality rate 10 times that of the flu.

The rumor: An official in Chinas Foreign Ministry, Zhao Lijian, suggested that the U.S. Army started the virus, pointing to its presence at the Military World Games in Wuhan (where the pandemic began) in October.

The truth: All evidence points to Wuhan as the origin of the outbreak, but China first reported cases December 31. As for the soldiers involved in the Military World Games, the Pentagon reported no illnesses have been tied to American service members from October, according to the New York Times. One might suspect that, given its early failings in trying to downplay and suppress information about the virus, the Chinese government is now looking to keep the worlds attention elsewhere while it rehabilitates its image.

For the latest updates on the novel coronavirus outbreak, visit the World Health Organizations COVID-19 page.

Read more from the original source:
Conspiracy theories and myths about the coronavirus, debunked - Yahoo Tech

How did the genes that ledto heart disease, one of the biggest killers on the globe,persist for so long? According to new research, the same genes that wreakhavoc on our heartserve amore beneficial purpose: They help us have babies.

The study, published online in PLOS Genetics, found that the same genes responsible forcoronary artery disease (CAD), also play a major role in successful human reproduction; the genes are involved in "...functions in male and female fertility being expressed in the testes, ovaries, and endometrium..." Futurity reported. The team believes that this may explain why evolution allowedotherwise deadly genes to remain in the human genome for so long.

Read: Why Can't I Get Pregnant? Failed Fertility Treatment Linked To Future Cardiovascular Problems

Evolution, it seems, is involved in a trade-off where CAD only begins to appear at around 40-50 years of age when the potential beneficial effects of these genes on reproduction have already occurred, explained lead author Sean Byars from the School of BioSciences at the University of Melbourne, Futurity reported.

For the study, the team looked at 56 genetic regions for CAD in 12 worldwide populations originating in Africa, Europe, andEast Asia. They specificallylookedto see if there have been any recent changes to genes associated with heart disease, and were surprised to find that these genes were more or less untouched for many generations. This prompted them to further investigate why these genes had been preserved for so long. Its here where they realized that the genes associated with CAD were also vital for human reproduction. The team explained that this does not mean that peoplewho reproduce and have many children are more likely to develop heart disease, but rather that heart disease is a by-product of humans' ability to reproduce successfully.

This represents direct evidence that genes that have been under selection are also beneficial for reproduction and, yet, are associated with occurrence of a common disease later in life, explained lead study author Michael Inouye, Futurity reported.

According to the National Institute of Health, coronary heart disease occurs when plaque builds up in the arteries meant to supply oxygen to the heart. As the plaque builds up over the course of many years, it can narrow the arteries, restricting blood flow or causing a blood clot that can also stop blood flow. When this occurs, the heart is deprived of blood and the individual may experience a heart attack.

As science further develops to allow us the ability to edit genes, this study offersa warning that sometimes the effects of genes can be complex and editing them out can have unforeseen consequences.

Source: Byars SG, Huang QQ< Gray LA, et al. Genetic loci associated with coronary artery disease harbor evidence of selection and antagonistic pleiotropy. PLOS Genetics. 2017

See Also:

These Blood Types May Increase Risk For Heart Attack And Poor Overall Cardiovascular Health

Breast Implants Can Impede With ECG Test, Give False Heart Attack Diagnosis

Original post:
Same Genes Involved With Heart Disease Also Play Vital Role In Human Reproduction, Study Says - Medical Daily

By Fred Sheldon Mwesigwa

While I have been closely following the effects of secular ideology on the Western society, nothing prepared me for the academic documentary titled Demographic Winter that projected the declining population and attendant effect on the economies of these countries.

The main argument of the documentary is that although there is overwhelming proof of steady breakup of family, preference of a life without children and resultant low birth rate; social scientists and economists have avoided discussing the subject because it is not politically correct and raises moral and ethical questions.

The academicians argue that there is a kind of conspiracy to overemphasise the debate on the negative effects of climate change and population explosion instead of the projected decline in population, especially in Western civilisation.

According to population experts, the declining fertility rates that are leading to a drastic reduction in population is occasioned by industrial revolution, the sexual revolution, the women revolution, the individualistic revolution and the divorce revolution. The population explosion phase often referred to as the baby boom of the 1960s was subsequently followed by a period of growth in industry and prosperity.

The prosperity era according to Dr Gary Becker, originated an emphasis on work ethic and urbanisation and these did not favour growth of traditional family. The more wealthy people became, the more they prided in material possessions and the less in procreation and nurture of children.

The women revolution, according to Dr Janice Crouse, saw the emergence of feminism and the rise in opportunities of women to study and getting same employment opportunities as men. The sexual revolution, according to Dr Linda Waite, which redefined gender identity, is responsible for the decline in fertility since it resulted in reduced significance of traditional family.

The effect of the sexual revolution on demographics has been a declining fertility rate and thereby fewer children, which has negative effect on economic development. Unfortunately, population decline is not discussed in the media, lecture rooms and political platforms because it is not a politically correct subject in a post-modern or a postChristian era as some opine. Instead, there is overemphasis on womens rights, gay rights, environmental issues, which Dr Phil Longman argues, are mainly informed by the 1970s obsession with the population explosion theory, which is now a largely contested subject by demographers.

The dilemma with top scientists is that there are more questions than answers to the inevitable extinction of the human race since fewer children are being born yet their strongly held view is that we have a problem with increased population.

Relatedly, Dr Longman and Dr Mark Regnerus, question the pontifical scientific argument of Charles Darwin that the evolutionary biology of sex is all about reproduction. Dr Regnerus asks, How can this be when the most intelligent arent interested in reproducing themselves? Is this true among all species except humans? The irony, according to Dr Longman, is that the only section of humans that are interested in reproducing themselves, are people of faith, including Jews, Muslims, Christians and not the secularists, who are interested in promoting individualistic lifestyles that are anachronistic to sexual reproduction.

The only escape route out of the impending decline in fertility, thereby decline in family and subsequently economic decline is going to be a return to supporting traditional family as reflected by people of the book, best summed up by Dr Longman, I am not a church person, I work for a progressive secular think tank not faith based organisation but this research, perhaps may bring me to faith!

As the world is on tenterhooks over the deadly coronavirus that could wipe out the human race, it is most likely a vaccine will soon be discovered.

Rt Rev Dr Mwesigwa is the Bishop of Ankole Diocese and Chancellor Bishop Stuart University.

More here:
Projected death of human race; the hidden data! - Daily Monitor

Genomics has come a long way since the central dogma (the notion that DNA is the master controller that calls all the shots) and junk DNA (the expectation that much of the genome is non-functional). If scientists ditch those old dogmas and approach the genome expecting to find reasons for things, they often do.

To-may-to or to-mah-to? The British write flavour; the Americans write flavor, but generally each understands the other without too much difficulty. Genomes, too, have alternate ways of spelling things: GGU and GGC in messenger RNA both spell glycine. No big deal, thought geneticists; these silent mutations cause no change in the resulting protein. At the University of Notre Dame, however, biochemists are finding that the differences in spelling are not just background noise; they alter the proteins folding. Is that good or bad?

Synonymous mutations were long considered to be genomic background noise, but we found they do indeed lead to altered protein folding, and in turn impair cell function, said Patricia Clark, the Rev. John Cardinal OHara professor of biochemistry at the University of Notre Dame, and lead author of the study. Our results show that synonymous variations in our DNA sequences which account for most of our genetic variation can have a significant impact on shaping the fitness level of cellular proteins.

Surely many of these mutations are harmful, as are random mutations in humans that cause genetic disease. But E. coli has been around for a long time. Wouldnt the species have gone extinct by now with the accumulation of defective spellings if they are always deleterious? Other work has suggested a secret code in synonymous variations that fine-tunes expression rates or regulates the supply of a given protein based on environmental conditions. The news release only mentions impairments caused by synonymous variations, but Notre Dame teams paper in PNAS suggests some possible advantages:

Synonymous codon substitutions alter the mRNA coding sequence but preserve the encoded amino acid sequence. For this reason, these substitutions were historically considered to be phenotypically silent and often disregarded in studies of human genetic variation. In recent years, however, it has become clear that synonymous substitutions can significantly alter protein function in vivo through a wide variety of mechanisms that can change protein level, translational accuracy, secretion efficiency, the final folded structure and posttranslational modifications. The full range of synonymous codon effects on protein production is, however, still emerging, and much remains to be learned regarding the precise mechanisms that regulate these effects. [Emphasis added.]

A design perspective would consider every possible function before rendering a judgment that all synonymous variations reduce fitness.

Keeping the genome accurate to a high degree preserves it from collapsing due to error catastrophe. At the time of cell division, proofreading enzymes (what a concept!) perform this vital function. Chelsea R. Bulock et al., writing in PNAS, have found one duplication enzyme that proofreads itself while proofreading its partner! DNA polymerase proofreads errors made by DNA polymerase , the paper is titled.

Pol and Pol are the two major replicative polymerases in eukaryotes, but their precise roles at the replication fork remain a subject of debate. A bulk of data supports a model where Pol and Pol synthesize leading and lagging DNA strands, respectively. However, this model has been difficult to reconcile with the fact that mutations in Pol have much stronger consequences for genome stability than equivalent mutations in Pol. We provide direct evidence for a long-entertained idea that Pol can proofread errors made by Pol in addition to its own errors, thus, making a more prominent contribution to mutation avoidance. This paper provides an essential advance in the understanding of the mechanism of eukaryotic DNA replication.

In other words, Pol is a proofreader of a proofreader. The paper says that Pol is a versatile extrinsic proofreading enzyme. One could think of it as a supervisor checking the work of a subordinate, or better yet, as an auditor or inspector able to fix errors before they cause harm to the product. Why would this be necessary during replication? The authors see a seniority system:

Thus, the high efficiency of Pol at correcting errors made by Pol may result from a combination of two factors: the high proclivity of Pol to yield to another polymerase and the greater flexibility and robustness of Pol when associating with new primer termini.

One proofreader is amazing to consider evolving by a Darwinian mechanism. A proofreader of a proofreader is astonishing. Consider, too, that this proofreading operation occurs in the dark by feel, automatically, without eyes to see.

Now that genetics is long past the heady days of finding that DNA forms a code that is translated, additional discoveries continue to show additional codes and factors that contribute to genomic function. One factor is the high-order structure of DNA. Researchers at South Koreas UNIST center have explored further into the formation of this structure, which involves chromatin wrapping around histone proteins so that long strands of DNA can fit within the compact space of the cell nucleus. As with everything else in genomics, the structure doesnt just happen. It requires a lot of help.

Regulation of histone proteins allows the DNA strands become more tightly or loosely coiled during the processes of DNA replication and gene expression. However, problems may arise when histones clump together or when DNA strands intertwine. Indeed, the misregulation of chromatin structures could result in aberrant gene expression and can ultimately lead to developmental disorders or cancers.

Histone chaperones are those proteins, responsible for adding and removing specific histones [found] at the wrong time and place during the DNA packaging process. Thus, they also play a key role in the assembly and disassembly of chromatin.

Cryo-EM imaging allowed the team to envision the molecular structure of some of these chaperone proteins. Their paper in Nature Communications begins, The fundamental unit of chromatin, the nucleosome, is an intricate structure that requires histone chaperones for assembly. Their cryo-EM images of one particular chaperone named Abo1 reveals a six-fold symmetry with precise locations for docking to histones, its hexameric ring thus creating a unique pocket where histones could bind with energy from ATP. Not only is Abo1 distinct as a histone chaperone, they write, but Abo1 is also unique compared to other canonical AAA+protein structures. Like Lego blocks, Abo1 features tight knob-and-hole packing of individual subunits plus linkers and other binding sites, such as for ATP. And unlike static blocks, these blocks undergo conformational changes as they work.

Such sophistication is far beyond the old picture of DNA as a master molecule directing all the work. It couldnt work without the help of many precision machines like this.

These stories are mere samples from a vast and growing literature indicating higher order in the genome than expected. Here are some more samples readers may wish to investigate:

Researchers at the University of Seville found additional factors involved in the repair of DNA strand breaks. These repairs are essential for the maintenance of genome integrity. The factors they discovered help maintain the right tension in cohesin molecules that hold the chromosomes together until the right time to separate. The news was relayed by EurekAlert!and published in Nature Communications.

Remember Paleys Watch? Researchers at the University of Basel discovered that Inner clockwork sets the time for cell division in bacteria. In PNAS and in Nature Communications, the Basel team elucidates the structure and function of a small signaling molecule that starts the clock, which then informs the cell about the right time to reproduce. They report in the news release:

A team at the Biozentrum of the University of Basel, led by Prof. Urs Jenal has now identified a central switch for reproduction in the model bacteriumCaulobacter crescentus: the signaling molecule c-di-GMP. In their current study,published in the journalNature Communications,they report that this molecule initiates a clock-like mechanism, which determines whether individual bacteria reproduce.

Proteins must fold properly to perform their functions. Small proteins usually fold successfully on their own, but large ones can fall into several misfolding traps that are equally likely as the canonical fold. It appears that the sequence of the sequence in a gene has something to do with this. Interestingly, many of these proteins sequences contain conserved rare codons that may slow down synthesis at this optimal window, explain Amir Bitran et al. in a January 21 paper in PNAS, discovering that Cotranslational folding (i.e., folding that begins as the polypeptide exits the ribosome) allows misfolding-prone proteins to circumvent deep kinetic traps.

Design advocates and evolutionists need to fathom what they are dealing with when discussing origins. Theres nothing like some low-level detail to put the challenge in perspective.

Image credit: Caulobacter crescentus, by University of Basel, Swiss Nanoscience Institute/Biozentrum, via EurekAlert!

More:
More Hints of Order in the Genome - Discovery Institute

The rapid rise of the COVID-19 coronavirus has made films and TV shows about pandemics a new guilty pleasure. Unfortunately, many films about the spread of disease are low budget or rely too heavily on tropes such as zombies and killer animals. While no film is going to stand up to scientific scrutiny and win awards for epidemiological accuracy, there are a handful of films and TV shows streaming online that are both entertaining and can make one think about the nature of widespread public health emergencies. Here are the five best TV shows and movies depicting pandemics.

Contagion (YouTube, Amazon Prime, iTunes, Google Play, Hulu)

Released in 2011, Contagion is in some ways the closest depiction to a modern day pandemic. A businesswoman on a trip to China is inadvertently exposed to a new virus, and quickly spreads it not only to her fellow international travelers but also in the continental United States. The disease spreads quickly across Japan, China, the United Kingdom, and other countries. The Center for Disease Control quickly determines the origin of the virus and begins work on a vaccine. In the meantime the social fabric of the country begins to unravel, as food runs short, pharmacies are looted, and crime increases. The most pitch-perfect arc of the film however is of a conspiracy theorist and blogger promoting hysteria and distrust of science and government at a time society needs calmness and trust in science and government all while benefiting financially from the global crisis.

The Andromeda Strain (YouTube, iTunes, Google Play, Amazon Prime)

The Andromeda Strain adds an otherworldly spin to the pandemic threat. A U.S. military satellite designed to detect signs of extraterrestrial life crashes near the small town of Piedmont, New Mexico, and soon the entire townsave two peopleare dead. The federal government activates Project Wildlife, a top secret research project staffed with pre-selected scientists, to determine the cause of the towns demise. Wildlife scientists identify the alien pathogen, nicknamed Andromeda, and must prevent it from spreading. Wildfires mission is complicated by the presence of a nuclear weapon buried at the underground facility designed to detonate in the event scientists lose control over Andromeda. Directed by Robert Wise, The Andromeda Strain is a slow-paced, procedural film that lacks chase scenes and other exciting elements but makes up for it with strong acting and a decent script.

Children of Men (YouTube, Amazon Prime, iTunes, Google Play, Hulu)

Children of Men takes place in 2027, years after a worldwide sterility plague that effectively ended human reproduction. Societies worldwide, fearing the last generation of mankind has already been born, grapple with their imminent demise. Left without the hope of continuing generations, the countries of the world slide into civil war, authoritarianism and xenophobia. The future in doubt, individual and community life ceases to have purpose. The film is full of allusions to civilizations decline, from newspaper headlines of dirty bomb attacks to abandoned schools and playgrounds. Children of Men is a look at how humanity might face a gentler form of pandemic, where individuals are left alive but the human race itself faces extinction.

Pontypool (iTunes)

Pontypool is a different type of pandemic film. The film takes place in a small Canadian town named Pontypool, and is mainly centered around the town radio show host. After receiving sporadic reports of violence taking place across town, DJ Grant Mazzy realizes that the virus, which causes uncontrollable urges of violence, is actually a virus of language, caused by the repetition of certain words in English. While by no means realistic the use of language to transmit a pathogen is an immensely creative one, similar to both computer viruses and those that affect biological organisms. The disease is later alluded to have been the result of terrorists, perhaps the only form of linguistic terrorism in the history of pop culture.

The Walking Dead (AMC, Netflix, YouTube TV)

The Walking Dead is a television series about zombies, no doubt, and in that sense is highly unrealistic. As scenes unfold worldwide of toilet paper buying panics, people exposed to the coronavirus breaking quarantine, and incompetent government, were reminded that in a crisis, perhaps the most dangerous thing is the unpredictability of the human next to you. This has opened The Walking Dead up to complaints that it shows horrible people more than zombies, a legitimate one, but the show has always made the point that it wasnt necessarily the dead coming back to life that ended civilization but mankinds responseor lack of one.

Kyle Mizokami is a defense and national-security writer based in San Francisco who has appeared in the Diplomat, Foreign Policy, War is Boring and the Daily Beast. In 2009, he cofounded the defense and security blog Japan Security Watch. You can follow him on Twitter: @KyleMizokami.

Image: Reuters.

See the original post here:
The 5 Scariest Pandemic TV Shows and Series You Can Stream - The National Interest