The epidemic nobody talks about

Here is a fact that has been "out there" for at least 25 years. "Everyone" knows about it. It is of vital importance. An epidemic is sweeping a large part of the world, which may condemn a part of the human race to extinction. "Everyone" knows about it, but nobody talks about it. It is not AIDS, which affects a relatively small part of the population of industrialized countries. It is not obesity either. It is potentially much more lethal than either. It is more disastrous in its consequences for modern civilization than global warming, pollution or the energy crisis.

 

How could it be that media have so studiously ignored this fact? On the Web, it is represented by a few longely articles. Time Magazine featured an article about it, The Saddest Epidemic,  in 1984, but then seems to have dropped the subject. A book about this epidemic called Our Stolen Future, with a foreword by Al Gore, no less, appeared in 1996 and was reprinted and updated in 1997.   

 

What's it all about? According to several studies, between 1938 and 1990 the sperm count of European, Australian and American males decreased by about 1.5% per year. A study by Carlsen et. al. found:

 

Linear regression of data weighted by number of men in each study showed a significant decrease in mean sperm count from 113 x 10(6)/ml in 1940 to 66 x 10(6)/ml in 1990 (p < 0.0001) and in seminal volume from 3.40 ml to 2.75 ml (p = 0.027), indicating an even more pronounced decrease in sperm production than expressed by the decline in sperm density.

 

The findings are clear: Western males are producing much less semen and the semen has far fewer sperm. Volume declined by about 20% and the density of sperm in that volume declined by about 42%. Overall then, the western males in the study produced less than half the number of sperm cells per ejaculation.

 

Incidences of male infertility have become increasingly common in industrialized countries, but no decline was observed elsewhere. The increased infertility helps to explain why Europeans and Caucasian Americans have birthrates that are well below the values needed for population replacement. After a brief postwar "baby boom" fertility rates began to decline among the Caucasian European and American populations of the world.  In the United States, the current birthrate overall is 14.0 per thousand - about 1.4% per year. In Germany, it is 8.2 per thousand,  In Catholic Italy it is also 9.2 per thousand! .In Germany, the mortality rate is 10.2 per thousand, and in Italy it is 10.5 per thousand.. More people are dying than are getting born The obvious conclusion is that the populations of these countries are slowly aging and becoming extinct. If their population grows, it is because of migration. The same sad story is found all over Europe, the United States and in most of the developed world. 

 

Not all countries in the world have such low brithrates. In the Palestinian territories, for example, the same source tells us that the birthrate is 35.9 per thousand. In Pakistan, 27.2 per thousand and in Egypt 24.2. In Yemen, 38.3 per thousand! In Syria, 26.7 per thousand. In Saudi Arabia 24.9 per thousand. What do these countries have in common? They are all Sunni Muslim Arab countries. To be sure, African countries and Afghanistan have even higher birthrates. Again, these are mostly Sunni Muslim countries, but they are also poor and tend to have higher mortality rates. 

 

The common and facile temptation is to blame the lower sperm counts on environmental toxins. This might be a factor, but it cannot account for the differential fertility of Muslims living in western countries. They are exposed to the same toxins and the same environment as others. In France for example, the average woman born in Metropolitan France has 1.7 children, while the avrage immigrant woman has 2.16 children. Narrowing this down a bit, the average French woman born in Europe other than Turkey has 1.68 children. Women born in Turkey have 3.21 children. Those born in Morocco have 2.97 children on average and those born in Tunisia have 2.90 children. Those born in sub-Saharan Africa have 2.86 children. We cannot present statistics according to religious affiliation, simply because the French government does not collect such information. But the data we have are certainly suggestive. The epidemic of infertility, whatever its causes, is selective. 

 

A scare video that has been circulating on YouTube makes exaggerated claims about Muslim demographics in Europe, damaging the credibility of those who warn about a problem that is, whatever its causes, very real. European Muslims are reproducing faster than non-Muslims, and the non-Muslim birthrate is below replacement level. Those assertions are true in most of Europe.

 

What is behind the mysterious epidermic of infertility and the lowered birthrates? What is the reason that almost nobody is willing to discuss the problem? Here is a problem that potentially affects every Caucasian male in the world and many others. Here are data that show not a tentative and possible statistical effect, like, for example, global warming, but a highly significant statistical trend that must be caused by something. An alarming trend that will wipe out a large part of the human race if it continues. Chances are though, you never heard of it before. Check out the references above and you will see that I have reported the findings faithfully and completely. They are shocking, but nobody is interested. And I bet that if we examine female infertility we will find similar data.

 

Nobody is talking about the infertility epidemic. There is no global summit of world leaders to discuss the infertility epidemic, and there are no UN-sponsored high-publicity conferences on the issue, such as those devoted to the problem of AIDS. There is no serious investigation of the causes. Blaming it all on "pollutants" is not a serious approach to prevention and cure, is it?

 

Can there possibly be a benign explanation for this nearly universal silence and neglect?

 

  

 

.

 

 .