Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Study Hints That Wi-Fi Near Testes Could Decrease Male Fertility

Posted by timothy on from the does-not-bode-well-for-me dept.

Pierre Bezukhov submits news of a report that "a laptop connected wirelessly to the internet on the lap near the testes may result in decreased male fertility," writing "'[The scientists who conducted the research] placed healthy sperms under a laptop running a Wi-Fi connection. After four hours, the Wi-Fi exposed sperms showed 'a significant decrease in progressive sperm motility and an increase in sperm DNA fragmentation' compared to healthy sperms stored for the same time in the same temperature away from the computer. That is, the sperms exposed to Wi-Fi were less capable of moving towards an egg to fertilize it and less capable of passing on the male's DNA if it does fertilize an egg.' The scientists blamed the damage on non-thermal electromagnetic radiation generated by the Wi-Fi." However, the experiment was based on sperm outside the body; the researchers (here's the abstract from their study) note that "Further in vitro and in vivo studies are needed to prove this contention."

15 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Its a study that admits its incomplete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and still people will use this as FUD for the next 3 decades.

  2. Insufficient data. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 5, Funny

    They don't say what the compute was displaying. Porn has been known to effect the movement of sperms.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  3. This calls for... by Shirogitsune · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...a tinfoil codpiece!

  4. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by somersault · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trolling aside, this experiment doesn't sound like it had a control group, ie a laptop with no wi-fi being held over your balls. Heat in that area is known to decrease fertility. The experiment as described in the summary has nothing to do with wi-fi.

    (no, I didn't RTFA).

    --
    which is totally what she said
  5. They're claiming it's not thermal damage by bandy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yet every modern laptop has its wifi antennas carefully routed alongside the screen so that their polarization will match the WAP's polarization. Laptops get hot. Sperm want to live at 97F (definitely not at 98.6, which is average body temperature). What have they previously published? I smell an agenda.

    --
    "You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
    1. Re:They're claiming it's not thermal damage by IICV · · Score: 5, Informative

      They actually aren't claiming anything. I tracked down the paper (which was fucking harder than it should have been, the article didn't cite anything but the journal and month - turns out it was in the supplemental issue from September, not the main journal). The real citation is:

      A. Van-Gheem, J. Martin, L. Penrose, N. Farooqi, S. Prien, Short-term exposure to cell phone levels of radio frequency radiation do not appear to to influence semen parameters in vitro, Fertility and Sterility, Volume 96, Issue 3, Supplement, September 2011, Page S155, ISSN 0015-0282, 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.07.610.
      (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0015028211017079)

      I wonder why the article didn't cite it? Maybe because in the title itself, it says "do not appear to influence". Anyway, turns out it's not a real paper, it's really just a blurb about "We did this and it turns out nothing happened".

      Here's the results section:

      As expected, all measured semen parameters decreased with time (p

      So basically, I have absolutely no idea where this article came from. What it says directly contradicts the paper it claims to be reporting on. It looks like there is an agenda here, but it's not the scientists'.

    2. Re:They're claiming it's not thermal damage by wes33 · · Score: 5, Informative

      there are two papers: the Van-Gheem et.al. paper you cite and then there is the
      one the slashdot article is about, which is:

      Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation. by Avendaño C, Mata A, Sanchez Sarmiento CA, Doncel GF.

      The authors are the Argentineans which the linked article mentions.

      It's (to be) published in Fertility and Sterility.

      So I basically don't know what you're going on about ...

  6. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Non-thermal electromagnetic radiation" means that electromagnetic radiation caused the effect through a nonthermal mechanism. It's a common idea in EM fear circles (because the output from EM devices is too low to cause damage by a thermal mechanism). It doesn't say anything about heat, one way or another. You can have thermal damage from EM radiation without any application of heat. That's what your microwave oven does.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  7. Hmm by lightknight · · Score: 4, Funny

    Most things placed near testes tend to decrease male fertility.

    Briefs, jeans, angry women...

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  8. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

    The abstract specifically states that the control group was a set of identical samples, under the same incubation regime, without the laptop. So no, they didn't control for the idea that the laptop alone could've caused the effect

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  9. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the kicker - they ran the laptop with the wifi switched off, but only measured the RF output of the laptop in that state. They didn't perform - or performed, but didn't publish - the obvious control experiment.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  10. Re:Evolution by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Funny

    You could bedazzle your balls with aluminum sequins, that will maintain full sack flexibility while guarding your nuts from the wifi waves, and you'll have DISCO BALLS! XD

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  11. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

    That news report is wrong. The seperate test in question evaluated the RF output of a laptop with its wifi switched off, but it did not measure sperm motility after exposure to that laptop:

    "A separate test with a laptop that was on, but not wirelessly connected, found negligible EM radiation from the machine alone."

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45469130/ns/health-mens_health/#.TtT0PlabUlT

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  12. Re:That's not a bug, it's a feature by Niedi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    They put the laptop 3CM above the sperm and tried to control the temperature from below and via air conditioning. If I got it right while skimming through it, they also measured sperm temp every 5min using an infrared thermometer.

    However the control was NOT a laptop with the wifi turned off but a setting with no exposure to electrical equipment at all. Which is not a control for WiFi but a control for a "Laptop with Wifi on".
    Which leads me to think that the reason they chose this setup was that they couldn't get a useful result when using a laptop without WiFi as a control. The effect could in theory be caused by any part or combination of parts inside the laptop.

  13. Yeah, right by tgibbs · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I take reports of damage to cells in a dish with a grain of salt. This isn't a natural environment for the cells, and it is incredibly easy to harm them accidentally in a variety of ways. When the phenomenon is unlikely to begin with (damage to cells from photons that individually don't carry enough energy to produce lasting changes in any biological molecule), place your bets on "artifact."