Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I was really surprised the article didn't mention this. To be fair it's apparently something that has been evolving for decades, so it wasn't so much prediction but they definitely aren't inventing something wild. https://ourworldindata.org/fertility/


sort by: page size:

I am surprised there's no mention of male fertility. It's a very viable hypothesis in my opinion.

I can't wait for their follow up article:

"Are eggs making young women fertile".


And that entire paragraph touches on random fears about fertility technology that have almost nothing to do with the subject of this article, which is gametogenesis.

Did you actually read the article? They are already thinking about applying it to humans. This kind of thing is almost always first tried in mice or other animals.

Also, the dwindling of our population is mostly due to societal changes like people wanting fewer children on average, or not finding a partner. Infertility is not the major problem, if you even want to call it a problem at society level (personally, it can very well be, of course).


Soy is not exactly a new thing in the history of humans. In fact some of the most populous regions on earth have been eating it widely for a very long time so it seems pretty low down on the list of fertility risk factors to be honest.

Now if only they could invent something revolutionary for treating infertility...

The science still doesn't seem clear - for example, a recent study in the UK (presumably the largest ever) showed no evidence of increased infertility: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/jomh.2014.0012

> becomes a monumental task

Even ignoring the fact that fertility treatments exist...

1 in 4 healthy women in their 20s and 30s will get pregnant in any single menstrual cycle. (The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2018)

1 in 10 healthy women in their 40s will get pregnant in any single menstrual cycle. (The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2018)

hardly monumental


If they had left out the part about growing a significant other the article would have worked a lot better.

April fools joke aside with the growth of human organs in the laboratory this has to be inevitable right?


I'm sure the intent is that it be fertile (so they've chosen their methods and so on with that in mind), but it's still to young to know.

Interesting.. but it assumes that thousand years from now it will still take an entire woman, not just a sub-component called fertile frozen egg to create a baby ex-vivo

Fantastic, if this really translates into human ovaries it will greatly expand the viability of otherwise unfertile couples, and together with better health care and fertility drugs we can tremendously increase the "threatened" human population. We'll finally be able to overrun every other species on the planet, including ants and bacteria. Yay humanity! </s>

BBC did a pretty good video [0] about it. Haven't really heard much about it since. Must be extremely exciting for scientists, as (to my understanding) this kind of self-fertilization is completely unheard of!

[0] https://youtube.com/watch?v=CFyd-kC6IUw


...many couples are oblivious to the existence of modern NFP...

Gosh, why wouldn't their fertility doctors have told them about it? b^)


This is absolutely mind-blowing.

Also, since humans are now very numerous and so good at surviving, makes you wonder if humans could mutate this way too. Makes it seem like you'd just get outright pregnant instead of ovulating, which may be a bummer.


Mate! This is well known! My mum told me this a decade ago https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=lapt...

I'm mad it wasn't well known enough that everyone happens to know it.

Also cycling.


The article said there might be "missing cues of fertility that would otherwise increase sperm production" which reminded me of "study shows that when men smell T-shirts worn by women while ovulating, it triggers a surge in the sex hormone testosterone" [1] which would be exactly such a cue of fertility.

[1] https://www.webmd.com/men/news/20100115/womens-scent-trigger...


I've got news for you pal: science has made it possible to conceive without a "male-female sexual partnership" for a while now.

Taking a trend with an unknown cause and extrapolating seems unlikely to yield accurate predictions. The actual news here is that in USA and Europe, male sperm counts have fallen 50-60% between 1973 and 2011. That's alarming enough on its own without sensational headlines like this.
next

Legal | privacy