Skip to content

Human sperm Credit: Wikipedia

Studies find that male fertility is diminishing, with sperm counts decreasing globally every year in the past few decades. Scientists have been searching why this is occurring, suggesting a number of possible causes (e.g., environmental pollutants, pesticides, microplastics, endocrine disruptors, lifestyle habits.).

Recent studies are suggesting that pollution, especially air pollution, may be also be contributing to the problem of reduced male fertility. Researchers are finding regional differences in sperm count and quality.

Two recent studies presented similar findings at the recent European Study of Human Reproduction this past week, with both finding that where you live could have a bigger effect on sperm count, sperm quality, and fertility than lifestyle habits. In other words, the pollution in the area you live (air pollution or other environmental contaminant) has an effect on fertility - that is, sperm count and quality. [Studies show that lifestyle habits are also important.]

From Medical Xpress: Men living in different regions show marked differences in sperm quality despite similar lifestyles, novel study finds

A new study has found substantial regional differences in sperm quality, with men in the highest-performing region recording almost double the total motile sperm count of those in the lowest-performing region. ...continue reading "Air Pollution and Male Fertility"

Hypertension (high blood pressure) is a big problem in adults. A large European study found that eight preservative food additives are associated with high blood pressure and heart (cardiovascular) disease. And the more a person eats additives in their daily diet (meaning more ultra-processed foods), the greater the risk of developing hypertension and heart disease.

The most problematic of the preservative food additives in this European study included: potassium sorbate, potassium metabisulphate, sodium nitrite, ascorbic acid, sodium ascorbate, sodium erythorbate, citric acid, extracts of rosemary. These results suggest that a higher intake of preservative food additives means a greater intake of ultra-processed food, which ultimately is not good for the health (increased risk of high blood pressure and heart disease).

Note that in the list of US problematic food additives may be somewhat different, because different additives may be more common. But all are indications of ultra-processed foods.

Bottom line: Nutrition matters! Eat as many minimally processed foods as possible. Also, read ingredient labels and try to avoid products that contain ingredients that are not normally found in a kitchen (e.g., xanthan gum, carrageenan).

From Science Daily: Researchers found 8 common food additives linked to high blood pressure and heart disease

A massive study suggests that some common food preservatives may be putting heart health at risk. ...continue reading "Food Additives and Hypertension"

We all know that vitamin C is important for our health, especially skin health, but it is also important for a healthy brain. A recent study found higher levels of vitamin C in aging adults is linked to a healthier aging brain. Nutrition matters!

The study found that having low levels of vitamin C in blood plasma in aging adults is correlated with having lower brain gray matter volume and connectivity. The study looked at 2040 aging adults (median age 69 years) in Japan - using both MRI scans and blood plasma samples.

As we age, the volume of the brain shrinks - this is normal. There are both structural and connectivity changes - again, it's normal.  But...you want to delay and minimize these changes, which is why this research finding that vitamin C is important for aging brain health is significant. As the researchers point out, one can make nutritional changes by increasing vitamin C foods in the diet. (BTW, generally foods are superior to supplements.)

Gray matter of the brain is where processing information, movement, and emotion control occur. It has an effect on new memories and multitasking.

Other studies have also pointed out that vitamin C are important for aging brain health. Lower levels of vitamin C have been associated with a higher risk of dementia and other neurodegenerative diseases.

Bottom line: Try to eat foods high in vitamin C frequently, preferably daily.

From  Science Daily: Scientists discover a surprising link between vitamin C and brain health

Researchers have found another clue that diet may influence how the brain ages. In a study of more than 2,000 older adults in Japan, people with lower levels of vitamin C in their blood tended to have less gray matter and weaker connections within an important brain network involved in memory and attention. While the findings do not prove that vitamin C protects the brain, they strengthen evidence that good nutrition could play a role in maintaining cognitive health later in life. ...continue reading "Vitamin C Is Important For Aging Brain Health"

Uh-oh, two popular supplements don't have the health benefits that many think. Millions take vitamin D or calcium (or both) for stronger bones. A large review of 69 studies found that taking calcium or vitamin D or both does not prevent fractures and falls in older adults.

Other studies have had similar results. Bottom line: Focus on eating well and getting enough exercise, especially resistance exercises and balance exercises.

From Science Daily: Millions take calcium and vitamin D for stronger bones. A major review finds little benefit

A comprehensive review published in The BMJ suggests that calcium supplements, vitamin D supplements, or taking both together provide little to no clinically meaningful benefit in preventing fractures or falls for most older adults. ...continue reading "Large Study Finds Vitamin D and Calcium Supplements Do Not Prevent Fractures"

We all know that there are lots of health benefits, such as better heart health, to being more physically active. In contrast, a recent study found health harm from sitting more during leisure time and increased risk of early death, especially from cardiovascular disease (heart disease).

The study found that physical activity could not overturn the effects of prolonged sitting (6 or more hours every day) during leisure time - but it did help. Best was sitting the least (less than 3 hours per day) and being the most active.

Those who both sat more (6 or more hours per day) and were less physically active were more likely to have an early death - 94% increase in women and 48% more likely for men (when compared to those who sat the least and were the most physically active).

Bottom line: Turn off the TV, put away the cell phone, and get up and move!

From Science Daily: More time spent sitting linked to higher risk of death; Risk found to be independent of physical activity level

A new study from American Cancer Society researchers finds it's not just how much physical activity you get, but how much time you spend sitting that can affect your risk of death. Researchers say time spent sitting was independently associated with total mortality, regardless of physical activity level. They conclude that public health messages should promote both being physically active and reducing time spent sitting. ...continue reading "Sitting Many Hours A Day Has Health Harms"

It has long been known that the pesticide chlorpyrifos has harmful health effects on humans, especially developing fetuses and children. Unfortunately, it is still in use.

A recent review of nearly 300 studies looking at chlorpyrifos found that the pesticide has harmful effects throughout the body, also causes DNA damage, harms children's brains and nervous systems, causes cancer.and that harmful effects are found at levels that are considered safe by the EPA. Unfortunately, more health harms are found each year.

While the pesticide is no longer allowed to be used for household use in the US (remember cans of Raid cockroach killer?), it is still allowed to be used on farms, in greenhouses, golf courses, and more. Keep in mind that industry-funded studies of chlorpyrifos have been used to shape federal policy and exposure limits for decades.

In other words, federal standards do not protect public health. Why is that not surprising?

Excerpts from the investigative journalism site U.S. Right To Know: Nearly 300 studies link the common pesticide chlorpyrifos to multi-organ damage, DNA disruption, and chronic disease 

Key findings:

    • A review of nearly 300 studies summarizes evidence that chlorpyrifos may harm multiple systems throughout the body, including the brain, hormones, liver, gut microbiome, muscles, reproductive organs, and bones.
    • The review describes DNA damage, chromosome instability, and epigenetic changes that may alter how genes function long after exposure.
    • Some harmful effects appear at exposure levels below those considered safe under current pesticide exposure testing standards.

...continue reading "Many Studies Link A Commonly Used Pesticide To Health Harms"

People assume that if a pesticide is allowed to be used, than it must be safe. Wrong! Pesticides are registered with the government precisely because they are dangerous.

We are not exposed to just one pesticide at a time, but mixtures of pesticides - for example, in the foods we eat, our yards, our homes, our water, and even our air (from drift). The big question is: What (if anything) are these pesticide mixtures doing to us?

A recent study conducted in Peru set out to answer the question regarding exposure to pesticide mixtures. They compared heavily agricultural areas (lots of pesticides applied) and non-agricultural areas throughout the country. 31 pesticides were looked at, and yet none of these are considered cancer-causing (according to the World Health Organization).

They researchers found up to 150% higher incidence of cancers in the regions with higher environmental pesticide exposure. There were cancer "hot-spots" in the country, and different cancers depending on the pesticide mixtures people are predominantly exposed to.

By the way, finding increased cancers in both adults and children in heavy pesticide use areas (generally agricultural areas), is also found in other studies. The people exposed to the most are farmworkers, their families, and anyone living near farms. But also anyone with pets (e.g., flea treatments), and anyone having pesticide treatments in their homes or in their yards. People also ingest pesticides/pesticide residues from the foods they eat.

From Science Daily: Pesticide exposure linked to 150% higher cancer risk in major study

A major new study published in Nature Health has found a strong connection between environmental exposure to agricultural pesticides and an increased risk of cancer. By combining environmental monitoring, national cancer registry data, and biological research, scientists from the IRD, Institut Pasteur, University of Toulouse, and the National Institute of Neoplastic Diseases (INEN) in Peru provide new insight into how pesticide exposure may contribute to the development of certain cancers. ...continue reading "Areas of High Pesticide Use and Cancer Rates"

Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The topic of farts is rarely discussed in adult conversations. This is because passing gas or farting can be embarrassing to the person farting, especially when occurring in a public setting. One wonders: Is farting (flatulence) normal? How many farts per day is normal?

Research shows that releasing intestinal gas through the rectum (farting) is part of normal and healthy digestion. On the other hand, "excessive farting" could be a sign of some sort of intestinal problem. Two recent studies examined "normal farting" and came up with different results. An Australian study found that overall people reported 5 farts per day using a "Chart your fart" app, but a Maryland study had participants wear special "smart" underwear that measured any passing of gas and came up with 32 farts per day!

From Medscape: Flatus Status: How Many Farts a Day Is Normal?

Researchers Emily Brindal and Danielle Baird developed the “Chart Your Fart” app as a citizen-science initiative.

The app allows people to log their emissions in real time, and to (optionally) rate them in terms of stench, loudness, duration, and — critically — detectability. Which is obviously necessary to determine whether he who smelt it actually dealt it. ...continue reading "Farting Is Perfectly Normal"

Vitamin D supplements are available in both D2 and D3 form. Research has long supported that it's vitamin D3 that has health benefits, and that vitamin D2 doesn't do anything. Well... a recent study found that vitamin D2 actually has a negative effect - that it lowers how much vitamin D3 the body absorbs.

Ingesting vitamin D2 supplements results in lower levels of vitamin D3 in the blood - measured as  serum vitamin 25(OH)D3 concentrations.  Note that Vitamin D3 is the form of vitamin D synthesized in human and animals skin upon exposure to ultraviolet B (UVB) radiation from sunlight. Thus, vitamin D3 is the form of vitamin D that our body naturally produces from sunlight and then use.

All the more reason to avoid vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol), and instead only take vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol). Read the ingredients list on the bottle!

From Science Daily: Scientists warn popular vitamin D supplement may have a “previously unknown” downside

Taking vitamin D2 might lower the body's levels of the more efficient form of vitamin D, vitamin D3, according to new research from the University of Surrey, John Innes Centre and Quadram Institute Bioscience. Many people take vitamin D supplements to support their bone and immune health and meet the UK government recommendation of 10 micrograms (µg) each day, especially during the winter months. ...continue reading "Research Finds Vitamin D3 to Be Beneficial, But Not Vitamin D2"

Human eye Credit: Wikipedia

Scientists are now working on a treatment for vision problems that would avoid the need for lasers or surgery (e.g., LASIK). This would be an amazing development.

The new technique called electromechanical reshaping (EMR) is still experimental, but very promising. Instead of carving away tissue, which is done in LASIK, the new method temporarily softens the cornea so it can be gently molded into a new shape.

But studies need to be done in animals (only rabbit eyeballs tested so far), and only then can it be tested in humans. Stay tuned...

From Science Daily: Forget LASIK: Safer, cheaper vision correction without lasers or surgery

Millions of Americans live with blurry vision, nearsightedness, or more severe sight problems. While glasses and contact lenses help many people, millions have turned to corrective procedures such as LASIK to sharpen their eyesight. But scientists are now exploring a very different approach that could someday reshape the eye without lasers, cutting, or invasive surgery. ...continue reading "New Technique Being Developed For Vision Correction"