Latest news with #EnvironmentalHealthPerspectives
Saba Yemen
25-05-2025
- Health
- Saba Yemen
Study warns of common food substance that may impair male fertility
New York - (Saba): A new study has raised serious concerns about sucralose, the popular artificial sweetener, as findings indicate it may negatively affect male fertility. In the study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, researchers administered doses of sucralose to male mice over a period of two months and observed decreased sperm vitality, damage to testicular tissue, and hormonal disturbances. These findings are particularly significant in light of the escalating global fertility crisis. The shocking irony is that recent studies show that men are responsible for nearly half of infertility cases, with sperm counts declining by more than 50% in Western countries since the 1970s. However, experts caution against over-interpreting these results. Dr. Dan Nayot, a reproductive endocrinologist, points out that the research was conducted on rodents at high doses, which calls for caution when generalizing the results to humans. He also explains that the actual decline in testosterone levels over recent decades may be in the range of 20-25%, a worrying percentage, although lower than current estimates. There are multiple factors behind this silent health crisis, with unhealthy lifestyles playing a major role. Smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, obesity, and lack of physical activity all contribute to the decline in male reproductive health. Experts emphasize that the sperm production process, which takes between two and three months, is highly sensitive to these external influences. In the face of this health challenge, experts recommend a preventative approach based on improving overall lifestyle. Dr. Nayot emphasizes the importance of good sleep, regular physical activity, and a balanced diet, along with the possibility of using some fertility-boosting nutritional supplements such as coenzyme Q10, zinc, and vitamin E. He also notes that sperm health largely reflects an individual's overall health, making sperm care an indicator of overall health. Scientists are now seeking to conduct further research to confirm these findings in humans. In the meantime, it seems wise to follow the principle that prevention is better than cure and to search for safer natural alternatives to artificial sweeteners. Whatsapp Telegram Email Print
New York Post
22-05-2025
- Health
- New York Post
Popular artificial sweetener may sabotage fertility: alarming new study
No sugarcoating this deflating news. New research in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives is raising concerns about sucralose — a widely used artificial sweetener sold under the brand name Splenda — suggesting it may negatively affect male fertility. 3 New research suggests sucralose — a widely used artificial sweetener — may negatively impact male fertility. Laurentiu Iordache – Advertisement Researchers administered doses of sucralose to male rats over two months, finding that the exposure led to decreased sperm viability, damage to testicular tissue and hormonal disruptions. Translation? Splenda might just be sinking your swimmers. Previous studies have explored links between artificial sweeteners and reproductive health, though findings have been mixed and often inconclusive. Advertisement While this study's conclusions are noteworthy, there were limitations. The research was conducted on rats, so the results may not directly apply to humans. Additionally, the researchers noted that the amount of sucralose consumed by the rats probably exceeds that of human intake. Advertisement The Post reached out to Splenda's manufacturer for comment. The findings warrant further investigation, especially since infertility is a rising global health issue — with an estimated 12% to 15% of US couples struggling to conceive. It may come as a surprise, but some studies indicate men are responsible for as many as half of infertility cases. Some research even reports that sperm counts in Western countries have dropped by more than 50% since the 1970s. Advertisement 3 Some research shows sperm counts in Western countries have dropped by more than 50% since the 1970s. Getty Images Dr. Dan Nayot, a reproductive endocrinologist, infertility specialist and chief medical adviser at testing and supplement company Bird&Be, told The Post that the statistic is likely not that high, but it's still problematic. 'Research shows a real decline in testosterone levels over the past few decades — likely closer to 20–25%, not 50% — but that's still a significant issue and shouldn't be dismissed,' Nayot said. 'Testosterone plays a critical role in sperm production, so lower levels can lead to reduced sperm quality and impaired fertility.' While the reasons for the drop are not entirely clear, experts point the finger at some of the same factors contributing to the obesity epidemic. 3 To protect your family jewels, one infertility specialist recommends 'adopting healthier habits — such as improving sleep, increasing physical activity, quitting smoking and maintaining a balanced diet.' Getty Images/iStockphoto 'Sperm production is a continuous process, with mature sperm developing over approximately two to three months,' Nayot said. Advertisement 'This process is highly sensitive to lifestyle factors. Research consistently shows that smoking, excessive alcohol consumption and obesity — to name a few — impair sperm quality. In fact, sperm health is often considered a marker of overall wellness, underscoring the importance of prioritizing your physical health.' To protect your family jewels, Nayot recommends 'adopting healthier habits — such as improving sleep, increasing physical activity, quitting smoking and maintaining a balanced diet.' He also suggests taking certain supplements — such as coenzyme Q10, zinc, vitamin E, L-carnitine, folate, selenium and DHA — to help swimmers stay afloat. Based on this study, it also couldn't hurt to find your sweet release elsewhere!
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Benefits of boiling water with dirty fuels outweigh the risk in areas with unclean resources: Study
Boiling unclean water in many regions of the world results in air pollution from burning dirty fuels, but the benefits of doing so usually outweigh the risks, a new study has found. The boiling process, even at low effectiveness and when using sooty stoves, leads to a daily net reduction in 'disability-adjusted life years,' or the number of healthy life years lost, according to the study, published in Environmental Health Perspectives. 'In places where there is not centralized infrastructure that provides clean water, the responsibility for addressing that risk falls to individual households,' co-corresponding author Angela Harris, an associate professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering at North Carolina State University, said in a statement. 'The advice to those households is often to boil the water before using it,' Harris continued. 'But these households often have to rely on heating sources that carry risks of their own.' While the research community has generally focused on these risks separately, Harris and her colleagues decided to explore how the two factors overlap. To do so, they used computational models to estimate the health impacts linked to the consumption of contaminated water and exposure to emissions from cookstoves. These models, the authors explained, accounted for varying levels of water quality and of pollution from the stoves. 'For example, cookstoves that we accounted for in this work ranged from cooking over an open woodfire to using an electric stovetop,' co-corresponding author Andrew Grieshop, a professor in the same NC State department, said in a statement. They then used their framework to pursue case studies in both Uganda and Vietnam and incorporated public health and demographic data from both nations, Grieshop explained. The scientists calculated the total change in disability-adjusted life years from household air pollution and diarrhea from fecal contamination of drinking water. They determined that boiling water decreased diarrheal disease by an average of 1,100 such years and 367 years per 10,000 people, for those under and over five years old in Uganda, respectively. Similar results materialized in Vietnam, although fewer such years were avoided in children under five there — a variance that the scientists attributed to different demographics. 'Our results reflect the established science that if people only have access to highly contaminated water, then boiling that water drastically reduces risk — particularly for children,' Harris said. Meanwhile, she stressed that if households are already using unclean stoves for food preparation, then using those same appliances for boiling water only causes minimal increases in risk of disease. 'In other words, the modeling suggests that this is a tradeoff worth taking, especially for households with young children,' Harris added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
13-05-2025
- Health
- The Hill
Benefits of boiling water with dirty fuels outweigh the risk in areas with unclean resources: Study
Boiling unclean water in many regions of the world results in air pollution from burning dirty fuels, but the benefits of doing so usually outweigh the risks, a new study has found. The boiling process, even at low effectiveness and when using sooty stoves, leads to a daily net reduction in 'disability-adjusted life years,' or the number of healthy life years lost, according to the study, published in Environmental Health Perspectives. 'In places where there is not centralized infrastructure that provides clean water, the responsibility for addressing that risk falls to individual households,' co-corresponding author Angela Harris, an associate professor of civil, construction and environmental engineering at North Carolina State University, said in a statement. 'The advice to those households is often to boil the water before using it,' Harris continued. 'But these households often have to rely on heating sources that carry risks of their own.' While the research community has generally focused on these risks separately, Harris and her colleagues decided to explore how the two factors overlap. To do so, they used computational models to estimate the health impacts linked to the consumption of contaminated water and exposure to emissions from cookstoves. These models, the authors explained, accounted for varying levels of water quality and of pollution from the stoves. 'For example, cookstoves that we accounted for in this work ranged from cooking over an open woodfire to using an electric stovetop,' co-corresponding author Andrew Grieshop, a professor in the same NC State department, said in a statement. They then used their framework to pursue case studies in both Uganda and Vietnam and incorporated public health and demographic data from both nations, Grieshop explained. The scientists calculated the total change in disability-adjusted life years from household air pollution and diarrhea from fecal contamination of drinking water. They determined that boiling water decreased diarrheal disease by an average of 1,100 such years and 367 years per 10,000 people, for those under and over five years old in Uganda, respectively. Similar results materialized in Vietnam, although fewer such years were avoided in children under five there — a variance that the scientists attributed to different demographics. 'Our results reflect the established science that if people only have access to highly contaminated water, then boiling that water drastically reduces risk — particularly for children,' Harris said. Meanwhile, she stressed that if households are already using unclean stoves for food preparation, then using those same appliances for boiling water only causes minimal increases in risk of disease. 'In other words, the modeling suggests that this is a tradeoff worth taking, especially for households with young children,' Harris added.
Boston Globe
30-04-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
Citing NIH cuts, a top science journal stops accepting submissions
He declined to comment on the publication's future prospects. 'If the journal is indeed lost, it is a huge loss,' said Jonathan Levy, chair of the department of environmental health at Boston University. 'It's reducing the ability for people to have good information that can be used to make good decisions.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The news comes weeks after a federal prosecutor in Washington sent letters to several scientific journals, including The New England Journal of Medicine, with questions that suggested that they were biased against certain views and influenced by external pressures. Advertisement The editor of The New England Journal of Medicine described the letter as 'vaguely threatening.' On Tuesday, the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, published by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said that it had received such a letter. Scientific journals have long been a target of top health officials in the Trump administration. In a book published last year, Dr. Marty Makary, the new commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, accused journal editorial boards of 'gate-keeping' and publishing only information that supports a 'groupthink narrative.' Advertisement In an interview with the 'Dr. Hyman Show' podcast last year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is now secretary of health and human services, said he planned to prosecute medical journals under federal anti-corruption laws. 'I'm going to find a way to sue you unless you come up with a plan right now to show how you're going to start publishing real science,' he said. Still, the announcement regarding Environmental Health Perspectives baffled researchers, who pointed out that the funding cuts seemed to conflict with the Trump administration's stated priorities. For instance, Kennedy has repeatedly emphasized the importance of studying the environment's role in causing chronic diseases. The new administration has also expressed interest in the transparency and public accessibility of scientific journals, an area in which Environmental Health Perspectives has been a trailblazer. Environmental Health Perspectives was one of the first 'open-access' journals, allowing anyone to read without a subscription. And unlike many other open-access journals, which often charge researchers thousands of dollars to publish their work, Environmental Health Perspectives' federal support meant scientists from smaller universities could publish without worrying about a fee. 'There are multiple layers of irony here,' Levy said. Environmental Health Perspectives isn't the only journal caught in the crossfire of funding cuts at the Department of Health and Human Services. A draft budget for the department, obtained by The New York Times, proposes axing two journals published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Emerging Infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease. Both are published free of charge to authors and readers and are among the top journals in their fields. Advertisement Andrew Nixon, an HHS spokesperson, said 'no final decision has been made' about the upcoming budget. Emerging Infectious Diseases, published monthly, provides cutting-edge reports on infectious disease threats from around the world. It has helped to shape preparedness and response to outbreaks, said Jason Kindrachuk, a virus expert at the University of Manitoba who has published research on the Marburg and mpox viruses in the journal. The news 'is very disheartening,' he said.
