Hacker News Reader

Comment by graeme | Hacker News Reader

Reproductive issues are real. Sperm counts have fallen massively, and the lead researcher thinks EDCs are to blame. She only drinks filtered water.

https://www.ft.com/content/f14ab282-1dd3-46bf-be02-a59aff3a9...

View on HN

There is no evidence in the linked text that possible "reproductive issues" from sperm count reduction would be something overall bad. One possibility is that the total number of humans born will decrease somewhat and that global population will be somewhat lower compared to an alternative scenario with less microplastics. Every human has needs that require energy and resources so a scenario with lower global population might be better in terms of making sure all born humans get what they need.

I imagine the individuals affected might care. It’s also unlikely a destructive buologically change will only affect a single system.

And unlikely that this same cause would spare animals while only affecting humans. We do want animals to reproduce too…..

True, possible, possible, depends. But on the other hand current levels of global resource and energy use have harmful effects on existing humans and animals. For example climate change increases the frequency and intensity of wildfires that kill billions of animals. Increasing the human population by billions more, which is the path we're on unless some factor or other decreases population growth, likely increases such effects. That matters if we want to investigate if the consequences of microplastics are overall bad or good.

> might be better in terms of making sure all born humans get what they need.

Might be. Or might not be. Who knows? Let's leave it up to random chance and see what happens! No point in trying to understand this phenomenon right?

Understanding the issue requires evidence and arguments about how good or bad the effects are. The problem is that several commenters here jump to conclusions without evidence.

On current projections human world population peaks at 10 billion in 2086 [0]. If, for the sake of argument, microplastics were to lower reproduction somewhat so that "only" 9.5 billion people came to exist in 2086, would that be bad? We're already putting a lot of pressure on many of earth's scarce resources in ways that have harmful effects on the welfare of many existing humans. Increasing population increases that pressure.

[0] https://ourworldindata.org/future-population-growth

Reply on news.ycombinator.com