Research: Sperm quality inversely proportional to cell phone usage

Research: Sperm quality inversely proportional to cell phone usage

Summary: Yikes. According to a researcher at the prestigious Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, there appears to be a  relationship between cell phone usage in men and their sperm quality.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Mobility
10

Yikes. According to a researcher at the prestigious Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, there appears to be a  relationship between cell phone usage in men and their sperm quality. Wrote eWeek's Wayne Rash of the research and the study:

According to [the Cleveland Clinic's Dr. Ashok] Agarwal, men who used their cell phones for four hours a day or more showed the greatest damage to their sperm.....He said that he can only speculate on the reason for the damage, but he said it's likely to be the effects of the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the cell phones when they transmit, as they do in use....Those who use it for long periods of time had a much more profound decrease, he said.

Wayne Rash, who I have a great deal of respect for, does an excellent job reporting on the situation and drawing attention to the fact that there is so much that isn't known and so much more testing that has to be done before anything can be ruled in or out. For example, he talks about the testing that must be done with different phones using different frequencies and types of transmission and testing with women as oposed to men. Rash quotes him as saying "There are hundreds of questions that need to be addressed if these findings turn out to be true."

This has long been my point about the cell phone industry arguing that cell phone usage is safe. While it's definitely possible to show correlations (but be non-deterministic about cause and effect) between things like cell phone usage and sperm quality, it's idiotic and an insult to our intelligence to be presented with (and asked to accept) at face value any conclusions about how cell phones are safe. How can any reasonably intelligent person reach that conclusion given the body of evidence suggesting that the opposite is possible and given number of questions that remain unanswered? The bottom line is that the jury is still out and anybody who conclusively suggests otherwise is totally full of it (and undoubtedly connected to some agenda).  

This is why, in my past coverage of this issue (here's my last post.. it points to the others), I've routinely said to keep your eyes open rather than shut when it comes to cell phones. Since us men don't keep our cell phones in our crotches, this study drives that point home even more. Without any additional information to go on, at the very least, it turns the spotlight to the two SAR ratings that every cell phone on the US market gets: one for the body, and one for the head. How meaningful is that if usage (meaning, when the transmitter is in use) which normally happens around the head is having an impact on sperm? If you were to adopt a better safe than sorry approach to cell phone usage, what would you do? Here's what I do:

  • Minimize "at head" usage
  • Use speakerphone when possible
  • Use hands-free gear when not using speakerphone. Although no definitive tests are available for it either, Bluetooth involves radios that are way less powerful than the typical transmitters found in cell phones for making contact with towers that could be miles away
  • Minimize on-body contact
    • To the extent that you can avoid it, don't hang your cell phone on you belt or keep it in your pocket.
    • Bear in mind that some cell phones, particularly smart phones capable of messaging, are transmitting even when you're not on a call and that there's plenty more research to do to understand where some types of traffic (voice vs. data) could be more dangerous than others.
  • Shop based on SAR ratings
    • Sure, the stronger the radio in the phone, the fewer times it might drop a call. But, again, if you realize how precious life is and you adopt a better safe-than-sorry mentality (which I think you should), you should also realize that the higher power the radio is, the higher the SAR rating it has and phones with higher SAR ratings could potentially be more harmful than phones with lower ratings.
    • Don't make the mistake I made when I recently was paid by Verizon Wireless to take a cell phone (a deal that I found on Amazon).  It turned out to be tied with another phone for the highest SAR rating of any phone on the US market.
  • Think twice about giving your kids a cell phone
    • I've heard the argument that, if there is a risk of cancer due to cell phones, that the benefits outweight those risks. That argument is somewhat bolstered by the story of a 14-year old who, after being kidnapped, used the text messaging feature on her captor's phone to effect her rescue. But, I still remain unconvinced. There are some best practices that make more sense. For example, in a playground near my house, I  routinely see young children playing alone that I'd never leave alone. I often see young teenage girls walking by themselves in the dark. Here, in Massachusetts, it's pretty dark by the time some after school activities get out. On one hand, I want to stop and ask them if I can offer them a safer way home. On the other, I know someone will lock me up and throw away the key for asking that question. But I think about my two-year old daughter and how my wife and I will do everything in our power to make sure she doesn't feel like she has to be walking alone at night.  Either (a) she should be with a group of friends, or (b) we should have a pre-arranged pick-up time at which either my wife or I can be there in person to give her a ride. I simply couldn't live with myself if I knew that one of my children was kidnapped because of our ignorance. If that means we have to give them a phone, at the very least...
    • .....if you must give your kids a phone, find one with a low SAR rating and do what you have to to mitigate the unknown risks. 
    • After all, 25 years from now, if a bunch of our kids end up very sick, wouldn't you rather know that you were one of the ones that was better safe than sorry?

    Topic: Mobility

    Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

    Talkback

    10 comments
    Log in or register to join the discussion
    • On the other hand.

      Nokia and Motorolla can now market cell phones as birth control devices. The teenage boys will buy in droves :-)
      slopoke
    • uh-oh...

      somebody better tell Matthew Miller, ZDnet's "Mobile Gadgeteer", to start lining his pockets with tinfoil.

      ;-)
      lostarchitect
    • Microwave damage to sperm

      They die and then they come back - plenty of studies available and no problems. However, given the usual distance between the phone and the testes, it appears some people must be using the vibrator a bit too much - inverse square law makes it likely this is coincidental rather than real.

      On and the link to the 'study' doesn't work.
      TonyMcS
    • From the Dept. of Tin Foil Helmets

      If you wrap your own special self in tinfoil you can shield your precious bodily fluids from the evil radio waves. But likely you'll never get a chance to replicate, if you know what I mean.

      Look again at the study sample: 4 Hours a Day on a cell phone. That's over 5,000 minutes a month. It's more than the cell phone that's keeping their sperm counts down, it's likely their overall lifestyle and stresses. I'm surprised they have time to offer a sample for testing. Or maybe that's as close to a sexlife as they have.
      panzrwagn
    • Cell Phones Lead to Coffee Drinking

      If it could be shown that heavy cell phone users also drank more than 4 cups of coffee a day, I suppose that would prove that heavy cell phone use leads to heavy coffee use.

      If cell phone use was so dangerous, one would think that people would be dropping like flies from brain tumors and other cancers that would point to cell phones as the culprit. We've been using cell phones for something like 10 or 15 years, and as far as I know, there's no such thing as cell phone-related illnesses.
      mlibrescu2
    • Endangered Species

      Between laptops and cell phones, geeks are becoming endangered species:
      http://www.zoliblog.com/blog/_archives/2006/10/24/2442592.html
      Zoli Erdos
    • Coffee, Tobacco and Marijuana

      BBC news story on men smoking and coffee drinking

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3189224.stm

      Coffee drinking promotes fertility, tobacco has no effect either way but causes erectile dysfuntion and marijuana...

      "Scientists at Buffalo University found regular smokers had significantly less seminal fluid, and a lower sperm count.

      Instead of making sperm slow down and relax, marijuana makes them peak too early: they swim too fast and too soon - they literally burn out before they reach the egg."

      So the conclusion is (drum roll) heavy cell users are heavy amrijuana users.
      wmroc
    • How about ...

      all the many professions that are constantly bombarded by electromagnetic radiation? For example, radio and TV technicians, police radio dispatchers, subway operators....? Any test data on them that indicates they've been damaged in any way?
      pat.barna@...
    • But wait...

      Some men might relish in the thought of having a reduced or damaged sperm count. Think of it like a weaker version of the pill for men in toy form. You get the benefit of using a phone when and where you need to, and less chances of having a child unplanned. In younger generations, as long as the damage is not long-term, it's a win win for all. Still, testing would be appreciated and caution advised.
      was_staton
    • Radiation from cellular phones

      When I was in college, 40 years ago, I saw photomicrographs of
      the response of living cells to electromagnetic radiation. The
      effects were dramatic, with the cells becoming aligned and
      changing orientation, depending on the frequency and the
      strength of the radiation.

      ALL "wireless" devices radiate! Wireless telephones have become
      extremely popular, but I do not own one, and I avoid using
      them, whenever possible. Likewise, I minimize the use of the
      cellular phone I am issued on my job. I also try to stay as far as
      possible from anyone using a cellular phone.

      The standard industry response, that there is no known or
      demonstrable effect on users by cellular phones, is
      disingenuous. European studies have shown definite effects,
      and this study joins them.

      However, keep in mind that we are surrounded by radiating
      devices. For example, television-style monitors radiate strongly,
      although the newer models are usually shielded, which reduces,
      but does not eliminate, their radiation. "Flat-panel," LCD and
      plasma monitors also radiate, although much less strongly than
      CRT TV's and monitors.

      If you're really smart, you'll ditch your wireless telephones, and
      restrict use of cellular phones to the absolute minimum. They
      are an epidemic, steadily poisoning the environment
      electronically and silently injuring everyone.
      SilverEagle_z