Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Cell phones may hurt sperm

TENILLE BONOGUORE

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 10:08 PM EST 24/10/06

Heavy use of mobile telephones could damage a man's fertility ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Bob ImamI from Canada writes: This not science. This is at best an idea, not worthy of publication.
  2. David Gill from East Talbot, Canada writes: Damn! At least hanging it over your belt buckle will provide some compensation.
  3. Timber 'n from Somewhere, Canada writes: Hmmm, well I am underwhelmed by the lack of evidence. Heavy cell phone usage may well be indicative of people with a different life style than those who are infrequent users, and as such may not be the cause at all. The 'Heat' effect is very sensitive to distance. Perhaps if you carry your phone in your underwear. However you'll note, most people using their phone to speak would remove it from their underwear (ie hard to make the connection to Heat affecting sperm via high usuage). If your concerned keep your phone away from your 'hmm,hmm' even when you aren't using. A bluetooth headset will allow you to use your cell up to 30 ft away from it. But I must stress be careful of fly by night studies, where claims are often exaggerated. Certainly more study would be needed than this. oooyyy, vyyyy.
  4. snowlander . from Edmonton, Canada writes: since the study was observational no causal link between cell phone use and sperm count can be made. what the study did show as that there was a correlation. there were probably correlations between cell phone use and income, job type etc etc. also what if men that use cell phones more frequently also tended to be people with stressful jobs or even tighter pants? those two factors would probably have a greater effect on sperm count than the miniscule EM waves generated by cellphones. observational studies can only describe relationships as opposed to cause and effect.
  5. erich finchley from Toronto, Canada writes: Darwin at work again.
  6. Geoffrey L from Hamilton, Canada writes: I always thought that the radiation from cel phones was harmful. Imagine what it does to your brain cells!
  7. Al Forone from Toronto, Canada writes: This looks like one of those farcical conflations of causality and correlation - if guys who talk over 4 hours a day haven't got enought sperm, it's not because of the phone, it's because they've worked themselves into over-stressed dweebdom. 'Get a life.'
  8. Jim Terrets from Vancouver, writes: My instincts were correct, as usual. I never trusted these things to start with -- they just didn't feel right -- and have never owned or used a cell phone. Sure, some people would look at me and smile condescendingly, as if I were some uneducated hilly billy, when I told them I do not own a cell phone, but who's laughing now? Unlike these so-called 'cell phone users', my sperm is doing just fine, thanks to my vigilance.
  9. The Maestro from Canada writes: while some men may talk with their crotch, I talk with my mouth. And I keep my phone by my head. Does that mean I'll get a brain tumour instead of infertile?
  10. Hugh Draper from Vancouver, Canada writes: 'Men who spend hours on their cell phones have lower sperm counts than usual...'

    and this is bad?
  11. jennifer sydenham from Vancouver, Canada writes: And of course heavy cell phone use while driving increases the overall mortality rate, so what with one thing and another maybe cell phones could be promoted as a form of population control.
  12. sudhir jain from Canada writes: Wonderful news. No need for condoms. Just imagine.
  13. Asterix M from Canada writes: Okay.....thats cool.....so a cellphone is a good birth control method?
  14. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes: Just 2 quick points. 1) who thought up this study (I won't call it research) 2) I am taking my cell phone out of my front pants pockets......... Seriously though, I remember a study linking cell phones to brain tumors-whatever transpired with that?
  15. jay bechtloff from Canada writes: I will begin changing my calling patterns now. No more holding the phone by my crotch when talking. This is the most useful thing I have learned in the newspaper in a long time
  16. Go Figure from Chatham, Canada writes: Let me get this right, if Im having sex while talking on my cell phone my girlfriend wont get pregnet ?
  17. The Emperor's Paparazzi from Renfrew County, Canada writes: If they had included 'vibrate mode' and 'non-vibrate mode' in their usage study, would the results be more telling?
  18. G Beaudoin from Edmonton, Canada writes: 'Both phenomena occur over short distances, so holding a phone at a distance from the crotch while speaking should not be dangerous.' Hunh? If I called this reporter and held my cellphone near my ass and screamed, 'What the hell is 'A' distance?' into it, would this be dangerous? Perhaps I'll try holding it against my ear like the rest of the world and assume that my ear is 'A' distance that is sufficient for it not to affect my spermcount. But wait! The data suggests otherwise. Now I'm all confused....
  19. Paul Terefenko from Toronto, Canada writes: 'Both phenomena occur over short distances, so holding a phone at a distance from the crotch while speaking should not be dangerous.'

    Question: Who holds a phone close to their crotch?
  20. Andrew Pett from Toronto, Canada writes: Am I the only one who is confused by this article? It states that 'holding a phone at a distance from the crotch while speaking should not be dangerous.' How else am I supposed to use it? Oh wait..vibrating function...riiiiight...
  21. Roop Misir from Toronto, Canada writes: Is there anything these days that's 100% safe? If in fact sperms are harmed by cell phone use, at least this will result in a windfall for people in the baby making business! Who says that there isn't hope while beng 'textually active'? i
  22. Stephen St-Laurent from Vancouver, Canada writes: 'Both phenomena occur over short distances, so holding a phone at a distance from the crotch while speaking should not be dangerous.'

    Good grief! What are they listening with?
  23. Goran F from Toronto, Canada writes: I've got to get a home phone than.
  24. D W from Canada writes: So if I understand it correctly, over time, cell phone users will go extinct? Great!
  25. Diana Torrens from Luxembourg writes: I think the explanation is pretty simple. Men can't multi-task. So they can't talk on the phone AND produce sperm at the same time.
  26. D F from Regina, Canada writes: So, the last line of the article says as long as I don't hold the phone by my crotch I should be OK?? Are we then to suppose that all the men in the test were holding their phones by their crotch?? I guess I didn't really know what the term "phone sex" actually meant! So what did the last sentance in the article mean then anyway???
  27. Voice of Reason from Long Beach, United States writes: Two things: (1) as also stated here, the causality between these two data points may have many causitive connections and it indicates a request for further study to be done. (2) Recall from your study of electromagnetic fields that the near field is spherically shaped, that the near E (electric) field is about 1/3 of the total E field, and that the "near field" (a wacky sphere shaped field) is counted as having significance at a distance of less than one wavelength. At 1.2 Ghz, 1 wavelength is 0.23 meters (23 centimeters) so if there IS a direct relationship to the skull or the gonads, you won't escape it by carrying the phone around with you (no matter how carried). Car installations typically use the car roof as a ground plane and should protect you inside the car & be no problem.
  28. Parthasarathy KS from Mumbai, India writes: The authors should have published their paper first in a peer reviewed scientific journal. The paper did not get the benefit of scientrific scrutiny.By presenting the paper at a conference, the item may get coverage in the lay press.
  29. Chris Leighton from Windsor, Canada writes: 1. Cell phones do not emit radiation.
    2. No observational studies to date have suggested a causal link between cell phone use and disease (apart from death or injury in car accidents).
    3. As a few readers have pointed out, the probably cause of this finding is that the population of men with lower sperm counts likely differ in other factor(s) than the groups with higher sperm counts. In statistics, this is call the 'cofounder' or the unknown bias. To make an educated guess -- men who speak on their phones the most are more sedentary, and probably sit at their desk the most. When sitting, testes temperatures are higher, and therefore a decrease sperm counts. Sperm production requires a temp cooler than the body temp.
    4. The moral is: if you want children, don't spend 20 hours a day at your desk and wear boxers!

    C. Leighton MD
    Radiation Oncologist
    Windsor, Ontario
  30. glen g from Canada writes: Given the other macho behaviors of some mobile users it might be a good thing if cellphones reduced testosterone too.
  31. mike h from West City, Canada writes: So now they cause a sperm reduction, I thought brain tumors and the possibility of them exploding were bad enough!
  32. Helen Pettingill from Ontario, Canada writes: It's probably just as well.
  33. linda logan from Wainfleet, Canada writes: Re comment #22, they're listening with the same thing they're usually thinking with!
    Seriously, it would be a good thing to get a definitive answer as to the health hazards of these phones.
  34. Cassandra Incredulans from Dog River Sask., Canada writes: So this is self correcting - those morons constantly on their cell will fail to reproduce and our race will improve.
  35. Malba Talban from Toronto, Canada writes: Title for the next excellent piece of news: Japanese develop "Faraday cage"- like underpants. Sales are expected to reach a billion dollars within 6 months.
  36. You V.W. Eckz from Toronto, Canada writes: Is your cell phone more dangerous to your tadpoles than standing in front of a microwave while you cook your eggs? Then, there's all that time at your computer with your wireless setup surrounded by airborne high-speed agitated electron-proton who-knows-what. Then, there's wearing tight underwear and pants that snug up, heat and squeeze your biscuits while sitting all day. Then, there's that hard bicycle seat. It's a wonder the little guys have any spunk left at all.
  37. Mark C from Ottawa, Canada writes: Give me a break.
    Probably just another case of some attention starved researcher trying to justify their grants.

    And #20 ... Funny! lol
  38. The Diplomat from Canada writes: it's OK honey... I don't need a condom, I have a cel phone...
  39. jiri z from Canada writes: A few disparaging comments here but I bet all of you are now holding the cell far away from your scrotums! The fertile ones, anyway.

    I envision the cell phone becoming a mostly female tool of communication - until they find the radiation affects the Fallopian tubes as well...
  40. Dragon Tree from Toronto, Canada writes: Are those men using their underwear as Cell Phone Casing - bad idea guys!
  41. David Rouleau from Canada writes: HEY!!! Maybe they have found a way to control the burgeoning world population...just give every fertile man in the so called "third world" countries a cell phone enclosed in a hockey jock strap (where the cup goes). I have never criticized the G & M before but this article is ludicrous.
  42. Jim Bradley from Ottawa, Canada writes: Any man who uses a cell phone for 4 hours a day is too distracted to be an effective father. At that rate of usage he surely must be swapping batteries or is plugged into the DC socket in his car or truck - that means he must be sitting - and in turn that means more heat to the testicles! Next question?
  43. Andrew Chong from Toronto, Canada writes: Has anyone thought of the possibility that low sperm count CAUSES men to use cell phones a lot, rather than the other way around? To actually prove cause and effect, randomly select volunteers to receive cell phones and require them to talk 4 hours a day, forbid other randomly selected volunteers to use cell phones, and measure their sperm count before and after.
  44. Timothy Nessus from Somewhere, Canada writes: Geee....hummm.....ohhhh......uhhhh.... let's see.... cell phones irradiate MICROWAVE radiation. YUP! That's right! Now, we KNOW that microwave ration is NOT GOOD for living things, in general. It does NOT have to be microwave radiation tuned at the hydrogen-oxygen bond vibration lelves (such as in an oven) to do damage. The reason is simple. Physico-chemically speaking, the vibrational levels in molecules are SO pervasive that just about ANY microwave will be absorbed to a degree. Now, when a living thing absorbs microwave oven, what is happening is that a bunch of molecules are given enough energy to react or dissassemble itself in a whole new array of creative fashion. Problem is, life is NOT designed to do with SO much chemical creativity. Ergo, life gives-in (i.e. it dies). This is NOT news. What is news is WHY are we allowed to be bombarded with this type of microwave???? Are economic interests more powerful than our health??? (Yes, this is, sadly, a retoric question)...
  45. Paul who is from Vancouver, Canada writes: GOOD. The next time I am in a movie theater and some idiot's cell phone rings, I won't feel so upset about it. (Turning on the vibrate feature may help.)
  46. re scot from world, Canada writes: So, to apply Newston's third law of motion, does this mean increase in men's sexual drive?
  47. Barry L. Jones from Canada writes: Hhhmmmm...geez I never realized the ear was the place where
    sperm was stored. Maybe that explains the ringing in my ears!
  48. b c from Toronto, writes: This should not even be a story. This is a rather superficial throw-away study that has alreay been widely refuted for a variety of reasons.
  49. Craig McClelland from RE: crotch proximity, Canada writes: A lot of people use hands-free adaptors and keep their phones in their pockets while they talk... After reading this article, I bet they won't...
  50. S. S from Toronto, Canada writes: This study was done in mumbai also?. then it must be true they need more cell phones there
  51. Richard Cunningham from Canada writes: So if you are hung like a mouse, you have nothing to worry about.
  52. d d from calgary, Canada writes: excellent so the darwinian theory remains true.. men who talk too much cant have children
  53. Bart Tooms from Canada writes: If cell phones are affecting the viability of sperm, what effect are they having on other tissues of the body? There are much data pointing to the increase risk of brain cancer. A recent study by the European Union showed that mobile phones damage DNA and that the damage extends to the next generation of cells. The cell phone industry spends lots of money to try to discredit such reports - hence, we must be careful not to trust denials and to determine who is really funding any studies that fail to find a problem. If you value your health, better to severely limit cell phone usage to emergencies and return to good old wired phones.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top