PDA

View Full Version : Male Zika Issues


SpringHeeledJack
31st Oct 2016, 18:02
Zika virus could cause infertility in men, new study suggests (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/10/31/zika-virus-could-cause-infertility-in-men-new-study-suggests/)

Scary stuff, especially for those who might want to reproduce at some point in the future, or even young boys bitten and left with lifelong effects. My limited knowledge of the Zika Virus so far is that it affected females who were already pregnant, but perhaps was linked to another medication taken that caused the unintended consequences of microcephaly. The article above seems to suggest that the male victims are affected as well. I wonder if the virus can be passed from female to male, as there have been cases of it being passed from male to female ? Perhaps I should start a trendy hazmat clothing range….

radeng
2nd Nov 2016, 00:49
Could save the cost and pain of a vasectomy.....

Ascend Charlie
2nd Nov 2016, 07:06
Ah, but in males the Zika virus shrinks your d1ck instead of your head. Has the same effect, the thought processes are vastly diminished.

sitigeltfel
2nd Nov 2016, 08:05
Ah, but in males the Zika virus shrinks your d1ck instead of your head. Has the same effect, the thought processes are vastly diminished.

Swimming off a Scottish beach has the same effect. :ooh:

david1300
2nd Nov 2016, 12:10
Yeah yeah yeah - Zika, Swine flu, Avian flu, Ebola - anyone want to bet what next years global health crisis will be? It will probably kill 3 people and make another 7 slightly I'll.

TangoAlphad
2nd Nov 2016, 13:25
Yeah yeah yeah - Zika, Swine flu, Avian flu, Ebola - anyone want to bet what next years global health crisis will be? It will probably kill 3 people and make another 7 slightly I'll.

You don't really follow the news very well do you... Zika has had pretty horrible effects in a lot more than 7 people.

SpringHeeledJack
2nd Nov 2016, 14:12
I was beginning to wonder if anyone had the balls to contribute to this thread ;-) The median age of JB might have risen sharply over the last couple of years to the gentlemen who have already done their duty, so to speak, but if there is any basis to the claims of the scientists, then the passing on of the virus to whomever male could very well cause a massive drop off of procreation in all countries,classes,creeds and have devastating unintended future effects. Yes, there are too many mouths to feed on the planet, or more accurately too much mindless consumption and waste, but without getting hysterical this virus could possibly stealthily render far more damage on developed populations than other more loud examples such as Ebola.

ORAC
2nd Nov 2016, 14:30
but if there is any basis to the claims of the scientists, then the passing on of the virus to whomever male could very well cause a massive drop off of procreation in all countries,classes,creeds and have devastating unintended future effects. No, in this respect the sexes aren't equal. Women, at least outside Africa, tend to have an average of 2 children - one man can impregnate thousands, so it's not an issue of supply.

Would even be noticed officially? Whatever is said scientifically women are promiscuous - they marry the man they perceive to be the best provider - but cheat with the rogues/hunks they think would breed the best children. So many men would end up with cuckoos in the nest so to speak, in most cases without being aware of it.

There certainly isn't any fear of it causing the population to start falling.

SpringHeeledJack
3rd Nov 2016, 13:21
That might well be the case mr orac, however if at some future point it becomes clear that a sizeable proportion of both male and females are afflicted with said virus, then the reduction in populations could be very dramatic, with the males being impotent/infertile and the females prone to producing defective offspring should they become pregnant. These 'Black Swan' type of possible outcomes would be very difficult to influence to just certain troublesome parts of the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VT2apoX90o

ORAC
3rd Nov 2016, 15:23
Two points.

It's Miss, not Mr.

Zika only remains infectious in females for 7-14 days and men for a couple of months at worst, and apart from certain mosquitos there are no other carriers - and person to person transmission is rare and only via intercourse. Use of a condom for a couple of months avoids risk and in the vast majority of human cases has no long term effect. Aids it ain't.....

SpringHeeledJack
3rd Nov 2016, 16:28
It's Miss, not Mr.

??? pm please

Zika only remains infectious in females for 7-14 days and men for a couple of months at worst, and apart from certain mosquitos there are no other carriers - and person to person transmission is rare and only via intercourse. Use of a condom for a couple of months avoids risk and in the vast majority of human cases has no long term effect. Aids it ain't.....

I don't know enough about the virus to make an argument against the 7-14day infectious period, but there must've been an awful lot of procreating females who became pregnant within that window in South America in the last year or so. I've read in the past several articles whereby the virus was apparently passed on through ALL body fluids, in many ways, so that makes one wonder the efficacy of the condom protocol (for that reason alone). The article in the OP seemed to be suggesting that there are further consequences to the males infected, and that was from scientists researching it. Put together, the females would remain fertile, but produce sub-normal offspring unlikely to survive and the males would become infertile. No adult deaths to speak of, but no replenishing of the stock either!

david1300
4th Nov 2016, 04:06
You don't really follow the news very well do you... Zika has had pretty horrible effects in a lot more than 7 people.

And right back at you - it appears you don't follow the news all that well either :p

New doubts on Zika as cause of microcephaly
Date:
June 24, 2016
Source:
New England Complex Systems Institute
Summary:
Brazil's microcephaly epidemic continues to pose a mystery -- if Zika is the culprit, why are there no similar epidemics in other countries also hit hard by the virus? In Brazil, the microcephaly rate soared with more than 1,500 confirmed cases. But in Colombia, a recent study of nearly 12,000 pregnant women infected with Zika found zero microcephaly cases. If Zika is to blame for microcephaly, where are the missing cases? Perhaps there is another reason for the epidemic in Brazil. According to a new report by the New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI), the number of missing cases in Colombia and elsewhere raises serious questions about the assumed connection between Zika and microcephaly.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160624150813.htm

But it does pay for the money-making business of 'health care' to have these ongoing major scares.