Plummeting Fertility

We've had a few threads in the past on this topic but this has reappeared in the media again.

Just a few excerpts from the article:

There has been a remarkable global decline in the number of children women are having, say researchers. Their report found fertility rate falls meant nearly half of countries were now facing a "baby bust" - meaning there are insufficient children to maintain their population size.

In 1950, women were having an average of 4.7 children in their lifetime. The fertility rate all but halved to 2.4 children per woman by last year. But that masks huge variation between nations. The fertility rate in Niger, west Africa, is 7.1, but in the Mediterranean island of Cyprus women are having one child, on average. In the UK, the rate is 1.7, similar to most Western European countries.

Whenever a country's average fertility rate drops below approximately 2.1 then populations will eventually start to shrink (this "baby bust" figure is significantly higher in countries which have high rates of death in childhood).

Is this the long overdue correction to save the planet from overpopulation? ("Children of Men" movie anyone?)

Is it driven by the powers that be in a massive bioengineering project to reduce populations?

Is this going to be used as an excuse to justify massive migrant population movements so the west can pay for pensions and care for the elderly?

Please see the BBC article here for the full picture and additional graphics...BBC Article

originally posted by: Loque76

A. Is this the long overdue correction to save the planet from overpopulation? ("Children of Men" movie anyone?)

B. Is it driven by the powers that be in a massive bioengineering project to reduce populations?

C. Is this going to be used as an excuse to justify massive migrant population movements so the west can pay for pensions and care for the elderly?

Bob, I'm going with B!

What do I win!?

Plastic and other oil related things getting into our bodies.

I mean, the world is heavily over populated so it's not the worst thing, but society won't benefit.
The remaining breeders will not be the best and the brightest.

Seen the movie "children of men"?

a reply to: Loque76

50 % of the worlds men are infertile now

endocrine disrupting chemicals are the prime culprit

We are on the brink of species collapse if this continues

Children of Men, like Idiocracy has become freakishly true

I wonder if these statistics account for abortion rates. Not that abortion is a new thing, per say, but the access folks have to medically controlled methods might factor in a bit.

Also birth control is much more accessible and affordable. That has to play a part in it.

Lastly, what we consume and our collective overall health, at least in America, probably accounts for a plethora of reproduction issues.

@everyone

The world is not overpopulated, it´s the waste and missuse of resources by first world countries. Don´t listen to that bull#! Ironically you always hear that from first worlders who have a warm and cozy home.

If YOU are of the opinion the world is overpopulated, start with a good example! Oh the silence is always eerie if you say that.

How dare I expect someone who would deny others wishes for children by that stupid and entitled attitude to change something for good.

Just because 10% of the population live over their standards so the 90% can never reach their standard, does NOT mean that the world is overpopulated. It´s high standards, nothing else.

Everyone in this world could have something to eat, daily if not for the blatant waste of resources. We burn corn to make fuel when in other places, people die of hunger.

We feast on christmas in our warm homes and maybe waste a thought towards the poor and then shrug our shoulders "well, they want to live like that".

If Heaven and Hell exist, many will be in for a big surprise and it won´t be a good one.

a reply to: Loque76

I blame;

1) Skinny jeans
2) Estrogen in the water supply
3) Social engineering

It's women around the world gaining more freedom of choice.

Women choosing education and career over marriage and children.

originally posted by: verschickter
@everyone

The world is not overpopulated, it´s the waste and missuse of resources by first world countries. Don´t listen to that bull#! Ironically you always hear that from first worlders who have a warm and cozy home.

If YOU are of the opinion the world is overpopulated, start with a good example! Oh the silence is always eerie if you say that.

How dare I expect someone who would deny others wishes for children by that stupid and entitled attitude to change something for good.

Just because 10% of the population live over their standards so the 90% can never reach their standard, does NOT mean that the world is overpopulated. It´s high standards, nothing else.

Everyone in this world could have something to eat, daily if not for the blatant waste of resources. We burn corn to make fuel when in other places, people die of hunger.

We feast on christmas in our warm homes and maybe waste a thought towards the poor and then shrug our shoulders "well, they want to live like that".

If Heaven and Hell exist, many will be in for a big surprise and it won´t be a good one.

..

The best of luck organising all of that or trying for world Communism. With the heaven and hell Just be good in they are your true beliefs.

Two words explain the situation.

Man bun

a reply to: Loque76
Well our five kids says the wife and I are plenty fertile. I think the article related more to behavior choices of women in developed countries more so than any biological concern. So all you childless slackers, quit diddling around and get to #ing!

originally posted by: verschickter
@everyone

The world is not overpopulated, it´s the waste and missuse of resources by first world countries. Don´t listen to that bull#! Ironically you always hear that from first worlders who have a warm and cozy home.

If YOU are of the opinion the world is overpopulated, start with a good example! Oh the silence is always eerie if you say that.

How dare I expect someone who would deny others wishes for children by that stupid and entitled attitude to change something for good.


It´s high standards, nothing else.

Everyone in this world could have something to eat, daily if not for the blatant waste of resources. We burn corn to make fuel when in other places, people die of hunger.

We feast on christmas in our warm homes and maybe waste a thought towards the poor and then shrug our shoulders "well, they want to live like that".

If Heaven and Hell exist, many will be in for a big surprise and it won´t be a good one.

I agree with many of your points. There is one thing you said that is way off.

Just because 10% of the population live over their standards so the 90% can never reach their standard, does NOT mean that the world is overpopulated.

Your assumption that because 10% live lives of abundance that means that 90% cannot. Why do you put limitations on the 90 %? Are they powerless, without abilities? Are you saying their outlook is hopeless? You must not give very much credit to those that don't have all they want or need. You also give a crapload of power to those that have. I know you mean well, but you have simplified everything, making those that don't live in excess victims. If they buy this, they will make your thinking a prophecy.

Keep eating the food they tell you is good for you and you won't have those pesky children keeping you from hampering your life. I studied the food chemistry a lot and some foods have properties that hamper reproduction.

Men eating avacados has problems because we could have a deficiency in the chemistry to detox it properly. People who have been eating it for generations have the enzymes, men who can't break down the plant defense system chemicals of the avacado have the tale eaten off their sperm cells. You can use this to your advantage both ways though, sometimes it is good and sometimes it is bad.

There are other foods with the same properties of controlling people getting pregnant, most are pushed as healthy. Think about it, what is the best way to stop population rising, talk the people into eating foods that make them not be able to have kids, call those foods super foods by looking at other properties the food has. The medical industry is not going to complain, people wanting kids will go to the doctor for expensive testing and treatment.

I am sure some of the food additives also have some chemistry that blocks reproduction somehow but there are about fifty thousand different chemistries allowed by the FDA that deal with food. Think about the cruciferous veggies, they could possibly dampen our ability to reproduce by dampening cellular energy uptake and messing with the thyroid. Endocrine disruptors in plastic lining our foods can cause some people to have infertility too.

I agree that we need to curb our world population, but some genetic lines are more susceptable than others to this chemistry. Male hispanics have been eating avacados for a thousand years, they can make appropriate enzymes, the white people will have more problems with this

Foods containing proteinases can also cause problems with fertility of men if eaten everyday. But these are not heat stable usually, cooking the food above one hundred sixty degrees usually breaks them apart. That is a temporary issue though, not a permanent one, some proteinases are good for some people. The new age nutrition says eat more raw foods, what is the underlying reason for that, are these people misled or just ignorant of what is really happening?

For men it all part of a balanced breakfast an exercise. As for woman...well what do women want.

It was a made up number, obviously. I did not define the high standard in my post so I thought it´s clear what I mean, because those numbers will shift when you nail it down more precise.

Your assumption that because 10% live lives of abundance that means that 90% cannot. Why do you put limitations on the 90 %? Are they powerless, without abilities? Are you saying their outlook is hopeless? You must not give very much credit to those that don't have all they want or need. You also give a crapload of power to those that have. I know you mean well, but you have simplified everything, making those that don't live in excess victims. If they buy this, they will make your thinking a prophecy.

Far from what I wanted to say.

They are not victims, I despise victim mentality. I traveled a lot and let me tell you in those "poor" countries, people are happier and more social overall, is my observation.

Not the starving ones, obviously. What I mean is we do posses the technology and we already produce enough food worldwide to prevent people from starving.

You have to know that the reason for many kids (not too long ago in Europe, too) isn´t because they are reckless, it´s because a bigger family gives more safety where there are none of the social safety nets most first worlders have.

Who is going to care for you when you are old and can´t work on the fields?

It isn´t as black and white as you think it is.

My point was, everyone who stupidly repeats the sentiment that the world is overpopulated, is a close minded parrot.

I never said those people are hopeless, don´t deserve it, are lazy or that it´s their fault or whatever you thought.

a reply to: skywatcher44

and here we go with the assumptions....

Because I state something, of course I must be a communist. If you had read any of my posts in the past you would recognize that I´m fairly conservative, I like traditions and I consider myself more center than right.

So no, sorry, the mud you throw at me just does not stick. Maybe stop jumping to conclusions, the world is not black and white.

Your head might explode: I also value some libertarian thoughts! Oh no, impossible... does not compute, right?

a reply to: Loque76

Here is a really good talk on this topic:

New Insights into Poverty

originally posted by: Loque76
Is it driven by the powers that be in a massive bioengineering project to reduce populations?

In all the research I've seen on this topic female literacy rates is the number one cause for the decline in fertility rates. Once woman are able to read they apparently prefer using birth control.

One issue could also be this:

Women today have a hard time because they are encouraged to go on academic careers. Stay at home mothers are laughed at or seen as lazy.

A young women is encouraged to go on lenghty academic careers and when they turn 30/35 they realize they want a family and time runs out. This put´s enormous pressure on women.

Men have it relative easy: Get a good paying job to be able to provide for a family.
Women: Get a good paying job to provide for yourself, then start a family but go back to work as fast as you can.

It´s the women who are going to birth a child, not the men. We can´t and I am honest, we can be lucky. I was with my wife with every of our children when they were born. You don´t want to go through that.

Women and Men can never be equal and can never have an equal life if building a family is involved. It´s nature.

You can´t have a high quality career and raise children (without a housemaiden or similar) while being a young mother.
It does not work.

There is a reason that women care for children, it´s not like every men conspired against women to keep them in check, those are natural roles that mirror themselfes in our bodies.

Even in modern times, that does not change anything.

Now I sit here and wait for the misogynistic accusements that try to paint me as a women hater, when all I do is recognize the mess they have to face.

originally posted by: Annee
It's women around the world gaining more freedom of choice.

Women choosing education and career over marriage and children.

Yup. In developed countries, women are putting off child birth for careers. The end result is less fertility as most professional women are having children in their 30s. They are also having fewer kids due to the associated cost of raising children (daycare and nannies are extremely expensive).