There was an effort to offer a list of reasons for that situation, not least of which is an artificial lifestyle of processed foods, lack of exercise, obesity, stress, pesticides, plastics and others. It was a litany of health issues associated with modern living, and it diminishes fertility.
That there is relative decline of fertility on account of modern living and stress could not possibly be doubted, or that factors like processed foods have an impact on body organs in that excessive chemicals are brought into the body and not sufficiently processed out.
However it is a different matter to move from there to suggesting the possibility of human extinction on that accord, as it implies a linear progression of such problems, instead of a limited impact on each of us.
When up to now some individuals can exercise fertility capacities up to 70 or higher, in what gene context will it conceivably be too difficult for a 45 year old man to be sufficiently fertile?
At times academic research is conducted in order to push certain agenda, for instance in this case one can expect an ultra-conservative university seeking to push a green agenda in the face of rising hostility to that agenda from the Trump administration in the United States to move to shock people.
“If you don’t abandon plastics, processed foods, cars, fried potatoes, cheese and the rest, the human race will later become extinct,” in order that the research effort is adopted for action worldwide.
But it doesn’t meet with criteria of usage, for instance how linear that situation becomes, as it is a health or nutritional problem, not one having to do with genetics specifically.
What the researchers are trying to say is that body functions are diminishing in a progressive way and perhaps that is why they have two children at most in Europe and America, and until recently a one child policy in China.
Historically declining fertility rates are a result of progress in the sense that women are not getting children simply because they are married but have a time frame and limit because they engage in external work, apart from cultural change generally. So far there is no actual limitation of having only two children per family as due to fertility decline.
On the basis of what scientists say about the numbers of sperm produced in a typical instance, there is plenty of fertility inducing discharge at each moment, and even for those who are fairly obese, the idea of nearly total infertility is a bit implausible.
There is at the same time probably plenty of evidence as is apparent in the study, that sedentary living surrounded by plenty of processed foods reduces sperm count, but one must not forget that there is a huge countercultural movement of gym, mass athletic involvement, etc. Sedentary life isn’t a total way of life, a curse.
In other words the study is useful in adding to what is already known about effects of processed foods in body metabolism or sedentary life and even in reproduction, but there is nothing to be alarmed about.
Human resilience like that of plants or animals is ability to withstand diversity, and it will require vast changes in atmospheric conditions, water and chemical composition of what we eat for diminished body ability to occur on a global scale. Processed foods can’t do it.
Reliving old days as Tanzania skates out finger in Qatar mediation initiative
GOING back close to four decades in the past was necessary for those with memories of first phase foreign policy in Tanzania to find a situation that resembles an announcement that the country was joining mediation efforts in relation to the intra-Arab crisis relating to Qatar.
There was a statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation seeking that the various countries involved solve their differences peacefully, which incidentally was never really at issue. The idea of using force on Qatar did not arise in the first place, but trade boycott.
In the past Tanzania did cut some weight among major powers as it controlled the diplomatic key to positions of the Frontline States, what neighbours of Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) would accept in relation to talking with Britain, the terms of solving the unilateral declaration of independence by a minority government of European settlers.
There has never been any other situation where Tanzania mattered, as the Uganda conflict was bilateral and involved few mediation efforts (save with Col. Muammar Gaddafi, a pro-Amin ruler).
In crises like Somalia or the Congo we have been marginal participants, or currently in Burundi where we favor stability.
Students of foreign policy generally and diplomacy in particular are likely to have picked up the news concerning that initiative and may try to pierce the façade behind that statement to find out what ‘weight’ Tanzania would have carried in the situation.
A different way to look at the issue is to find out who needed our help in that regard, that is, constitute part of those wishing that the issue is resolved rapidly, by creating a semblance of international concern and consensus about the situation.
Here we have a series of countries which are enhancing their friendship with us, and any could have approached the president, Dr John Magufuli, an independent minded leader.
That of course helps to raise Tanzania’s profile if it becomes among stakeholders to the situation in the sense of adding a voice which is not being ignored but factored into how the situation moves, if only to an extent.
It would help to bring about a wider regional consensus as Africa is not oblivious of the dangers of a restive Middle East, where negative forces start eroding the stability around which global market outlets have developed in Dubai and Qatar specifically, while the cold winds of extremism blowing in the area bring these countries to diplomatic discomfiture.
It is not surprising as the stakes of combating Islamic State are high, and bitter.
Whether it was for our own interest as well as the wider East African sub-region, or we opted to assist a concerned regional power trying to urge caution in the matter, it is plausible that adding a voice for peace and amicable resolution of differences is a plus in the pursuit of world peace.
But given the big stakes strategic environment of the issues, and Tanzania holds no levers to any of the key factors there – like movement of currencies to extremist groups, etc – the idea that we think we could add our voice was exciting to say the least.
People inclined their ears to pick up bits or pieces of what precisely we might be demanding but it was short on detail, just focusing on principles of amicable resolution of disputes. All the same it was laudable, that we also care.
_0.jpg?itok=QU87XW8D){kind=tracking}
.jpeg?itok=vCj6bCRe)
