Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NeedMoreKowbell t1_isfstpq wrote

Reply to comment by TheDevilOnFire in Animal populations have shrunk an average of 69% over the last half-century and are continuing to decline, a report says, and we've got limited time to try to fix it. by mossadnik

You’re under an ignorant assumption that each sperm is equally effective and that as long as a man can produce 1 sperm he can pregnate someone. Please read up on the topic and don’t spread feel good lies.

−2

TheDevilOnFire t1_isg5b9r wrote

Actually I'm not. To be considered "sterile" a man needs around 20,000,000 viable sperm. That means the sperm has good motility, mobility, and morphology. The abilities to move, survive, and penetrate the egg. In vitro fertilization technology allows for the insertion of one viable sperm to be directly inserted into an egg.

I'm not saying that we SHOULD insert only one man's sperm unto an egg. I'm saying we have the technology to keep our species propagating. Animals (Mammals) that are wild, well how do we keep each species that has its male fertility move below that threshold of whatever the species viable sperm count, from not going extinct or have a natural habitat collapse?

I hope that clarifies for. I did not mean to literally insert one man's sperm. Just that the average man by around 2050 will fall below that threshold. But we can mitigate our issue. Other animals, not so much

2

TheDevilOnFire t1_isg8stu wrote

But rereading your reply, actually yes, if a man can produce even one viable sperm, again yes, it can be inserted into an egg and become a viable embryo. See, you can learn something new everyday;)

1