This is Your Sperm on Weed

Reefer is Bad for Reproduction

Welcome to this week’s episode of Irony or Hypocrisy, the game show we’ve all be forced to play that offers no cash or prizes. This week we learned that NIH is no longer allowed to study misinformation, but the Trump administration is going to evaluate the medical accuracy of California’s sex education. Clearly, the people who pulled their “scientific” definition of sex out of the 1750s and their measles prevention plan from the 1880s are qualified to tell actual sex educators and public health experts what’s what.

The investigation was basically announced in a Daily Mail article with the not-at-all-biased-headline, “RFK exposes woke Californian schools spending huge sum teaching 10 year old kids to use sex toys.” Apparently, some of the few people left at HHS gave the British tabloid exclusive access to California’s curriculum which mentions “sexual aids (commonly called ‘sex toys’ by youth),” suggests “role-plays that reflect the spectrum of sexual decision-making circumstances,” and uses “inclusive language.” (My bet is that the pronouns bother the Trump administration more than the sex toys, but that doesn’t make for nearly as clickbaity a headline.)

The curriculum in question is funded by the Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP), one of several federal funding streams started under Obama to address teen pregnancy and STIs. While these programs were improvements over their Bush-era abstinence-only-until-marriage predecessors, they are far from the liberal-free-for-all-use-the-kama-sutra-as-a-textbook-sex-ed extravaganza that the Daily Mail is describing. (For one thing, no self-proclaimed liberal would use “responsibility” in the name of a sex education program. That’s way too judgey.) PREP focuses on young people who are most at risk, including those who are homeless, part of the foster care system, living with HIV, victims of human trafficking, pregnant or parenting, or living in areas with high teen birth rates.

A 2021 report from Guttmacher found that most of the funded programs teach healthy relationships (98%), healthy life skills (81%), and adolescent development (73%). The report also suggests that PREP programs were successful. Half of the young people who participated in a PREP-funded program in 2016-2017 said they were more likely to abstain from sex for the next six month. Among the other half, 70% reported they were more likely to use birth control and 77% were more likely to use a condom than they would have been before the program.

PREP straddles ideologies and works; no wonder the Trump administration is going after it.

In a press release, an acting assistant secretary at HHS vowed to review California’s curriculum to make sure it is both medically accurate and age appropriate. He called the review part of the administration’s “radical transparency efforts.”

Obviously, the administration’s radical transparency will be the focus of next week’s episode of Irony or Hypocrisy. Unsecured Signal chats set to disappear mode will be exhibit A.

Speaking of California, that’s where I’m going to be next week. I promise not to teach any 10 years olds about vibrators while I’m there, but I plan to be too busy ogling redwoods, staring at the Pacific, and drinking wine to write about anything on Wednesday. See you in two weeks!

This Is Your Sperm on Weed

You know how when your best friend from college is stoned, he gets very relaxed, goes a little limp, and moves more slowly? Well, his sperm may be doing the same thing. A new small study with Jordanian men suggests that weed may change the shape of sperm and slow them down even more than cigarette smoking. This isn’t good for people who want to get other people pregnant—now or in the future—and adds to a growing collection of research showing that reefer isn’t good for reproduction.

For this study, researchers analyzed the semen of 113 men: 37 non-smokers, 39 tobacco smokers, and 37 cannabis smokers. The analysis included semen volume (how much was in the sample), concentration (number of sperm per milliliter of semen), morphology (size and shape), and motility (how good they are swimming).

The results showed a significant reduction in normal sperm morphology when smokers of any type were compared to non-smokers. There was also a significant reduction in normal sperm morphology in the cannabis smoker group when compared to the tobacco smoker group. This means weed may be worse for sperm than tobacco.

There were also some differences in progressive motility—sperm’s ability to swim in a straight line. Non-smoking sperm were a little better than tobacco sperm at swimming straight while stoned sperm were the worst at it. (I imagine them absent-mindedly chasing their own tails.) But these differences were not enough to be considered significant. There were, however, highly significant differences between the three groups in the number of immobile sperm, with the cannabis group having the highest percentage of non-swimmers in their pool.

The researchers noted that when THC binds to a sperm’s cannabinoid receptors it damages the mitochondria. In high school biology we all learned that mitochondria are known as the engine or powerhouse of our cells. In this case, mitochondria propel the sperm toward the egg. Damaged mitochondria make bad propellors. The researchers think this might be why weed is worse than tobacco.

This is a very small study that needs to be replicated on a larger scale, but it’s just the latest in a series of studies to suggest that joints are not good for your jizz. A 2020 study of Jamaican men found that even moderate marijuana was associated with a 3.5 times greater likelihood of misshapen sperm. A 2019 review of research confirmed the weed and warped sperm connection and also found that cannabis use was associated with lower sperm count and concentration.

Marijuana has gone mainstream now that it’s legal in 24 states and DC. (My small town now has more dispensaries than nail salons, which is quite a leap for suburbia.) In 2023, approximately 42% of adults 19 to 30 reported using cannabis in the past year, 29% said they used it in the past month, and 10% reported daily use (use on 20 or more occasions in the past 30 days). Older adults are also smoking, vaping, and chewing gummies with some regularity; 29% of those 35 to 50 reported using cannabis in the past year, 19% in the past month, and 9% daily.

While no one is suggesting we have to put this genie back in the bong, fertility experts say that anyone who wants to get someone else pregnant should put down their pipe about three months in advance. It’s not just sperm quantity and quality that’s an issue; heavy cannabis use can cause decreased libido, erectile dysfunction, and delayed ejaculation, none of which are great for babymaking.

German Woman Welcomes 10^th Baby at 66,
Says She Got Pregnant Naturally

Speaking of babymaking, a 66-year-old woman in Germany who gave birth to a baby boy at the end of March says she got pregnant naturally. Alexandra Hildebrandt told media outlets that she did not use IVF or fertility drugs and got pregnant easily. This was her 10^th child. While Hildebrandt is not the oldest woman to give birth, getting pregnant naturally over 60 is practically unheard of.

Pregnancy is a young person’s game. When you’re under 30, there’s an 85% chance that you’ll get pregnant after a year of trying. Those odds go down quickly to 75% at 30, 66% at 35, and 44% at 40. By 45, it’s unlikely to get pregnant without help from your local fertility clinic. By 66, most women have gone through menopause.

Getting pregnant is only part of the issue. Those of us with ovaries are born with all of the eggs we’re ever going to have. As we age, the quality of those eggs goes down which means the chances of fetal anomalies goes up. The chance of having a baby with Down’s Syndrome, for example, is 1 in 1,480 at age 20 but goes up to 1 in 353 at age 35 and 1 in 35 at 45. Miscarriage and stillbirth are also more common among older women.

Pregnancy is also hard on a body. Complications like c-section, gestational diabetes, high blood pressure, and pre-eclampsia are more common. There is also a higher risk of dying during pregnancy or childbirth.

Until recently, the medical establishment referred to anyone who got knocked up over 35 as having a “geriatric pregnancy.” (If that conjures images in your mind of old ladies with grey hair and big swollen bellies shuffling around on walkers, you’re not alone. Just remember that these women aren’t even middle aged.) In recent years, doctors have started using the only-slightly-better phrase, advanced maternal age.

Advanced maternal age pregnancies are becoming more common. The average age of first pregnancy was 21 in 1972, by 2018 it was up to 26. Birthrates have declined for women in their 20s since the 1970s and jumped for women in their later 30s and early 40s. A 2019 Census report found that median age of women giving birth in the U.S. had gone up to 30. Still, pregnancies after 45 are so rare that the census doesn’t bother to include them in the charts and graphs.

Hildebrandt had her first child when she was 20 and her second at age 30. Her other eight children—including one set of twins which is more common in older women—were born when she was between 54 and 66. Hildebrandt, who works as a museum director, told German media, “I eat very healthily, swim regularly for an hour, walk for two hours.” (As a working mother of 10? Wow.) She says doesn’t drink or smoke and has never used contraceptives. (Now I’m surprised that she only has 10 kids.) Her OB/GYN confirmed to the press that the pregnancy was “largely uncomplicated.”

The new mom also said that she’s only received positive feedback from friends and family. While her friends might be supportive, some people see having kids in your 60s as an ethically gray area. The likelihood that Alexandra will be around to see her youngest kids graduate from high school, get married, or have kids of their own is very slim. That said, “my body, my choice” does not have an age limit.

Plus, Hildebrandt isn’t the oldest new mom we learned about this week. That distinction goes to a 97-year-old who is ironically named Mommy despite this being her first pregnancy. Mommy is a tortoise from the Western Santa Cruz Galapagos who has lived at the Philadelphia Zoo since 1932. Her baby daddy, Abrazzo (96), arrived at the zoo in 2020, and to the delight of zoo officials, they hit it off. In November, Mommy laid a clutch of 16 eggs. As of last week, four of them—all female—had hatched.

Zookeepers continue to watch the other eggs to see if any more will hatch, and they’re keeping their eyes on Mommy too. While female tortoises typically lay their first clutch of eggs three to six weeks after mating, they are able to store sperm in their bodies for up to three years and may lay multiple clutches without mating again. Mommy is getting a late start on the whole mommy thing, but she may catch up to Hildebrandt’s 10 kids before she hits 100.