SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This from Science Advances dated 22 Feb, but just now floating to the top:
From the abstract (abridged - bold is mine)
Zika virus ... found to cause fetal infection and neonatal abnormalities, including microcephaly and neurological dysfunction. ZIKV persists in the semen months after the acute viremic phase in humans.
[...] ZIKV replication persists within the testes even after clearance from the blood, with interstitial, testosterone-producing Leydig cells supporting virus replication. We found high levels of viral RNA and antigen within the epididymal lumen, where sperm is stored, and within surrounding epithelial cells.
Unexpectedly, at 21 days post-infection, the testes of the ZIKV-infected mice were significantly smaller compared to those of mock-infected mice, indicating progressive testicular atrophy. ZIKV infection caused a reduction in serum testosterone, suggesting that male fertility can be affected. Our findings have important implications for nonvector-borne vertical transmission, as well as long-term potential reproductive deficiencies, in ZIKV-infected males.
OMG.
Full paper: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/2/e1602899.full
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1602899
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Monday March 13 2017, @10:56AM
That's not what the study showed — which was just that there might be *some* reduction in male fertility, not that Zika resulted in sterility. Considering people have been getting the Zika virus since the early 1950s and isolated epidemics began a decade ago, any *significant* impact on men's fertility would've already been uncovered.
The microcephaly threat couldn't be handled just by abstaining for 6 months for two reasons: a lot of people have very mild or no symptoms (so they have no idea they're infected), and a hell of a lot of the mothers were infected by mosquitos after they became pregnant. The only way to really avoid it is to not have reproductive sex until there's a vaccine or it's otherwise eradicated.
I got the wrong impression from the lone "OMG" as well, and I not only don't lean towards the "you don't care about ___" angle, I usually find it annoyingly whiny. I think my interpretation is because the known reality about Zika's bad enough that not referencing it in some way (e.g. a comment like "as if Zika wasn't bad enough already") and reacting with just "OMG" kind of implies the earlier events hadn't really registered as significant. (Poorly-worded, but hopefully you get my meaning.) I basically got a mental image of a guy in a movie who's busy minding his own business, then drops what he's doing with a look of astonished horror and/or wide-eyed "holy shit" when something finally gets his attention.