Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday June 25 2015, @02:46PM   Printer-friendly
from the chip-off-the-old-block dept.

Bioethicist Dr. Kevin Smith has recommended that the sperm of 18-year-old males be frozen and stored with the UK National Health Service (NHS) to prevent the effects of genetic damage being passed to offspring:

Men are having children later - the average age of fatherhood in England and Wales has increased from 31 in the early 1990s to 33 now. But while it remains possible to have children well into old age, there are consequences. Making his case in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Dr Smith said even small increases in the risk of disease could have a big effect when scaled up across a whole nation.

His solution is sperm banking for everyone on the NHS so that in older age men can turn to the sperm from their younger selves. He said there was no fixed age when someone could become an "older dad" but that people in their 40s might want to return [to] the sperm bank freezer. He said sperm should be banked ideally around the age of 18. It costs £150-200 per year to keep sperm privately, although an NHS equivalent should be cheaper to run.

From the abstract:

Modern genetic sequencing studies have confirmed that the sperm of older men contain a greater number of de novo germline mutations than the sperm of younger men. Although most of these mutations are neutral or of minimal phenotypic impact, a minority of them present a risk to the health of future children. If demographic trends towards later fatherhood continue, this will likely lead to a more children suffering from genetic disorders. A trend of later fatherhood will accelerate the accumulation of paternal-origin de novo mutations in the gene pool, gradually reducing human fitness in the long term. These risks suggest that paternal age is of ethical importance. Children affected by de novo mutations arising from delayed fatherhood can be said to be harmed, in the sense of 'impersonal' harm or 'non-comparative' harm. Various strategies are open at societal and individual levels towards reducing deleterious paternal age effects. Options include health education to promote earlier fatherhood, incentives for young sperm donors and state-supported universal sperm banking. The latter approach would likely be of the greatest benefit and could in principle be implemented immediately. More futuristically, human germline genetic modification offers the potential to repair heritable mutational damage.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 25 2015, @03:57PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 25 2015, @03:57PM (#201034)

    The abstract is full of weasel words: "a greater number", "most of these mutations", "minimal phenotypic impact", "a minority of them present a risk", "later fatherhood", "reducing human fitness", "delayed fatherhood", "reducing deleterious paternal age effects", "earlier fatherhood", "young sperm donors"

    Does TFA attach any numbers to these claims? If not, we can be sure they do not actually understand the impact of aging on sperm and human fitness (how would you even measure such a thing?).

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1