Err, yes, didn’t we all know this?

Men who want to boost their sperm counts may want to swap their tight-fitting underpants for more roomy boxers which are better suited to keeping testicles cool, scientists say.

A major study into the impact of underwear on sperm quality found that men who favoured airy boxer shorts made significantly more sperm than those who tucked themselves into more restrictive items of underwear.

The reason something as sensitive and important to the very purpose of life as testicles are outside the body is?

Quite, that they work better at slightly lower than body temperature.

If they worked better at it then we’d be descended from those whose remained safely tucked away up where the ovaries sit and where they themselves start out. We’re not and they don’t.

23 comments on “Err, yes, didn’t we all know this?

  1. Plus the fact that visible testicles are a secondary sexual characteristic for primates. Humans walk upright, displaying penis and testicles. Size is a status symbol. Teenage boys getting out a ruler at school prove this (I’ve seen it done).

  2. This does not explain why the Scots chose to expose their undercarriages to midges and an intemperate climate.

  3. This is why I carry mine around in a wheelbarrow full of ice.

    Ljh – Because they’re Pictish perverts! It’s why the Romans built a wall. See also: The Krankies.

  4. ‘A major study into the impact of underwear on sperm quality found that men who favoured airy boxer shorts made significantly more sperm’

    ‘Significantly more’ is quantitative, not qualitative.

    I have never understood why I need more sperm. All it takes . . . is one. ‘17% more sperm in each ejaculate.’ I’m not impressed.

    200 million, +/- 17%.


    ‘A major study into the impact of underwear’

    I think it safe to close the university now.

  5. Could be evolution, of course. The owners of dangly bollocks, on receiving a kick in the nads from a kicker with non dangly bollocks, ripped the leg off the kicker & beat him to death with the soggy end. As you would.
    So it’s just a matter of the owners of the swinging ones evolved to be more violent in protecting them.

  6. Even if they’re decades behind the times… it’s nice to see the Guardian being accurate for once!

  7. I see no advice for women who want to boost their sperm counts. Should they, wear thongs or Bridget Jones-type undercrackers?

    I fear The Granuiad may be being a tad trans-phobic in this matter…

  8. “‘Significantly more’ is quantitative, not qualitative.”

    Only if it means statistically significant. Otherwise it’s just tedious managerial bollocks.

  9. What about superheroes?

    I understand there is a little known Marvel character who patrols the back streets of Ely checking the takeaways are registered for VAT. He wears a mask, a TaxMan logo on his chest chest and, importantly for this question, his tight pants are worn over his leggings.

  10. “And just so the sake of balance, precisely how many sperm are needed to fertilise an ovum?”
    Quite a few usually. They work together to break down the barrier, then one forceful or lucky chap makes the final dash.
    So don’t worry, you are probably quite safe in the Jacuzzi – it’s far too dilute.

  11. abacab – no, but results were quoted as with or without foreskin, stretched and relaxed.
    Plus there was speculation that a watch with luminous dial would, if tied to the genitals, render you temporarily infertile. (I presume it doesn’t).
    OK, this was 1964, but we were remarkably ill-informed. Even for then.

  12. “Plus there was speculation that a watch with luminous dial would, if tied to the genitals, render you temporarily infertile.”

    It does. When you drop your pants, the girl takes one look, backs away slowly making excuses, and leaves.

  13. “Swallow. Don’t spit.”

    Witty and true, NiV. Though, surely, from your perspective, a biological man with a high sperm count can self-identify as a woman and – voila! – he’s a woman?

  14. Baron Jackfield,

    Thank you!

    “Mmm. Gosh. Is that the time?? I neeed to go and, err… Must dash!”


    Thank you also. I was tempted to comment, but couldn’t be bothered. From my perspective a term like “biological man” is ambiguous, since the people you’re talking about are biologically female in brain structure, biologically male with regard to genitals. Unless you really think men’s minds overheat when their underpants are too tight, you would agree that the ‘person/personality’ is the bit in the head?

    Do you really want to start another fight? Happy to oblige, if you do.

  15. Did Brave New World in school over 35 years ago and that contained the advice that Rams wrapped in thermogene beget no lambs or something to that effect, so not exactly a ground breaking cutting edge study here confirm something that’s been known for decades

  16. @MB

    I should have added, you are correct. It was probably a misunderstanding of the radioactiveness (that a word?) of tritium.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.