Skip to content


Manual labour makes men more fertile, study suggests
Scientists find that men who regularly lift heavy objects at work have higher sperm counts than those stuck at a desk all day

Fit folk are, err, fitter.

10 thoughts on “Gosh!”

  1. They’ve misinterpreted correlation as causation.
    Men who are physically unfit don’t spend their days doing manual labour with heavy lifting – they are also the ones most likely to have a low sperm count.
    The proverbial schoolboy could explain that.

  2. Slightly O/T, but i’ve tried posting this on another thread but for some reason it disappers into the ether…..

    At the 12 minute mark the Professor says “If I were a woman in fertile age I would not plan a motherhood from a man who was vaccinated”.

    Covidians 2021: ‘The jab stays in the jab site, the deltoid muscle. It categorically does not enter your organs and those internet ‘experts’ who says it does are tin foil hat conspiracy theory nutjobs spreading lies and misinformation’. Except of course it does. And they new it.

  3. Tim, I’ve tried posting a link to Rumble on another thread and then this one but it goes AWOL. Is there an issue with Rumble links?

  4. O/T The link Addolff posted did indeed work. There you will find some old geezer rambling hesitantly through his subject with occasional textual material to support it. I lost interest after the first two minutes. I get sent any number of similar links. Usually featuring some cvnt rambling on about something. I wondered. Do people actually look at these things? The information density of video & podcasts is incredibly sparse compared with text, unless there’s something that particularly benefits from video. Ratio’s about 20:1. Who’s looking at them or listening to them. Unless they’ve an abundance of valueless time. I haven’t Or do they get made because people like ponceing about in front of a camera or mic?

  5. BiS, I saw a link on another site which just showed the bit about fertility but I lost it, hence the longer clip and hence me pointing out the relevant timing. I usually ignore anything over about ten minutes myself (some of those Yanks go on for hours…..) but I thought it may be of interest. He may be a rambling old geezer but if what he says is right…………

  6. The information density of video & podcasts is incredibly sparse compared with text…

    Arrgh! Drives me crazy. Normal speech can be 60-80 words per minute. A frantic sports announcer might get to 150. A normal adult reads at maybe 250 wpm; a fast reader might be 350 – 400 (this is just normal reading, no ‘speed reading’ needed). Straight off the top, you’re getting a 3x improvement in transfer rate. Add to that, a reader can vary the pace depending on material, can pause to think through an example, or even back up and review at will. The real information transfer is much greater than just that speed-up.

    It is incredibly annoying when media outlets (or podcasters) present spoken-word commentary in preference to written. In most cases, they’ve written a script anyway – why not just post that? As you say BiS – if there’s something that requires (or at least benefits from) the visuals, great, but 12 minutes of talking-head versus 4 minutes of reading is a bad trade-off.

  7. Some bloke on't t'internet

    Isn’t this a variation on a situation identified a long (decades ?) time ago ? IIRC there was a report that certain occupations, such as taxi drivers, resulted in poorer fertility. But it was nothing to do with the sedentary lifestyle vs manual labour – it was to do with being sat with one’s gonads in a hot spot (thighs above to each side, insulating seat below). Keeping the gonads warm like that is known to reduce fertility, that’s why they (in us mammals at least) hang down in their own bag for cooling.
    So the causation is more likely to be “blokes who do manual labour down’t cook their gonads and hence are more fertile”.

  8. There was a BioNTech presentation to the EU recently that showed the vaccine was supposed to travel as the best place for producing the spike protein was lymph glands
    Also apparently they have said that in the development they were thinking it would be better to inject into the groin, but someone pointed out you’d have a hard time selling a vaccine that required that method and that was in part why they have the lipid coating so it will allow the vaccine to circulate until it gets to where they need it to be.
    So they were well aware it wasn’t intended to stay in the injection site as it was designed not to

  9. I thought the lipid coating was primarily so that it didn’t get attacked immediately on injection (as it would if it was a normal vaccine) and hence had time to *hide* from the immune system until it could sneak its way into a cell? Once in the cell, then it morphs and shows its baddy side on the exterior, effectively saying “come and kill me (and the cell I’ve taken over)”, creating the immune response. Ie, the lipid coating being part of the fundamental design relating to the mRNA process rather than to help it get to places elsewhere? Getting materially elsewhere – and especially for example into the blood stream where those invaded cells may be part of blood vessel walls…. – was definitely not what was wanted?
    (at least from what I read?)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *