Biological Clock Ticks For Men Too

[Stephen of Borg 2]

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A man's fertility appears to decline after the age of 40, in much the same way that a woman's ability to conceive fades after 35, according to French researchers.

 

 

 

Their study, of nearly 2,000 couples undergoing fertility treatment, found that pregnancy attempts were 70 percent more likely to fail when the man was age 40 or older than if he were younger than 30 -- regardless of his wife's age.

 

Because all the women in the study were completely sterile and undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF), the age of the fathers was key. And while past studies have suggested that older men are less likely to father children, the extent to which this was related to biological changes or to decreased sexual activity has been unclear.

 

"Our results provide, for the first time, strong evidence for a paternal age effect on failure to conceive that is linked only to biological male aging," the study authors report in the journal Fertility and Sterility.

 

Dr. Elise de La Rochebrochard of the French national health institute INSERM led the study.

 

According to the researchers, the lower IVF success rate among relatively older men may be due to poorer-quality sperm.

 

It has long been known that women are less likely to conceive after the age of 35 than before, de La Rochebrochard and her colleagues note. But the current findings, they write, suggest that for men, the age of 40 is similarly important.

 

"In reproduction," the researchers conclude, "age must no longer be considered as the concern of the woman, but as that of the couple."

[BakulaBabe 2]

Wow, that's surprising! I didn't think a man's age made any difference. Guess those young women who go for older men had better think twice if they want to have kids.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

I think those younger women who go for older men are looking for $omething other than children.

[Odie 0]

You know I have a problem with that study. My father was older (about the same age the study states) he still had four children with no problems what so ever. I believe it is the health of men really determines their ability to produce. Also sperm count on the whole is also down from the male population. I am not sure how this factor in with the study, but it does give some food for thought.

Edited May 25, 2006 by Odie

[youbroughtheryouRiker 2]

Same here, Odie. My Dad was 42 when I was conceived, and I'm not even the youngest in the family.

 

And dangit TUH, you stole my line!!

[Yillara Skye 1]

I think those younger women who go for older men are looking for $omething other than children.

oooooh, good one, UH. And it is sad, but probably true in a lot of cases.

 

 

In my case, my mom is older than my dad by about 6 months (I was born when my mom was almost 25, and my little brother was born when she was almost 31). My brother in law is older than my sister by about the same (my first niece was born when my sister was 22, and my second niece is due to be born in August).

 

My grandparents had 8 kids, the oldest born when my grandparents were in their late teens, and I think my uncle was born when my grandparents were in their mid 30's

[mj 7]

I agree with Odie. Healthy men can continue to father children. Many years ago a local man and his wife in my hometown lost both their sons, teenagers, in a freakish auto accident only a few hundred feet from their home. The boys were their only children. The parents were middle-aged. They ended up divorced, and the man fathered children by his second wife. The wife did not have the same option.

 

Even if it is true that the sperm count is lowered, that reduces the liklihood, but not enough to make it unlikely. And that is not the same thing as with women who can no longer conceive.