• Due to excessive bot signups along with nefarious actors we are limiting forum registration. Keep checking back for the register link to appear. Please do not send emails or have someone post to the forum asking for a signup link. Until the current climate changes we do not see a change of this policy. To join the forum you must have a compelling reason. Letting us know what skills/knowledge you will bring to the community along with the intent of your stay here will help in getting you approved.

Remarkable Decline In Fertility - Half The World Below Replacement Levels

haidut

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
18,920
Location
USA / Europe
I posted a few related threads on the topic of the declining reproductive health before. Sperm counts in males have declined by more than 60% since the 1970s.
Sperm Count (a Surrogate For Male Health) In The West Has Declined By 60% Since The 1970s

However, that finding does not seem to be getting a lot of publicity despite the steady stream of news that worldwide fertility is declining. The explanations offered are that richer and more educated countries "choose" to have fewer children. I think the more likely explanation is the declining male and female reproductive (and general) health. Apparently, now the issue has reached epidemic proportions with half of the world (mostly developed countries) below natural replacement fertility levels. The sad part is that the scientists in charge of monitoring demographics express "huge surprise" at these findings. This does not bode well for the world as it suggests most public health professionals and demographics experts are utterly clueless as to what exactly is going on around them. This institutional stupidity is not at all surprising considering IQ scores have also been rapidly falling around the world.
World IQ Scores Are Declining
IQ Scores Have Been Dropping For Decades And The Reason Is NOT Genetic
Intelligence Expected To Decline In Higher IQ And Rise In Lower IQ People

As they say in AA meetings - the first step is admitting we have a problem. Instead, we are being bombarded with fraudulent messages of increasing life expectancy and advised that even one child may be too many for most modern, educated couples. This ill-advised attempt at population control is not starting to spectacularly backfire and I don't see any signs that the trend may reverse any time soon. Maybe that is the goal of the powers that be...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)32278-5/fulltext
'Remarkable' decline in fertility rates
"...Their report found fertility rate falls meant nearly half of countries were now facing a "baby bust" - meaning there are insufficient children to maintain their population size. The researchers said the findings were a "huge surprise". And there would be profound consequences for societies with "more grandparents than grandchildren"."

"...The study, published in the Lancet, followed trends in every country from 1950 to 2017. In 1950, women were having an average of 4.7 children in their lifetime. The fertility rate all but halved to 2.4 children per woman by last year. But that masks huge variation between nations. The fertility rate in Niger, west Africa, is 7.1, but in the Mediterranean island of Cyprus women are having one child, on average. In the UK, the rate is 1.7, similar to most Western European countries."

"...Whenever a country's rate drops below approximately 2.1 then populations will eventually start to shrink (this "baby bust" figure is significantly higher in countries which have high rates of death in childhood). At the start of the study, in 1950, there were zero nations in this position."
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,198
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal
I believe it's mostly forced schooling making people infantile and hedonistic. However, there are also health issues, and once they put 5G networks in schools and western cities I suspect the girls will become largely sterile and even the ones that won't have high risk of genetic problems with their kids.
 

Herbie

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Messages
1,952
I wonder how quickly we will reach peak global population and witness a sharp decline.
 

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
609
It's because I have to work so much and can't get out to give the ladies the attention they deserve. I apologize in advance. Sorry world.
 

raypeatclips

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
2,555
"The total fertility rate is the average number of children a woman gives birth to in their lifetime."

Calling the amount of children someone has "fertility rate" allows for more sensational headlines. Someone that actively doesn't want kids would have a very low "fertility rate" and doesn't have to be any indication of health. A large number of the people I speak to of my age group 20-35 years old say the same thing, jobs unstable, hardly got any money for themselves let alone a kid. The financial freedom of one parent working and being able to sustain a family I don't personally know one family that does this anymore. The cons are greater than the pros for having children for a lot of people now, and the term fertility rate should be changed to avoid confusion.
 

haidut

Member
Thread starter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
18,920
Location
USA / Europe
"The total fertility rate is the average number of children a woman gives birth to in their lifetime."

Calling the amount of children someone has "fertility rate" allows for more sensational headlines. Someone that actively doesn't want kids would have a very low "fertility rate" and doesn't have to be any indication of health. A large number of the people I speak to of my age group 20-35 years old say the same thing, jobs unstable, hardly got any money for themselves let alone a kid. The financial freedom of one parent working and being able to sustain a family I don't personally know one family that does this anymore. The cons are greater than the pros for having children for a lot of people now, and the term fertility rate should be changed to avoid confusion.

All of this is true and has been acknowledged as a reason for the declining rate. But nobody has investigated how big a role the declining physiological ability to have children is paying. That was really my main point behind the post - not the declining rate per se but that it is just another example of globally declining health.
 

Sam Suska

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
52
@haidut I agree with you in the sense that the declining birth rate is largely a sign of poor physiological health. As far as I know the biggest decline is in the highest IQ populations, and I think that is also a sign of the nihlism, hedonism and purposelessness in the highest IQ cultures in the people born during the last 50-60 years. Do you think I'm onto something or do you have any further insight on that hypothesis? Thank you.
 
Last edited:

Herbie

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Messages
1,952
trump building the ice wall?

Believe me, It will cost a lot of money, millions and billions its going to be huge, it will protect the incredible men and women, trump ice wall will be tremendous, we are winning.
 

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,315
Believe me, It will cost a lot of money, millions and billions its going to be huge, it will protect the incredible men and women, trump ice wall will be tremendous, we are winning.
pimpnamedraypeat said something about a colder period coming and how much of the U.S. will become very cold while mexico becomes temperate/ideal. Hence „the wall“ being an ice wall ... now wouldnt that be something.


but I get your comment and I laughed

And interestingly enough, I.C.E. is the deportation agency in America ( Immigration and Customs enforcement ). Jason brought this up to me

Trump building an I.C.E. wall or meming it at least
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
9,718
Location
Manila
I personally think this is Gaia at work. Earth is a self-regulating system and with the third world breeding like rabbits the first and second world are compensating. The developed countries have set themselves up to make raising a family more complicated. You have flawed medicine creating more issues on children making it difficult for parents to bear the burden. An example is the jump in cases of autism. You have psychiatrists giving all sorts of drugs to children. You have women made incapable of giving childbirth naturally. And then you have the nanny state imposing so many restrictions it makes life hell for parents. No wonder it's not common for parents to want to kick their children out when they turn 18.

Then there is the fallout from having the conflicting powers at a perpetual state of detente where no major wars are fought. Regional wars yes, of the sort in the middle east. But this has made parents become too soft. The less developed countries have a more natural approach to life. They accept that some of their children may die, not just due to sickness, but also because they have to defend themselves against their enemies, much more from within their borders than from without these days. They mourn the loss, but they can accept that this is a risk that is inherent in ensuring the family or the tribe's survival. They're not going to be too protective of their children, and are more willing to see any harm befalling their children to be a probabilistic roll of the dice.

The developed world is ensconced in a world that's too safe and sterile. Parents fear too much for their children, and are less accepting that some harm may happen. They want to ensure 100% survival. They and by extension, their government, make stringent laws that bind them to such an outcome. The end result is that it becomes hell for the parents. With each succeeding generation, life gets worse and worse as trappings and rituals are added. The supermoms are to blame.

They banned swings, seesaws, and monkey bars. They have all sorts of vaccines to spare the children of any remote possibility of being stricken by a virus. In the process, people grow up to become unnatural expressions of humanity. To not procreate is one end result.

The societies that accept the possible death befalling their offspring are the ones that find joy in raising children.

See a mother cat. She protects her young but accepts some harm may happen to them. For the cat, life goes on. She doesn't mourn. She will bear more in time.
 
Last edited:

rei

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
1,607
You downplay the choosing aspect, but from what i know it is primary. I am not against the concept of someday having a child, but i have never had the slightest desire to do so in the circumstances the society puts us in. And i know this kind of thinking has become quite common during the last decade, especially in high IQ societies.
 

Nebula

Member
Joined
May 30, 2018
Messages
549
Desire for reproduction is usually triggered by existential threat in nature (change of season, threat of predators). People in developed nations have all their basic appetites satiated and often lack a group identity that could feel threatened so do not have their instincts for reproduction triggered.

They feel no pressure to make the decision of whether to have children until it may be biologically impossible as the expectation of a long and healthy life makes it seem there is plenty of time, and they reason that humanity as a whole is not in threat of extinction if they do not have children. There is also the belief that all humans and cultures are interchangeable, so there is no major loss if their heritage goes extinct, as they may not have much of a sense of unique valuable heritage in the first place.

Many also have a very gene centric view of heritability and reason their genes are not worth reproducing.

I don't think it's an IQ or knowledge issue either, as I know many very high IQ well educated religious people who choose to have children in their early to mid 20's and have large families. A non materialist religious Worldview has a huge impact on one's priorities. Religious people see their children as a type of cultural and spiritual wealth that will be capable of propagating and growing the kind of culture they think the world needs more of.

I don't think it's a wealth issue either. I know many lower middle class religious families who plan their lives and budget to have children and make it possible.

It's very fascinating to see how worldview can have such a strong impact on culture around marriage and having children.

All that said I do agree with Haidut, that increasing the reproductive health of developed nations would result in a higher birthrate, especially as many non religious do find themselves wanting 1-2 children when they reach their mid-late 30's but do not have the reproductive health for it, or may have even lost their libidos, acquired despressiom, or other sexual dysfunction by their 30's (or increasingly even sooner) that might interfere with desire or ability to have children.
 
Last edited:

haidut

Member
Thread starter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
18,920
Location
USA / Europe
You downplay the choosing aspect, but from what i know it is primary. I am not against the concept of someday having a child, but i have never had the slightest desire to do so in the circumstances the society puts us in. And i know this kind of thinking has become quite common during the last decade, especially in high IQ societies.

When half the world falls below replacement levels (the key part) the something additional than just choice is probably at play. If the situation was say one half of the World has less children but more of them survive while the other half has more children but less of them survive, and the net effect for both halves is the same - then I would agree that is the process is natural and simply due to changing preferences. Most people have desire to procreate, even in the West. Since that desire does not disappear (even though it provably diminishes in developed countries) then probably the ability to have children has decreased as well.
 

Nebula

Member
Joined
May 30, 2018
Messages
549
Most people have desire to procreate, even in the West. Since that desire does not disappear (even though it provably diminishes in developed countries) then probably the ability to have children has decreased as well.
It seems the main thing that changes in developed and non religious regions is an increase in the age of wanting to begin to procreate (up to mid to late 30's or even higher) and a decrease in the number of children desired (usually just one). But perhaps that would be different if reproductive health and other aspects of youthful metabolism were optimal.

Although I still think the main factor of birthrate in developed nations is worldview on whether one's cultural identity is under existential threat and has value in propagating.
 
Last edited:

rei

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
1,607
When half the world falls below replacement levels (the key part) the something additional than just choice is probably at play. If the situation was say one half of the World has less children but more of them survive while the other half has more children but less of them survive, and the net effect for both halves is the same - then I would agree that is the process is natural and simply due to changing preferences. Most people have desire to procreate, even in the West. Since that desire does not disappear (even though it provably diminishes in developed countries) then probably the ability to have children has decreased as well.
Is it not safe to say that half the world is living in the modern age and are high iq compared to the other half? I am only talking about iq as an abstraction here, mainly because much of the research that is available shows that IQ is strongly correlated with how early and how many children people have. Education level is another one.

In my opinion the decisive factor is that you have access to information and capacity to investigate and understand what you are signing up for.

I am in no way saying that decreasing fertility plays no role, but the majority of the observed effect probably comes from decision. The real fertility crisis comes once the artificially inseminated babies reach reproductive age, and especially once their kids do.
 

Similar threads

Top