Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This mini-review highlights how environmental pollution affects infertility rates, indicating serious health implications.
Environmental pollution has emerged as a significant global challenge, with detrimental effects on human health, ecosystems, and biodiversity. One of the overlooked consequences of environmental pollution is its adverse impact on reproductive health, contributing to the increasing prevalence of infertility, which affects approximately 12.6% of the global population. Pollution from industrialisation, urbanisation, waste disposal, and pesticide use introduces toxic chemicals, heavy metals, endocrine disruptors, and other pollutants into the air, water, and soil. These pollutants accumulate in the environment and food chains, affecting human fertility outcomes. Multiple studies have highlighted the detrimental effects of environmental pollution on reproductive health, including irregular menstrual cycles, reduced sperm quality, ovarian dysfunction, and increased rates of miscarriage and genetic abnormalities. The pathophysiology behind this includes oxidative stress, endocrine disruption, and direct damage to gametes, affecting both males and females. Exposure to pollutants such as carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, heavy metals like mercury and cadmium, and endocrine-disrupting chemicals like bisphenol A and phthalates can disrupt the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis, leading to impaired gametogenesis and fertility. Furthermore, pollution contributes to long-term chronic health issues, including low-grade inflammation and hormonal imbalances. As evidence of the growing concern, the World Health Organisation has acknowledged the impact of air pollution on fertility, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Given the widespread nature of this issue, it is crucial to raise awareness, conduct further research, and implement policies aimed at reducing environmental pollution to protect reproductive health and ensure the well-being of future generations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tissera et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: