INSIGHTS | 26. Polyester & Infertility

There are growing health concerns for the overuse of plastics in everyday life, including the clothing you wear.

Photo by Dainis Graveris on Unsplash

Article: An experimental study on the effect of different types of textiles on conception.

Context

Plastics are ubiquitous, and for good reason. They have improved our lives in ways which we cannot begin to fathom. From the industrial to the personal day-to-day, plastics have touched everything.

As with all things, however, there are downsides. Whether to the environment (enabling mass production, consumption, and waste), or to our bodies in the form of BPA and Phthalates.

Researchers have been warning about the use of plastics in everyday life for decades, including those who present rather convincing data suggesting hormonal impact of plastics via estrogenic disruption.

In the digital health-hacking biosphere, avoiding exposure to hormone disruptors has become a hot-topic issue. Whether the concern is about the impact of estrogens on overall hormone regulation, cancer, or fertility.

The study we are about to discuss explored the impact of different textiles on the hormonal cycle and fertility of female dogs (bitches). Based on their results, our fears are supported…but, not for the reason we were expecting.

More pressingly, it seems that the impact of polyester on fertility impacts both men and women.

Recently, I stumbled the work of a surgeon from Cairo, Egypt: Ahmed Shafik.

Shafik has performed some very interesting experiments on both dogs and humans, as pertains to fertility.

The study linked above is of particular interest, as female infertility seems to be on the rise.

Study Design

The authors chose 35 bitches who are otherwise known to have normal reproductive cycles and have conceived when mated.

These 35 were split into 5 groups: 4 experimental groups and 1 control.

Four Experimental Arms:

• 100% polyester pants

• 50/50% polyester/cotton blend pants

• 100% cotton pants

• 100% wool pants

These pants were fashioned such that they cover the pelvis of the dogs, including the lower trunk, perineum, and upper hind limbs.

The dogs wore these pants day and night for 12 months. After completion, the pants were removed and the bitches were followed for an additional 6 months.

During the study period, Shafik performed hormonal assays and attempted to mate the dogs. They attempted mating both during the 12-month period and the post-pant-removal 6-month period.

The hormones (estradiol and progesterone) were assayed both in the estrous (fertile) and anestrous (infertile) phase.

As the name suggests, pro-gesterone is a pro-gestation hormone and is critical in fertility.

One more thing: Shafik also studied the electrostatic potential generated on the skin by the cloth that was worn. More on this later.

Results

With respect to hormone dysregulation, the only robust finding was this:

Bitches who wore polyester or polyester-cotton blend pants experienced an order of magnitude drop in progesterone.

More importantly, this drop in progesterone was noted in the estrous phase, the phase in which progesterone is needed most. This is why in the first 2 columns (anestrous phase) progesterone is already low.

Even more convincing is that the progesterone levels normalized after removal of the polyester pants.

But, wait - there’s more.

Out of 14 bitches (7 polyester and 7 blend) that worse polyester-containing pants, 8 were unable to conceive during the 12-month period

Based on this admittedly low-n cohort, it would seem that the effect of polyester exposure is dose-dependent. Meaning, the more polyester in your pants, the greater the impact on fertility (second row). Now, this may just be a fluke of low-numbers and not really dose-dependent.

But, the final outcome that Shafik tested further supports dose-dependency.

That final outcome was skin electrostatic potential.

For those who are unfamiliar with physiology, we are electric beings (as are all forms of life). Despite what the mainstream will tell you, electrostatics does have an impact on physiology - and not merely ionizing radiation.

We are batteries, and it is long past due that we treat ourselves like it.

Notice that the change in skin electrostatic potential is greater with higher exposure to polyester. Cotton and wool? Completely inert.

Shafik believes this may be due to the friction between polyester and skin which results in a charge-separation resulting in increased net positive electric charge on the surface of our skin. The exact mechanism of this is yet unclear, and the field of triboelectricity has emerged to understand the nature of charge-separation between surfaces. More on this in a future article.

Thus, it may be the case that a rather durable polymer like polyester is not seeding estrogen disruptors into your body…but rather altering the electrostatics on the surface of your body, which will inevitably have an impact on electrostatics inside you.

What about Males and Humans?