Razor-Sharp Hands of Biological Clock Cut Both Ways

Our Bodies Our Blog links to a story in the New York Times about a study from the University of Queensland suggesting that children fathered by older men are at higher risk of various health conditions.

We've been hearing pretty much forever (at least, as long as I've been paying attention--and I'm super old!) that pregnancies of older women are at higher risk, but since men don't have to worry about actually building the child from this close to scratch with their own material components, it hasn't traditionally been as big a concern for them. It's just some DNA! What could go wrong?

Apparently, something.

I think there was also a theory that men keep on churning out brand new germ cells all the time, while women are born with all of theirs and so they inevitably age along with the woman, or something, and that therefore sub-optimal outcomes were less likely to be tied to the male parent. 

I may be making that up, and if I'm not, whoever came up with it may have been if it turns out that, indeed, there are increased odds of health issues for children of older men.

The article raises the question of whether, as we learn more about how male as well as female fertility declines with age, men might not also have to start thinking about that good old biological clock. 

I guess it's not really surprising. We're mortal: we get old and things start to break down, and eventually we die. Hopefully we get in some good years of cantankerousness first. That's my goal.

But the point is, it makes sense that things don't work as well in later years as we creak closer to death. (Did I mention I'm super old?) I, for one, welcome our male siblings on board the speeding train of reproductive decrepitude. The more the merrier!