This is a fairly thorough and thoughtful analysis of the reasons for male infertility and the pros and cons of this particular home fertility test for men. Our one wish was that there was a little more consideration given to the science behind the test itself.
The story is bookended by the idea that the burden for addressing fertility issues is born mostly by women. If the statistics in the story are to be believed, men should be taking fertility issues just as seriously. This story provides ample information to help men address the right questions about infertility.
The story says, “The test costs about $40; the average cost of a semen analysis in a doctor’s office is about $100.” As a comparison, the story says, “There are also several at-home sperm analysis kits available online. They each include a microscope and cost at least $80.”
This was the story’s one big failing. There is no attempt in the story to actually quantify how well the test works. What’s the sensitivity? What’s the specificity?
The story points out that the test might lull men into a false sense that they have no fertility problems. “A positive result from the SpermCheck Fertility test could give men a false sense that everything is all right, APA’s Imler said. It might even cause some men to delay a necessary doctor’s evaluation, Brannigan said.”
The story waited a little too long to make this point, but we were glad to see it included.
The story does a nice job explaining what exactly the test does and its limitations. For example, it says, “As stated in the SpermCheck Fertility instructions, sperm count is not the only factor that contributes to male fertility. The test is not intended to be a complete semen analysis or an overall indicator of a man’s fertility, Lopez said.”
There is no disease mongering in the story. Instead, the story provides some statistics about fertility. We wished they had been sourced beyond one “expert in male fertility.” The story says, “Approximately 15 percent of U.S. couples of reproductive age who are trying to conceive face infertility issues, said Brannigan, an expert in male fertility. Male infertility contributes to 50 percent of those cases, he said. Male infertility alone is the cause 30 percent of the time; a combination of male and female factors account for the other 20 percent.”
The story extensively quotes Dr. Robert Brannigan, a urologist at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. And Brannigan provides much needed context for the test. For example: “The male reproductive system should not be oversimplified, Brannigan said. There are several characteristics of sperm alone — at least three that aren’t addressed by SpermCheck — that affect male fertility. In addition, hormones and the delivery of the sperm play a part.” The story also quotes Brad Imler, the president of the American Pregnancy Association, who provided good comments.
The story provides a lengthy list of fertility problems that are not addressed by this home test, but, presumably, would be addressed in a fertility clinic.
The story makes it clear that the test is new to the market but now available in retail stores.
The story claims “SpermCheck Fertility is the only FDA-approved home sperm test currently on the market and available in retail stores, Lopez said.” The story goes on to say, though, “At-home sperm tests are a fairly new idea, Imler said, but SpermCheck Fertility is not the first one. Four years ago an FDA-approved home test called Fertell, which is no longer for sale, offered an evaluation of both male and female fertility.”
The story does not rely on a press release.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
A lot of interesting workshops are happening now at the #NBCCSummit! @garyschwitzer, the publisher of @HealthNewsRevu, is discussing new cancer research news. #BeBold
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like