An article in LifeSiteNews Thursday highlighted that growing numbers of studies are steadily revealing the impact contraceptive pills have had on the environment, reducing and mutating whole fish populations.
A study conducted by scientists from the University of Missouri and the US Geological Survey found that fish populations faced with a significant amount of exposure to 17a-ethinylestradiol (EE2), a major ingredient in birth control pills, have an estimated 30 percent decrease in reproduction for second and third generations.
By exposing aquariums of fish to chemical EE2—the Japanese medaka, to be exact—the experiment simulated the chemical environments found in small aquatic populations downstream of wastewater treatment plants, which have no current ability to remove the toxic chemical. Given that EE2 is a known endocrine disruptor, the reduced effects on fertility in these populations should come as no shock.
“This study shows that even though endocrine disruptors may not affect the life of the exposed fish, it may negatively affect future generations,” said lead researcher Ramji Bhandari in a USGS press release. “If those trends continued, the potential for declines in overall population numbers might be expected in future generations.”
“These adverse outcomes, if shown in natural populations, could have negative impacts on fish inhabiting contaminated aquatic environments,” Bhandari said.
The environmental effects of the contraceptive pill has already been well-documented in a multitude of studies. Scientists at the University of Aberdeen discovered that populations of sheep raised on farms fertilized with sewage sludge exposed to the chemicals found in contraceptive pills infect the food chain, creating higher risks of abnormalities.
An article written for Forbes by British economist Tim Worstall in 2012 drove feminists mad when he actually suggested that consumers of the birth control pill should be forced to pay a higher tax to upgrade wastewater treatment plants.
“We cannot charge BP for killing fishies through pollution if we don't also charge others who kill fishies through pollution, can we?” wrote Worstall. “The pill pollutes; thus, those who use the pill should pay the costs of their pollution.”
Read the full study from the US Geological Survey here.