Skip to Main Content

Just in Time for St. Paddy’s Day: PETA’s Grossest Ad Ever?

Written by PETA | March 14, 2008

 

According to the British music magazine NME, Irish sperm donors are in short supply and one enterprising sperm bank has come up with an incentive scheme in time for St. Patrick’s Day (donations in exchange for contest tickets).

“Sperm donors are to be offered free tickets to any music festival in Europe under a new initiative. Irish stocks are apparently dwindling, with demand far higher than is sustainable, and donations down by 40% over the last four years.”

Always ready to help (and mindful of how good fruit and veggies prove in fertility studies), PETA is offering a special St. Patrick’s Day T-shirt to help remind anyone with a touch of the Blarney that drinking milk can lower their sperm count. I defy anyone to choose a pint of milk over a pint of Guinness after looking at this particular masterpiece.

Anyway, good luck lads, and happy, um, donating.

Leprechaun.JPG

 

Related Posts

Respond

Comments

Post a Comment

If your comment doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take some time to publish or may require moderation.

By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our collection, storage, use, and disclosure of your personal info in accordance with our privacy policy as well as to receiving e-mails from us.

  • Ronixis says:

    LUDICROUS! I’d much rather attempt to drink a gallon of milk then let ANY alcoholic beverage come near my lips!

  • rojo says:

    mike no issue with any of that rechavarro. It’s a small study. It just isn’t necessarily wrong. As you say we nearly all consume at least some soy but this study had participants that remembered eating soy explicitly. Chavarro plainly accepted the obese factor and thinks soy pushes them over the edge. Again because children exist in asia it is not a logical progression that there are no fertility problems. Who says a decrease of 40 sperm count actually causes a problem? We are talking about changes in sperm count not fertility per se. I think the “large body of…” is soyfood assoc spin. They focus largely on Barnes workvisit their site to check which I don’t think is as rigorous as they think. You quoted part of Barnes study yourself “soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed”. A study on rat sperm and my impression is not on many rats. Possibly fewer than the 100 couples in Chavarros study. All I’m saying no matter how flimsy the evidence there are more questions about soy with regard to sperm count and even fertility than real Milk.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Jay Most of that crop goes toward feed for meat animals not into vegetarians’ shopping bags.

  • jay says:

    Derek Chill mate. I’m just trying to see where you’re coming from. You can try to patronize me with your discovery channel slurs etc. but the fact is you have no idea who I am I dont even have a TV. But I did live in Africa for 26 years and your sterile view of how the world should work just doesnt hold up. I have nothing against a vegan lifestyle but I dont think you can follow it for moral reasons. Thats all. Dont get so mad when someone doesnt agree with you. By the way what do you think about the gophers the snakes the grounghogs the ants the earthworms etc. that are killed by tilling of the soil in raising crop? Not a sterile world.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Rojo I checked out your link to the Belfast study and also tried to get info on the methodology of that particular study which I could not find. The study’s conclusion was based on the fact that the seminal liquid surrounding the slowermoving sperm contained chemicals called isoflavones. Were these isoflavones from soy products? Were they from processed soy isolated soy protein or wholebean products? Were they testing men that regularly ate soy products and if so how much? or men on a “regular” diet? There are research estimates that soya is present in 6070 per cent of all supermarket products and is widely used by most fast food chains so it is fairly omnipresent in everyone’s diet. I’m unaware if Dr. Barnes did a study or not but the issues discrediting Dr. Chavarros’ study are It was based on recollected intake of soyfoods and not on specific diets containing soyfoods. Dr. Chavarros himself speculates that his study found a link between soya and low sperm count because many of the participants were overweight or obese. Men with high levels of body fat produce more oestrogen than their slim counterparts. Dr. Chavarros also admits that many East Asian men consume much more soya than the participants in his trial and do not develop fertility problems. Chavarros’ study conflicts with the large body of U.S. government and National Institute of Healthsponsored human and primate research in which controlled amounts of isoflavones from soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed. I’m not sure where verification for these studies could be foundPubMed perhaps? “This study is confounded by many issues thus I feel the results should be viewed with a great deal of caution” warned Dr. Tammy Hedland a researcher on male fertility issues including soy from the Health Sciences Center Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado. As described Dr. Hedland is a male fertility researcher and has researched soy herself so she should know of what she speaks I would say more research is needed on the soyfertility issue. Chavarros’ study seems a bit of a research disaster and the Belfast study leaves me personally with too many unanswered questions to be convincing.

  • Maya, CVT says:

    Hi Lynda! Yes on that point I completely agree. Not only that but I think it would make for a facinating study if it hasn’t already been done. Avian neuroscience for example is a really hot new field because they’ve actually renamed many parts of “bird brains” and are discovering all kinds of new things. I totally think that we have underestimated animals in the science world!

  • Derek says:

    jay Wow I do not even know where to begin with your conglomeration of discovery channel snipets distorted interpretation of postmodernism and complete lack of ability to differentiate between evolutionary survival mechanisms and humanity’s irresponsible exploitation of animals and the environment. None of your “Blue Planet” examples demonstrate true animal to animal cruelty. Now if the chimps raised another tribe of chimps for the sole purpose of eating them then I might be more inclined to agree with your point of view on that part of your discussion. What is the true definition of a cannibal? Muscle fibers are what one eats when biting into dead animal flesh…there are very few differences between human muscle fibers and those of a rat unless one is an expert in electron microscopy. But that is a discussion to have with a scientist which you clearly are not. The worn out question about what to do with all of the animals if slaughter houses were torn down would not even need to be answered if humans did not strive to breed as many animals as possible for a profit.

  • Michele says:

    Jay you should read “An Unnatural Order” by Jim Mason…

  • jay says:

    Hello Ana Dont get me wrong I dont support cruelty against animals I dont agree with zoos or circusses or hunting for pleasure etc.. But the fact is that this world is married to pain and I think that to imagine otherwise is naive. Herbivores do kill. Males in rut will kill each other. A male zebra will kill a lost calf to prevent it from attracting predators. Bears kill the young of other bears. And as for cruelty who is to say that animals should not be held accountable for their actions. Your very premise is that all live has equal value. Yet killer whales will follow a humpback whale for 6 hours drown it and only eat its lower jaw. Chimps cannabalize neighboring tribes. There are many examples of seemingly meaningless cruelty in the animal kingdom. Even in flora a fig tree grows by engulfing another tree and smothering it. So while the world seems cruel there is no hiding from it. Suffering is a part of life and even if you turn every person on earth into a vegan you will not change the condition of the human heart one bit. Have a look inside its black. From a pragmatic point of view what do we do with all the animals if we tear down all the slaughter houses. Maybe our role is similar to the carnivores in preventing overpopulation. I also think you misunderstood my point about human superiority my point is exactly that as per the theory of evolution humans are not superior just different and so should not as per evolution be judged differently. The alternative of course is that we are made entirely differently from animals with a spirit or a sole and a conscience and a moral law which is universal then you can judge cruelty.

  • lynda downie says:

    Thanks Maya. I appreciate your comments. I think for the most part however we underestimate or even deny the moral abilities of other species. When we see humans caring for each other sharing resources cooperating etc we call them moral. When we see the same behaviours among animals we call it instinct or survival stategies. Why? Agreed animals can’t articulate their moral values and they may not be as sophisticated as some humans but the empathy and even restraint they show between conspecifics in some cases excels that among humans. Shalom!

  • rojo says:

    Mike I’m having trouble finding the actual Barnes study which show isoflavones have no affect on sperm “mobility and quality” I don’t know how large the group of rats involved was. And of course how animal tests relate to humans anyway. I’ve been told they don’t. httpwww.sciencedirect.comscience?obArticleURLudiB6TC04C1NHDC1user10rdoc1fmtorigsearchsortdviewcacctC000050221version1urlVersion0userid10md51ff9da1d27d42250468748a255464a3d As to Chavarros being the only study to differ httpnews.bbc.co.uk2hiuknewsnorthernireland3513607.stm

  • rojo says:

    ok Mike if we’re going to cherry pick from newscientist “An analysis of the data which controlled for factors such as age and weight” “It doesn’t fit in with the rest of what has been done experimentally” says Barnes. “But that’s not to say it’s wrong” he adds. “He Chavarro believes that the oestrogenmimicking isoflavones in soya might push the hormonal levels in overweight and obese men even higher to the point at which sperm begin to suffer.” from emaxhealth “do not tell the whole story” They don’t actually refute Chavarros findings only downplay them. Understandably because it is such a small study. I don’t dispute that and have never professed any more than “could” reduce sperm. I just haven’t found any evidence to even suggest real milk could lower sperm count. One lonely study beats none in the could stakes. Yes I know the definition of conflicts my question was just because it disagrees with previous findings does that make Chavarros findings wrong? Barnes didn’t say so. If they soyfoods assoc can demonstrate that the sperm count of asian men is equally high to nonsoy eaters thats Ok. To simply proclaim that because asian children exist soy has no effect is illogical. Maybe they try longer or perhaps a 40 sperm count reduction has little effect on fertility. Perhaps the sperm count is not the only issue when we look at fertility. httpwww.newscientist.comchannelsexdn7559wouldbemumstoldtoavoidsoya.html I’m sure people trying to conceive will feel better in the knowledge they’ll have less chance of prostate cancer.

  • Maya, CVT says:

    Thank you Ana I hadn’t thought about the herbivores so gentle who could ever want to harm them?? I can understand why cat killings can seem brutal but without them ungulates become quickly overpopulated and suffer from a massive spread of disease slow deaths and imbalance in the populations. Even if they could feel sorry for their prey the loss of these cats can and does! cause terrible disruptions like myxomytosis in rabbit populations in Spain and other places.

  • Ana says:

    Hello Maya I was going to respond to Jay that human animals purport to be moral animals and should behave as such. His response about the other animals eating other animals is a long held albeit old response that gets even more ancient as it is repeated ad nauseum. Elephants gorillas rabbits deer sheep goats horses beavers and others too numerous to name do not eat other animals. The other animals do show empathy and intelligence but humans tend to ignore this fact or better yet deny it. Elephants surround a baby to protect him even as they are being killed by poachers. As humans we have a choice to make moral decisions and we should. People debate the death penalty constantly and many nations have banned it. This shows that killing is seen as wrong even if it means sparing the life of a convicted murderer. The herbivores I have mentioned kill no one why kill them most especially when humans can live quite well without ingesting flesh. The argument because other animals eat flesh we should also is not a sound one. We could all go on a killing spree and kill each other humans but what stops us oh yes I get it it’s wrong to kill to take a life. Only might determines taking a life killing others. The other animals neither have laws nor Jainism or Christianity to adhere to. We need laws to control our base nature otherwise we would all be suffering miserable lives. But most of all I find it reprehensible and unacceptable to kill and hear the screams and see the struggle and view the pain these poor creatures endure at humans’ hands because of an addiction to flesh and because of the addiction to money think McDonald’s. First the argument is that humans are superior to animals then the argument is well the other animals eat flesh. Which one is it your equal to the other animals or are you superior to them??? Animals don’t race other animals to death set up slaughterhouses hunt for recreation hold rodeos wear the skinfur leather of other animals drink the milk of other animals create zoos circuses for the other animals kill tigers for their penises so that men can get erections from ingesting tiger penile tissue…and the list goes on……yes that’s right the oppressive human does that. That’s intelligence??? Maya so interesting your comments. Stay well…

  • Maya, CVT says:

    Lynda good point. I absolutely think primates probably have a similar ability to empathize as us. Just one thing they are still animals. Even if some like the most humanlike primates are able to empathize they do not have nearly the same selfcontrol that we do. They react. They don’t have grade school Mister Rogers therapy etc etc and even if they did it would be useless. We can’t possibly hold them to the same standards to which we hold ourselves. It sounds like I’m disagreeing with you but I think we actually already agreed on this point. Om Shanti. Peace

  • Maya, CVT says:

    Hi again Jay! Phobosblack said it well in addition I’d say that it’s not about judging each other. First of all I don’t judge people I only judge their actions. Also I try to question my own actions first other’s second. We can stand in judgement of whomever we want but I think it’s nearly impossible to judge other people say for example in Africa or someone who is poorer than me. Nearly impossible to accurately judge another species whose lives are poorly understood even by experts. Instead of judging I prefer to ask myself what I value and spread a positive feeling to others and get them enthusiastic in helping each other. If you value something different that’s fine just try to understand that people helping this cause are part of your community and their efforts should be respected and at the very least we can come to a peaceful agreement!

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Rojo There has only been one single lonely study that found any connection whatsoever between lowered sperm count and soy consumption and the researcher himself accounted for this anomaly. The word “conflicts” in that context means disagreement “Chavarro’s study conflicts with the large body of U.S. government and National Institute of Healthsponsored human and primate research in which controlled amounts of isoflavones from soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed. Upon hearing of Chavarro’s findings Dr. Stephen Barnes a pharmacologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham noted “This study is the first to find this correlation. The research on soy in men has not found a negative impact on male hormones but rather has suggested a preventive effect in prostate cancer.” The fact that the Soyfoods Association of North America of America submitted the info to Men’s Health magazine has no bearing on the veracity of the findings since the research was U. S. government and NIHsponsored. Naturally they would want to promote this good news about soy.

  • lynda downie says:

    I don’t think that humans are unique in being moral agents. Studies in cognitive science for example have shown behaviours that correlate with brain neurons in macaques that strongly suggest emphatic feelings for others. The more we really understand animals we find just how closely related we are. Yeah lions do eat other animals and ants aphids. Humans have the choice to cook soybeans to extract the protein. Lions and ants don’t have that choice.

  • Phobosblack says:

    Jay The basis for morality in a nonreligious context is a matter of golden rule based respect. This is the reason you don’t see everyone who calls them self a postmodernist and other such philosophical and cultural movements running down the street murdering anyone in their path. I hope that answers your question.

  • rojo says:

    Mike I agree with Chavarro fertility problems may not result from a sperm count only 40 lower than normal. From memory an 80 reduction in sperm count becomes a problem not 40. This post is about real milk lowering sperm count not necessarily fertility. I haven’t seen anything to back that statement up but quite the contrary for soy . sorry to be pedantic. “Conflicts” makes it wrong? Incidently if you look right down the bottom of your emaxhealth link you will find the source they used.

  • jay says:

    Maya I appreciate your opinion and I think its appropriate that we as a species look after the planet. But my question is why. We know we should but why do we think so? What compels us? What standard are we measuring ourselves against? And surely if we believe that taking the live of another animal is wrong for our species then why does it not hold for all species? So we dont judge animals but we judge each other but on what grounds??

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Rojo As I detailed the source of my link was Men’s Health magazine. Your link refers to the single study that managed to find an association between soy and sperm count which I and even the the researcher himself had already refuted on my March 17 1109 post ” The researcher Chavrro admits that many east Asian men consume much more soya than the participants in his trial and do not develop fertility problems. He speculates that his study found a link between soya and low sperm count because many of the participants were overweight or obese. Men with high levels of body fat produce more oestrogen than their slim counterparts. “They already have a lot of background estrogen” says Chavarro.” As well his study “conflicts with the large body of U.S. government and National Institute of Healthsponsored human and primate research in which controlled amounts of isoflavones from soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed.”

  • Maya, CVT says:

    Jay hello. I found your comment interesting. I hope Ana doesn’t mind if I comment on your question to her! Evolution and postmodernism are great things. We have become a species with great art poetry theatre written history philosophy… And morals. Ethical beliefs is a very high form of thinking. It requires a large highly evolved brain. Lions ants bears do not have morals. Animals don’t have the ability to imagine another individual’s suffering. We do. So what good is our special abilities if we don’t use them? Have your art your parties your trips to Paris but take responsibility for what you do to others.

  • rojo says:

    I’m not too sure about hunting humans though legend has it that it happens in Brazilian slums but something will have to be done about the growing human population. In nature when animals overpopulate there is invariably a crash in numbers not a simple trimming. Starvation is not something I would look forward to. Humans will not be immune when we exceed our resources. To the detriment of animals which will be eaten for human survival. Perhaps part of the solution is to send soy products as food aid.

  • rojo says:

    mike Q as the source for your link is the soyfoods assoc of America I’ll take it with a grain of salt. Here is another newscientist article possibly the one in question. httpwww.newscientist.comarticledn12792eatingsoyacouldslashmensspermcount.html What I haven’t yet seen is a scientific article saying that Milk lowers sperm count. Or even “could”.

  • jay says:

    Ana Lions eat the meat of other animals. Bears kill the cubs of other bears. Ants use aphids. Evolution baby survival of the fittest. This is what postmoderism is all about. What law prevents humansif we consider ourselves as animals from doing what we please to enhance our lives.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Ashes As you pointed out people have been drinking milk “depending upon location.” Since the majority of the world’s population can’t digest cows’ milk one would have to compare infertility rates of milkdrinking versus non milkdrinking nations.

  • Ana says:

    george h So humans are overpopulating this earth so the solution is to hunt them also??? The deer’s natural predators are being hunted therefore that contributes to the growth of deer population. Did you ever stop to think that it is humans who are encroaching on their land? And what gives humans the right to decide who should live or die?? Might?? Being that I have good hearing and have compassion I hear the other animals scream but that doesn’t make me or anyone else a freak. Very nonsensical statement you made. Comparing yourself to the president says more about you than of him. Only human animals drinks the milk of the other animalsthat is so ridiculous. I love calves and goats but I am neither. Only mothers milk does it for me.

  • Mike Quinoa says:

    Rojo Men’s Health magazine agrees with Jack. httpwww.emaxhealth.com317266.html “According to New Scientist “Chavarro admits that many East Asian men consume much more soya than the participants in his trial and do not develop fertility problems. He speculates that his study found a link between soya and low sperm count because many of the participants were overweight or obese. Men with high levels of body fat produce more oestrogen than their slim counterparts.” Chavarro’s study conflicts with the large body of U.S. government and National Institute of Healthsponsored human and primate research in which controlled amounts of isoflavones from soy were fed and no effect on quantity quality or motility of sperm were observed. Upon hearing of Chavarro’s findings Dr. Stephen Barnes a pharmacologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham noted “This study is the first to find this correlation. The research on soy in men has not found a negative impact on male hormones but rather has suggested a preventive effect in prostate cancer.” ”

  • Ashes says:

    Haven’t people been drinking milk from various animals depending upon location for centuries? Yet babies were born. The population of this world hardly bears out the idea that those who drink milk will not be able to reproduce. There are so many factors that combine to affect fertility that pointing to milk as the one and only determining factor is just silly and uninformed.

  • AgelessAnnie says:

    My comment is still under consideration? It is 900 p.m. where I am right now. I was sitting here typing my comment at 1000 a.m. this morning. My math isn’t too great but that seems to work out to 11 hours since I typed my remarks here!! There are no other comments posted as far as I can tell?? Is this some kind of “Eyes Only” security site or what???? Very weird. Very inhospitable I’d say. Well live and learn eh?

  • rebecca bower says:

    PETA first i want to say thank you!!!so much.i want to help support PETA as much as u can i love how u love helping animals.I seen ur documentry on tv before and i cant belive how much they abuse animals.Its AWFUL.we are grateful to have people like u in the world.animal abuse needs to stop.just cause they cant defend there selves doesnt give us the rights to hurt please let me help as much as i can THANK YOU! AND GOD BLESS

  • george hamletin says:

    i love animals too i have a dog and a bird and horses. i ride horses yes sit on them because they r agrue to go for a trail ride. they have 25 acreas to run around in all day. they get bored. so dont ride them? they would be sad and lonely. dont drink milk? this doesnt hurt any animal. sure they produce hibrid cows that give out 100 gallons a day thats wrong. but a normal cow? we grow because of milk im 62. i drink 2 gallons a week. it isnt hurting a animal. if you have read this dar plz read on. only freaks listen to animals scream. it makes my skin crawl. but i hunt for a reason. im not some blood thirsty redneck hunter who wants to pull the trigger. i hunt so we dont over populate our deer. this is not bs they eat alot of food already and some r starving. if we let them live they will all die. i hunt for sport and to perserve them. i eat meat like our president. i hate animal testing but how could my grandma have gotton laser eye surgery without it being tested? animals r helping us. to improve our lives. dont hinder that. stop testing. and dont be ignorant.

  • rojo says:

    Jack you seem to have left out the soy in “soy milk can lower their sperm count”. httpabcnews.go.comTechnologyStory?id3741133page1 Real milk is actually recommended httpinfertility.healthinfo.orgmaleinfertilitymaleinfertilityimprovespermquality.html

  • AgelessAnnie says:

    Gosh I don’t see anything wrong or naughty about the ad in question. It’s certainly very original isn’t it! LOL

  • Jessica says:

    this totally is true…i mean i hear about men getting girls preg after a night of drinking beer….notice how we never hear about a guy getting a girl preg after a night of drinking milk?

  • Mary says:

    I love this. You guys rock. As we celebrate St. Patrick’s weekend here in Ireland I will be sure to raise a glass to the health of all you wonderful PETA people.

  • Trey says:

    That is funny but I thought Guinness isn’t vegan. I wish it was because I love a good stout.

  • Judith, Freedom Fighter for Animals says:

    I love it. Unbelievable. John is right you need to get it into the irish media. I also am part Irish. This is priceless. I want this shirt! Peace!

  • Richard says:

    But guinness is not vegan… it’s not even vegetarian

  • John Carmody says:

    This is funny! Let’s get this into the Irish media would be great! Animal Rights Action Network ARAN