today is Wednesday February 26 2020
  • Welcome's to Profem Technologies

Sexed semen-a hoax

These days some companies are claiming to have marketing what is supposed to be the sexed semen. The technology that is employed to produce such a product is called ‘Flow-Cytometry’. This is based on the presumption that X sperm has 3.8% more DNA than the Y one. The semen is treated with a flourescent dye and the the flourescent sperms after being dyed pass through a medium at super high speed and X sperm is collected on one end depending upon the 3.8% more luminiscence and Y sperm on the other end and unspecified sperms are passed as such and collected at a different receiver. Is this technology possible and working? In the words of Prof. RHF Hunter, “the sperms being haploid bodies containing half the number of chromosomes as distinct from diploid ones and there is no evidence that haploid sperms express their surface characteristics as different from one another. Considering this, it is impossible to believe how a physical, chemical or electrical separation is possible of them’’ (cited from the just above mentioned book). This technology of free flow cytometry raises the very important objections to it as named below:

  1. Given that X sperm has 3.8% more DNA, it means that after being dyed, it will have 3.8% more flourescence. Just 3.8% more luminiscence can be judged in case of fast moving objects is difficult to believe. Suppose we have two bulbs say one of 100 watts and other of 103.8 watts. Can an eye, device or machine detect it in case of fast moving objects or even if the objects are slow moving and they are in super large numbers, hundreds of millions, then is it possible to separate them physically, chemically or electrically in such a small time so that large output quantities like in a commercial semen processing unit, are produced? If yes, then by what a mechanism, principle or theory?
  2. Light is measured in photons and so is the luminiscence. A photon is a physicall entity and is distinct from a quantum. As the available knowledge on physics tells that the quanta or photons are not charged particles and persistently charged of one particular electrical charge, they are never. The smallest charge units are electrons and protons. An electron is billions of times heavier than a photon and so is the proton again billions of times heavier than an electron. So, how is it possible that a photon can carry an electric charge? If so, then how can we believe that a small quotient of photon density difference i.e. a mere 3.8% can provide the materialistic scientific basis of charge variation between an X or Y chromosome bearing sperms?
  3. The nuclear or atomic principles even go to the extent that ‘it is impossible to measure the direction and velocity of the quantum particles at a given time’. This is an important postulate from the ‘Uncertainity Principle’, a very fundamental theory of the quantum physics. Then how at a given time we can be sure that a given quantum particle like photn is negatively or positively charged and moving in which direction and and what a speed? A photon is further different form a quantum and even a quantum can not be a charged particle. It is therefore foolhardy to imagine that the photons can be differntiated from one another on the basis of acquiring different charge (negative and positive) due to the fact that they have slight different variation in the magnitude (3.8% only)?
  4. Even if imagined that the slightly less or more flourscence can give rise to the differentially charged photons (negative and positive), then again the same question arises that if the 100 units of a photon density can carry an electric charge (say negative), then the maximum chances do exist of the fact that the 103.8 units of the photon density will also carry the same electric charge (again negative) and vice versa. After all, this is the matter of quantitative differentiation and not a qualitative variation. And according to the scientific principles and logic there is not a reason to believe that a small difference of quantitative change of mere 3.8% can serve a potential reason to cause a qualitative change.
  5. Having proved and nullified the all chances of charge variation between X and Y sperms on the basis of having slight marginal differentiation of a mere 3.8% in DNA content (and hence the diffentiation in flourescence), there arises the need to debate on the point that a mechanical basis can exist of separating the sperms on the basis of a mere 3.8% differnce in the amount of DNA? The answer is a plain no as in case of sperms we are handling super large quantities of sperms in a limited time frame. And further the sperms are super micro particles and they are unicellular. Any interfernce in their natural existence and behavior can prove a reason of some major damage in their morphology and physiology and further that they are covered by super sensitive and delicate plasmalemma and they donot have a rigid and robust cell wall. The mechanical separation of tens of millions of sperms to constitute a single straw of sexed sperm will require too large a time and hardships, so impossible in a commercial sort of productions.
  6. The chemical separation of sperms on the basis of a mere 3.8% difference in DNA magnitude is again impossible because both the types of sperms are formed of the similar proteins and a small difference in weight can lead to a different chemical behavior, is not to be believed. A male or female can be formed of the same or similar proteins in any species especially in the family mammalia and so can be the sperms. It can be true that there can be different chemical binding sites on an ovum and different conforming binding ligands on the bodies of the X and Y sperms due to the different chemical nature and structure of the X or Y chromosomes in them. Such has been proved in the U.S. patents granted to Zavos and others (U.S. patents 4,448,767 and 4,999,283) and such is the technology of the Heifermate. But the quantitative (and not qualitative or chemical) diffrence in weight and that also slight, can lead to a different physical or surface (electrical) characteristic, is hard to imagine. The 3.8% diffrence in the quantity of DNA will lead to the difference in size or mass of the sperm, is again very difficult to imagine since till date we have no scientific data available that a smaller DNA will lead to a reduction in size or mass of the cells or animals. The DNA content of a rat and elephant is almost same but the size difference in both the species is much obvious.
  7. The websites of all sexed semen companies elaboarte that the sexed semen produced in their labs is collected in three streams, one containing the X sperms, other containing the Y sperms and a third containing the unspecified sperms (a mixture of both the fractions). If the technology is so potent and holding, then it should be that all sperms should conform to the only two fractions, X and Y and there should not be even a question of the third fraction of unspecied sperms (a mixture of two). The very fact that the sperms are collected in three fractions, X, Y and unspecified mixture; is the proof, ample enough to prove that the sexed semen technology, especially the flow cytometry is a hoax and it cannot be believed at any cost.