No one is questioning the existence of "chemicals" in our food and water or the processed stuff that we eat and are sold as consumers. The discussion is not about that. The discussion is about "theories" about its effects on gender. In all my comments above, the phrase I use is "there are NO gender bending chemicals in our products".

Also, for statements like "But they have been linked to the halving of sperm counts over the last couple generations, still going down by two percent a year", you would have to provide citations to studies - as there is lots of misinformation and "beliefs" but not enough "science".

You may have heard of the confounding bias in research. For example:

(1) First one has to definitely prove (with adequate sample size and randomization) the "sperm count" theory.

(2) Next, one needs to do a controlled study to figure out the correlations and whether correlations is causation (i.e. there may be hundreds of factors/causes for the observed evidence. How does one know exactly which one it is? Have all the other variables been controlled for? Is this an observational study (survey,etc.) or an evidence-based study (strict observation with isolation of other variables over an extended period of time)?

So again, it would be "incorrect" (especially as a scientist) to say "decrease in sperm counts are due to chemicals in food and water" without well-conducted and rigorous studies to back that up (keeping in mind the replication crisis in academia).