For many women, having a child is one of the deepest hopes of our lives. It should not be something we have to fight for.
Yet in the United States and around the world, infertility is widespread and women and their partners are struggling to have children.
The global fertility rate is at an all-time low, with many nations, including our neighbor Canada, now experiencing what researchers describe as “ultra-low fertility.”
The U.S. is not far behind with a fertility rate that has fallen nearly every year since 2007, dropping from 69.5 births per 1,000 women to 53.1 in 2025 -- the lowest level in the national data series dating back to 1909. In 2024, the total fertility rate was 1.6 births per woman, down from about 2.1 in 2007, the level generally considered replacement level.
Infertility is also widespread. The World Health Organization (WHO) now estimates that about 1 in 6 people experience infertility during their lifetime.
Behind those numbers are women who desperately want to become mothers, couples struggling to conceive, and families wondering why something that should be so natural has become so difficult. How did we get here?
We have to ask:
What is happening to our reproductive health -- and what are we missing?
Fertility Is More Than a Birth Rate
There is no single reason fertility is declining. Age, lifestyle, economic pressures and access to reproductive care all matter. But that cannot be where the conversation ends.
Researchers are also asking whether the world around us is making it harder for women to conceive and have healthy pregnancies.
A 2024 global review published in Human Reproduction Update examined declining fertility around the world and identified environmental contaminants, including endocrine-disrupting chemicals and pesticides, among the factors that warrant close attention.
Moms Across America has previously examined the broader fertility crisis, including declining sperm counts, reproductive disorders and the environmental exposures that may be contributing to declining reproductive health. Read Fertility Collapse: Is Modern Life Making It Harder to Have Children? for a broader look at the issue.
The studies cited in this article are only a small part of a much larger body of research. Organizations such as U.S. Right to Know and Children’s Health Defense have documented extensive research examining connections between fertility and environmental exposures, including pesticides, vaccines and other chemicals.
The evidence is not confined to a handful of studies. It is an expanding body of research that deserves serious attention.
If reproductive health is deteriorating, shouldn’t the governments responsible for protecting public health be investigating every plausible contributor?
Pesticides and Reproductive Health
For years, researchers have been investigating the impact of industrial agrochemicals and pesticides on reproductive health. The amount of evidence is shocking!
For example, pesticide exposure through food consumption has been linked to ovarian function. A 2025 study published in The Journal of Nutrition examined 633 women ages 21 to 45 at an academic fertility center. Those with the highest intake of fruits and vegetables with higher pesticide residues (non-organic) had 71.6% higher levels of follicle-stimulating hormone than those with the lowest intake. The research concluded that high-pesticide-residue fruit and vegetable intake is related to lower ovarian reserve and the scientists called for further study.
That is a striking finding -- especially for women who are doing what they have been told is healthy: eating more fruits and vegetables.
Glyphosate -- a WHO/IARC-designated probable carcinogen and the world’s most commonly used herbicide and primary ingredient in Bayer’s Roundup weedkiller -- deserves particular attention.
Numerous glyphosate studies have raised concerns pertaining to pregnancy and birth outcomes. A 2022 study published in Environmental Health found glyphosate in 99% of the pregnant women studied and reported that higher first-trimester glyphosate levels were associated with lower birth-weight percentiles and higher NICU admission risk. Moms Across America previously reported on this research.
A 2024 study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety in infertile French men detected glyphosate in seminal plasma and found a correlation between glyphosate levels and markers of oxidative stress. The researchers said their findings raised concerns about potential effects on human reproductive health and possibly offspring.
Research has also raised concerns about exposure during pregnancy. Studies of pregnant women have detected glyphosate in urine and reported associations between higher glyphosate levels and shorter pregnancy duration and lower birth weight.
A 2025 review published in Reproductive Sciences of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBH) and fertility examined evidence involving both male and female reproductive health and identified potential effects on hormonal and endocrine function, ovarian health, and other pathways involved in reproduction. Based on the “concerning” findings, the authors called for further research into the reproductive effects of glyphosate exposure.
And GBHs are only one part of the larger agrochemical picture. A 2024 global narrative review published in Human Reproduction Update and a 2025 study in Environmental Research found associations between exposure to insecticides and lower sperm concentrations.
These findings do not prove that glyphosate or other pesticides cause infertility. But given the stakes, how much more evidence do we need before reproductive health is treated as a serious consideration in pesticide regulation?
Exposure isn't limited to our food, farmers and agricultural workers. Glyphosate is also used in forestry, including aerial spraying of forests -- exposing workers, nearby communities, wildlife, food foragers, hunters and the environment. The chemical spraying dries down forest growth, increasing forest fire risk and the toxin-filled smoke affects us all.
Why aren’t reproductive effects being given more weight when our government regulators evaluate chemicals used around our food, water and communities?
Plastics and “Safe” Substitutes
It isn't just the toxins that farmers are spraying that affect our ability to reproduce. Numerous studies show that the chemicals found in plastics and everyday products deserve attention too.
For example, when bisphenol A (BPA) first came under scrutiny in the 1990s, manufacturers began replacing it with chemicals such as BPS, BPF and BPAF. But are these substitutes actually safer?
A 2020 review of BPA alternatives published in Critical Reviews in Toxicology found that reproductive-toxicity data were absent for many of these chemicals, while available evidence raised concerns about reproductive toxicity and endocrine-disrupting activity for several compounds.
A 2024 study published in Reproductive Toxicology evaluated 199 chemicals, including BPA alternatives, phthalates, pesticides, PFAS and other compounds, using a new method for assessing reproductive toxicity. Researchers found that 57 chemicals strongly negatively affected the reproductive system and that BPA substitutes appear to be more toxic than BPA, while combinations of BPA and BPA-type chemicals produced worse reproductive outcomes.
The findings are particularly concerning because many of these chemicals are found in common products people are exposed to every day, including plastic water bottles, cleaning products and other household and commercial products. The researchers also noted that tens of thousands of chemicals currently in use have not been adequately evaluated for their potential effects on human health.
A second 2024 study published in Reproductive Toxicology screened 133 environmental chemicals for reproductive toxicity and identified 13 as reproductive toxicants. The researchers identified steroid-hormone activity among the pathways affected and called for expanded testing of chemicals that have not been adequately evaluated for reproductive effects.
How many chemicals are we exposed to every day that have never been adequately tested for their effects on fertility, pregnancy and the next generation?
Why is our government protecting chemical companies over us?
The COVID-19 pandemic brought another set of reproductive-health concerns into focus. The CDC documented a 4% decline in the U.S. fertility rate from 2019 to 2020 and noted that some birth and pregnancy outcomes may have been related to the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19. Yet as the pandemic continued, the public conversation largely focused on social and economic disruption rather than examining the full range of potential reproductive-health exposures.
Vaccines
The questions, of course, don’t stop with environmental chemicals. For women who are pregnant or hoping to become pregnant, we should be able to ask a basic question about any medical intervention recommended during pregnancy: What do we know about its effects on fertility, pregnancy and the developing baby?
That includes the injections routinely recommended during pregnancy, including flu, Tdap, RSV and COVID-19 vaccines.
A 2026 study published in JAMA Network Open examined more than 13,600 pregnancies following RSV vaccination and identified elevated risks of pregnancy-associated hypertensive disorders and some premature rupture-of-membrane outcomes. The researchers said these potential risks could not be ruled out and called for further epidemiological studies.
That is exactly why ongoing, independent safety monitoring matters -- particularly when new vaccines are introduced for use during pregnancy.
During the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, pregnancy and reproductive-health data were still emerging. We know now that in January 2021, Anthony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky and Vivek Murthy discussed questions about COVID-19 injections during early pregnancy in text messages that were recently released. In the exchange, Fauci said that fever and an immune response following a second mRNA dose could be associated with miscarriage in the first trimester. Dr. John Mascola, then-director of the Vaccine Research Center at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), separately told Fauci that “initial studies” deliberately avoided vaccination in the first trimester because of possible fever and higher rates of miscarriage. The Senate release notes that it remains unclear which studies Mascola was referring to.
That exchange does not prove that COVID-19 injections cause miscarriage. But it does show that federal health officials were discussing potential early-pregnancy risks while women were being told that the injections were safe. Where is the accountability?
A 2026 study published in Vaccine compared more than 8,000 COVID-vaccinated pregnant women with matched unvaccinated women and found a 24% higher relative risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy among those who received a COVID injection during pregnancy or shortly before pregnancy.
A 2023 peer-reviewed study published in Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons and led by maternal/fetal medicine Dr. James Thorp analyzed pregnancy and menstrual adverse-event reports in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and reported higher reporting rates for several outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination compared with influenza vaccination. VAERS reports cannot establish that a vaccine caused an adverse event, but they can identify signals for further investigation.
Other research has examined ovarian function. A 2025 study in female rats published in Vaccines reported reductions in ovarian follicles following COVID-19 vaccination, with greater effects in the mRNA-vaccine group. The researchers concluded that the findings warranted further investigation into potential effects on human ovarian reserve.
Researchers have also looked at the placenta. A 2024 study published in American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology reported detection of COVID-19 vaccine mRNA in placental, maternal and cord blood samples following vaccination.
Individually, none of these studies proves that COVID-19 injections caused the U.S. fertility decline or pregnancy loss. Together, however, they provide more than enough evidence to justify serious scrutiny -- not dismissal. Women deserve complete reproductive-health data, transparent safety monitoring and the freedom to make informed decisions based on the actual evidence.
Then there are the Pfizer Papers.
Naomi Wolf, CEO of DailyClout, helped lead the WarRoom/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Research Team, which analyzed hundreds of thousands of pages of Pfizer documents released under court order. Her team’s findings were published in The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity. The project involved analysis of Pfizer’s internal clinical-trial and post-marketing documents.
Among the issues examined were pregnancy loss, menstrual changes, reproductive disorders, pregnancy and lactation. The research team also examined an eight-page internal “Pregnancy and Lactation Report” containing reports involving pregnancy and infant outcomes.
While the team’s findings have been disputed by legacy media outlets and public health authorities, the Pfizer documents are publicly available, allowing researchers, physicians and the public to examine the source material for themselves.
What did those findings show? We’ll examine them more closely in a future article.
When it comes to reproductive health, women deserve access to the evidence—even when the evidence is uncomfortable. That is what informed consent requires.
The Questions Women Have the Right to Ask
We are not claiming that one chemical, one vaccine or one exposure explains America’s fertility decline.
If fertility is falling, our government regulators and public health officials should be investigating every plausible contributor.
If chemicals may affect fertility, pregnancy or fetal development, why aren’t regulators applying the strongest possible precaution?
And if important safety questions remain unanswered, why shouldn’t families be told the truth?
Women have the right to ask questions.
Our Right to Reproduce -- What We Can Do
Here are three ways you can get involved:
- Download MAA’s Stop the Reproductive Crisis fact sheet to learn more about pesticide exposure and reproductive health.
- If you’re thinking about starting a family, explore MAA’s Future Moms resources for practical ways to reduce exposure before and during pregnancy.
- Get involved politically. Join the Moms Across America Movement (YES MAAM!) and help put the health of women and children in front of policymakers. Sign MAA’s petition calling on President Trump to end pre-harvest use of glyphosate.
Then share this information. Send this article to the women in your life, your friends, your family and your elected representatives.
This is why Moms Across America exists. Your support helps us investigate emerging threats, bring evidence to light and give mothers the information and tools they need to take action.
Become a monthly supporter and join us in this fight.
Every woman in America deserves the freedom to make informed decisions about her reproductive health and the right to reproduce.
Sources:
U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Fertility Continues to Drop but Still High in Some Counties, June 2026.
Population Trends. Replacement level fertility and future population growth. 1994 Winter; Craig J. (78):20–22. PMID: 7834459.
World Health Organization, Infertility
Human Reproduction Update, Declining global fertility rates and the implications for family planning and family building: an IFFS consensus document based on a narrative review of the literature, January 10, 2024, Bart C. J. M. Fauser, G. David Adamson, Jacky Boivin, Georgina M. Chambers, Christian de Geyter, Silke Dyer, Marcia C. Inhorn, Lone Schmidt, Gamal I. Serour, Basil Tarlatzis, Fernando Zegers-Hochschild.
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, Glyphosate presence in human sperm: First report and positive correlation with oxidative stress in an infertile French population, June 15, 2024, Claudine Vasseur, Loïse Serra, Souleiman El Balkhi, Gaëlle Lefort, Christelle Ramé, Pascal Froment, Joëlle Dupont.
Environmental Health, Glyphosate exposure in early pregnancy and reduced fetal growth: a prospective observational study of high-risk pregnancies, October 11, 2022, Roy R. Gerona, Jill L. Reiter, Igor Zakharevich, Cathy Proctor, Jun Ying, Robin Mesnage, Michael Antoniou, and Paul D. Winchester.
Environmental Research, Reproductive risk of Neonicotinoids: A review of male rodent studies, Volume 286, Part 3, 2025, Sumaiya S. Irfan, Veronica G. Sanchez, Michael S. Bloom, Helen B. Chin, Virginia Espina, Jenna R. Krall, Anna Z. Pollack, Lance A. Liotta, Melissa J. Perry.
The Journal of Nutrition, Associations of Pesticide Residue Exposure from Fruit and Vegetable Intake with Ovarian Reserve, March 2025, Maryam Kazemi, Yu-Han Chiu, Makiko Mitsunami, Lidia Mínguez-Alarcón, Russ Hauser, Irene Souter, Jorge Chavarro; EARTH Study Team.
Reproductive Sciences, Re-Evaluating the Use of Glyphosate-based Herbicides: Implications on Fertility, March 12, 2025, Alexandra M. Stone, Olivia G. Camp, Mia M. Biernat, David Bai, Awoniyi O. Awonuga, Husam M. Abu-Soud.
Critical Reviews in Toxicology, Substitution of bisphenol A: a review of the carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, and endocrine disruption potential of alternative substances, February 7, 2020, Shalenie P. den Braver-Sewradj, Rob van Spronsen, Ellen V. S. Hessel.
Reproductive Toxicology, Screening and characterization of 133 physiologically-relevant environmental chemicals for reproductive toxicity, June 2024, Gurugowtham Ulaganathan, Hui Jiang, Noah Canio, Ashwini Oke, Sujit Silas Armstrong, Dimitri Abrahamsson, Julia R. Varshavsky, Juleen Lam, Courtney Cooper, Joshua F. Robinson, Jennifer C. Fung, Tracey J. Woodruff, Patrick Allard.
Reproductive Toxicology, Rapid identification of reproductive toxicants among environmental chemicals using an in vivo evaluation of gametogenesis in budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, June 19, 2024, Ravinder Kumar, Ashwini Oke, Beth Rockmill, Matthew de Cruz, Rafael Verduzco, Anura Shodhan, Xavier Woodruff-Madeira, Dimitri P. Abrahamsson, Julia Varshavsky, Juleen Lam, Joshua F. Robinson, Patrick Allard, Tracey J. Woodruff, Jennifer C. Fung.
JAMA Network Open, Sequential Safety Surveillance of RSVpreF Vaccination During Pregnancy Early in the Postapproval Period, 2026, Ashley I. Michnick, PharmD, PhD; Sarah C. MacDonald, ScD; Sruthi Adimadhyam, PhD
Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function, Spring 2023, James A. Thorp, Claire Rogers, Michael P. Deskevich, Stewart Tankersley, Albert Benavides, Megan D. Redshaw, Peter A. McCullough.
Vaccines, Impact of mRNA and Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines on Ovarian Reserve, March 24, 2025, Enes Karaman, Adem Yavuz, Erol Karakas, Esra Balcioglu, Busra Karaca, Hande Nur Doganay, Koray Gorkem Sacinti, Orhan Yildiz.
American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Transplacental transmission of the COVID-19 vaccine messenger RNA: evidence from placental, maternal, and cord blood analyses postvaccination, June 2024, Xinhua Lin, Bishoy Botros, Monica Hanna, Ellen Gurzenda, Claudia Manzano De Mejia, Martin Chavez, Nazeeh Hanna.
Vaccine, COVID-19 vaccination during or just prior to pregnancy and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, February 2, 2026, Andrea J. Sharma, Ashley N. Smoots, Sabrina A. Madni, Lauren Head Zauche, Ansley Waters, Aliza Machefsky, David K. Shay, Cameron Hinrichsen, Jenna Chambless, Kendra Norris, Sarah A. Thompson, Tara Johnson, Sascha Ellington, Christine K. Olson.
U.S. Senate, Office of Senator Ron Johnson, Senators Johnson, Paul Release Additional Texts from Dr. Fauci’s Government iPhone, August 16, 2026.
War Room Books/Skyhorse Publishing, The Pfizer Papers: Pfizer’s Crimes Against Humanity, 2024, The WarRoom/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Analysts, edited by Naomi Wolf and Amy Kelly, foreword by Stephen K. Bannon.