Field Report: Two Alien Observers Attempt to Understand Human Reproduction

They started with moms.gov. It did not go well.

The following is a field report filed by two observers from the Galactic Census Bureau, assigned to document human reproductive biology for the 2026 intergalactic population survey. Their methodology was rigorous. They consulted only official government sources. This is what they found.

Day One: The Official Resource

The observers began where any responsible researcher begins: with the government. The United States of America maintains a website called moms.gov, operated by its Department of Health and Human Services and launched, with considerable ceremony, on the holiday this species has designated for honoring its maternal units.

The observers spent several hours with this resource. They took detailed notes.

According to moms.gov, human reproduction requires the following: a female who tracks her basal body temperature each morning before speaking or moving; a female who monitors changes in her cervical secretions across a 28-to-35-day cycle; a female who charts this data across eight to twelve months to establish her personal fertile window; a female who takes 400 micrograms of folic acid daily; a female who avoids alcohol, maintains a healthy weight, and manages stress.

The observers reviewed these instructions carefully. They cross-referenced them with their training in basic xenobiology.

Something appeared to be missing.

They searched the resource for any mention of the male of the species. They found references to the male in the context of emotional support during pregnancy. They did not find the male in the context of conception. The word sperm does not appear on moms.gov’s fertility guidance pages. The word semen does not appear. The phrase male factor does not appear.

Observer One filed the following preliminary note: “Human reproduction may be parthenogenic. Recommend further investigation before filing census report.”

Day Two: The Fertilization President

The observers were thorough. They did not stop at one source.

Further research revealed that the leader of this nation had, in February 2025, signed an executive order to expand access to a procedure called in vitro fertilization, or IVF. He had referred to himself, in public, as the “fertilization president.” The observers noted this title with interest. They hoped it would clarify the male’s role.

In October 2025, the fertilization president announced a landmark agreement with a pharmaceutical company called EMD Serono. The agreement would reduce the cost of three injectable medications — Gonal-F, Ovidrel, and Cetrotide — by 84% through a government platform called TrumpRx.gov. The president stood in his Oval Office. Officials stood beside him. The announcement was covered extensively.

The observers examined all three medications. Gonal-F stimulates the female’s ovaries to produce multiple eggs. Ovidrel triggers the final maturation of those eggs. Cetrotide prevents premature ovulation.

All three act exclusively on the female reproductive system.

The observers searched the TrumpRx platform for any medication addressing male reproductive function. They found none. They searched the executive order for any mention of sperm. They found none. They searched the associated press releases, the White House fact sheet, and the Labor Department guidance on employer fertility benefits.

Observer Two updated the preliminary note: “Fertilization president appears to be fertilization-adjacent. The male’s biological contribution remains unlocated in official documentation.”

Day Three: The $300 Question

On the third day, one of the observers made a discovery.

Buried in the National Library of Medicine’s database — not on moms.gov, not on TrumpRx.gov, not in the executive order, not in any document carrying a .gov domain that addressed fertility directly — was a description of a diagnostic test called a semen analysis.

The observers read it carefully.

A semen analysis evaluates the male’s reproductive contribution: sperm count, with a normal threshold of at least 15 million per milliliter; motility, with at least 40% of sperm required to move effectively; and morphology, with at least 4% required to be normally shaped. The test is non-invasive. It is conducted in a clinical laboratory. Results are typically returned within 24 to 48 hours. The cost, in the United States, is approximately $200 to $300.

The observers then consulted the peer-reviewed literature. They found that male factor is solely responsible for infertility in approximately 20% of couples and contributes to the problem in an additional 30% to 40%.(1,2) In total, male factor substantially contributes to approximately 50% of all cases in which human couples cannot conceive.(3)

Observer One sat quietly for a moment.

“So,” Observer One said, “for roughly half the couples who cannot reproduce, the answer may be findable with a $300 test that takes one appointment and requires no injections, no surgical procedures, and no ovarian stimulation.”

“That appears to be correct,” said Observer Two.

“And the government’s response was to discount the ovarian stimulation drugs.”

“Yes.”

“The drugs that cost $5,000 per cycle. That represent approximately 20% of the total cost of a treatment that runs $15,000 to $20,000.”

“Correct.”

Observer One made a note. Then crossed it out. Then made it again.

The Filed Report

The observers submitted the following findings to the Galactic Census Bureau:

Human reproduction is a two-gamete process requiring both a female egg and a male sperm cell. This is not in dispute in the scientific literature. It appears, however, to be in dispute in American fertility policy.

The official government resource for preconception guidance addresses the female reproductive cycle in considerable detail. It does not address the male reproductive contribution. It promotes fertility awareness-based methods as a primary strategy for couples who cannot conceive. A fertility awareness method tracks the woman’s ovulation. It does not evaluate sperm.

The national government has invested political capital in reducing the cost of medications that stimulate female ovarian function for IVF. IVF is an appropriate treatment for many causes of infertility. It is not the appropriate first step for a couple in which the male has a low sperm count, poor motility, or a varicocele — a surgically correctable condition present in up to 40% of men evaluated for male factor infertility, for which repair is often effective.(2) For these couples, IVF without a prior semen analysis is not a fertility treatment. It is an expensive procedure addressing the wrong partner.

We recommend that the species consider the following, in order: one semen analysis, before anything else. Its cost is $300. Its information content, for approximately half of infertile couples, is decisive.

We are returning to our home planet. We found the biology clear. The policy, less so.

The cervical mucus charts were especially confusing.

My Take

The satire is exact. Every number in this piece is real. Male factor contributes to 50% of infertility cases.(1,2,3) A semen analysis costs $200 to $300. The Trump administration’s fertility initiative discounts drugs that act exclusively on the female reproductive system. moms.gov does not mention sperm. None of this is a caricature. It is the policy, described accurately, through a frame that makes its absurdity visible.

I am not dismissing the IVF cost initiative. Reducing the cost of fertility medications is a real benefit for real patients. For couples who need IVF — and many do — an 84% discount on stimulation drugs is meaningful. I do not minimize that.

What I am saying is that fertility policy which begins with the woman and ends with the woman, without pausing to evaluate the man, will send roughly half its intended beneficiaries in the wrong direction. Some of them will undergo months of ovarian stimulation, egg retrieval, and embryo transfer before anyone thinks to order a semen analysis. Some of them will spend $20,000 on a cycle before anyone asks whether the problem was a varicocele that a urologist could have repaired for a fraction of that cost.

The semen analysis is the single most important test in the infertility workup. It is cheap, non-invasive, fast, and informative. Its absence from every government fertility resource launched in the past 12 months is not an oversight. It reflects a persistent cultural assumption — one this country’s fertility policy has apparently not examined — that infertility is a female problem.

It is not. It is a couple problem. Half the time, it is a male problem. The $300 test that establishes which half you are in should be the first thing any couple struggling to conceive is told to do. It should be on moms.gov. It should be in the executive order. It should be the first slide in any government presentation about helping Americans have babies.

The aliens were confused. They had good reason to be.

Bottom Line

A fertility policy that ignores male factor is not a fertility policy. It is a preconception program for women. Those are not the same thing, and couples who need to know the difference are currently being failed by every official resource their government has built.

If you want the complete picture of infertility — what causes it, how to evaluate it, and what the evidence says about when to seek help — ObGyn Intelligence covers it without the ideological filter. Subscribe below.

— Amos Grünebaum, MD / ObGyn Intelligence | obmd.com

References

1. Agarwal A, Mulgund A, Hamada A, Chyatte MR. A unique view on male infertility around the globe. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:37. doi: 10.1186/s12958-015-0032-1. PMID: 25928197.

2. Leslie SW, Siref LE, Khan MAB. Male Infertility. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024. PMID: 32965929.

3. Krausz C, Escamilla-Sanchez A. Male infertility. Lancet. 2021;397(10271):319-332. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32667-2. PMID: [VERIFY].

4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Evaluating Infertility [FAQ]. Washington (DC): ACOG; 2022. Available from: https://www.acog.org/womens-health/faqs/evaluating-infertility.