Boitrelle, FlorenceShah, RupinHenkel, Ralf2022-09-202022-09-202022Boitrelle, F. et al. (2022). Reply to Pallotti et al. Comment on “Boitrelle et al. The sixth edition of the who manual for human semen analysis: A critical review and swot analysis. Life 2021, 11, 1368. Life, 12(7), 1046. 10.3390/life120710462075-172910.3390/life12071046http://hdl.handle.net/10566/7931We would like to thank F. Pallotti and his colleagues for their positive comments [1] on our SWOT analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities of the sixth edition of the WHO manual on semen analysis [2]. They have raised two concerns: the re-introduction of the category of rapidly moving sperm, and the dropping of the reference range. With regard to the re-introduction of the distinction between rapidly progressive (type a) motility and sluggish progressive (type b) motility, Pallotti et al. raised the point that this distinction is difficult to make visually and will, therefore, lead to “approximation” and subjective reporting with “reduced standardization”. This is a valid concern and was the reason why the editors of the fifth edition of the WHO manual removed this distinction (which was present in the fourth edition) and created the combined category of “progressive motility”.enHuman semenWorld Health Organization (WHO)BiologyBioscienceFertilityArticle