Ivf Vs. Natural Conception

[CatherineM]

Just saw this article on the [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8057210.stm"]BBC Website[/url]. It says that twins conceived by IVF have many more health problems in the first 3 years than babies conceived naturally. They have higher risk of low birth weight and premature delivery, and are far more likely to need to be in the neonatal intensive care and to be hospitalized during their first three years of life.

I guess that says something for doing it God's way.

[mcts]

hmm. maybe people shouldn't meddle in the workings of the almighty.


just a thought.

[Archaeology cat]

I see they're recommending only implanting 1 embryo, but don't embryos implanted for IVF have a greater chance of dividing and creating twins? I think I've read that. So wouldn't the same risks be present?

[MithLuin]

Well, ummm....usually IVF has a high risk of not 'taking' - and each procedure is very expensive. So, they try to implant 2-3 embryos regularly, in the hopes that one of them will implant properly. But sometimes all of them survive, and then you get multiple births. That's why twins are more common for IVF births.

I do not know anything about the tendency to divide into identical twins, and how that would compare, but it has to happen prior to implantation, surely.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='MithLuin' post='1872466' date='May 21 2009, 02:17 AM']Well, ummm....usually IVF has a high risk of not 'taking' - and each procedure is very expensive. So, they try to implant 2-3 embryos regularly, in the hopes that one of them will implant properly. But sometimes all of them survive, and then you get multiple births. That's why twins are more common for IVF births.

I do not know anything about the tendency to divide into identical twins, and how that would compare, but it has to happen prior to implantation, surely.[/quote]
From what I've read, the process of IVF causes more stress on the embryo and so it is more likely to divide. I think division does typically happen prior to implantation.

I find myself torn with regard to IVF. I was reading [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html"]Donum Vitae[/url] earlier this week because of a discussion a friend and I were having on IVF, and it is interesting how clearly this document makes the connection between the abortion mentality and IVF. Even in the reading I've done on IVF you can see it pretty clearly. People talk about "weeding out" unwanted embryos (for reasons of birth defect, unwanted twins, etc.) as if it is no big thing. It's chilling.

But at the same time, as a person with a recently acquired fertility challenge, I find it difficult to accept from an emotional standpoint that IVF is off the table if things don't go as we hope. I understand and support the Church's teaching on it, but it does have emotional repercussions that I would not have appreciated as fully a year ago.

[MithLuin]

Yes, the Church's teachings are not easy. I'm sorry you might be in a position where you have to uphold this one.

It goes beyond loss of respect for life, though - it's about control. Abortion says that if you don't want to have [i]this[/i] baby right [i]now[/i], you can get rid of it and wait for a better time. When you're older, when finances are better, etc. Only have the baby if you [i]want[/i] it. The pro choice rhetoric is about having control of your body and your life.

IVF is the flip side of that. If things aren't going as planned, surely you can have a baby [i]now[/i] if you want one, right? I mean, everyone has the right to be a parent, and...we're in control. We can [i]make[/i] it happen. Again, you can have a baby if you [i]want[/i] one.

I don't want to get into that too much, because I know it is a very emotional thing to want to begin a family and have it not...happen. I certainly hope that things work out for you, and I hope you don't have to struggle with infertility for long - maybe it will be a temporary hurdle for you.

But as someone who is not married, from the outside, I see there being some danger of wanting to [u]control[/u] this aspect of our lives. This is yet another case, though, where we can submit to the will of God in all humility - and that is one of the hardest things to do!

Edited May 21, 2009 by MithLuin

[CatherineM]

The other thing that stood out in this report is that 25% of frozen embryos survive. I had thought I'd read before that number was 50%. That 75% of embryos are killed by the freezing process should be headlines somewhere.

[StColette]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1872688' date='May 21 2009, 12:39 PM']The other thing that stood out in this report is that 25% of frozen embryos survive. I had thought I'd read before that number was 50%. That 75% of embryos are killed by the freezing process should be headlines somewhere.[/quote]

Oh my! I didn't think it was that low of a survival rate.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1872688' date='May 21 2009, 05:39 PM']The other thing that stood out in this report is that 25% of frozen embryos survive. I had thought I'd read before that number was 50%. That 75% of embryos are killed by the freezing process should be headlines somewhere.[/quote]
Were they saying that only 25% survive the actual freezing process, or that, of those using IVF now, 25% are from frozen embryos while the other 75% are from non-frozen embryos? I had thought they meant the latter, but perhaps I misread it.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1872730' date='May 21 2009, 01:32 PM']Were they saying that only 25% survive the actual freezing process, or that, of those using IVF now, 25% are from frozen embryos while the other 75% are from non-frozen embryos? I had thought they meant the latter, but perhaps I misread it.[/quote]

I think you are right. I must have misread it. Thanks, I guess that makes me feel a smidgen better.

I have noticed that most of these research projects are only reported in the BBC, and that the research itself is being done in the UK, Europe or Australia. I wonder if researchers in the US can't get funding for this kind of research, of if it just isn't released outside the medical press.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1872762' date='May 21 2009, 08:49 PM']I think you are right. I must have misread it. Thanks, I guess that makes me feel a smidgen better.[/quote] I know what you mean. Although I do wonder what the actual percentage is for those that don't even survive freezing. Or that don't survive thawing for later. I think you said something about 50%? Sad, really.

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1872762' date='May 21 2009, 08:49 PM']I have noticed that most of these research projects are only reported in the BBC, and that the research itself is being done in the UK, Europe or Australia. I wonder if researchers in the US can't get funding for this kind of research, of if it just isn't released outside the medical press.[/quote]
Good question. I really don't know.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1872647' date='May 21 2009, 08:43 AM']From what I've read, the process of IVF causes more stress on the embryo and so it is more likely to divide. I think division does typically happen prior to implantation.

I find myself torn with regard to IVF. I was reading [url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html"]Donum Vitae[/url] earlier this week because of a discussion a friend and I were having on IVF, and it is interesting how clearly this document makes the connection between the abortion mentality and IVF. Even in the reading I've done on IVF you can see it pretty clearly. People talk about "weeding out" unwanted embryos (for reasons of birth defect, unwanted twins, etc.) as if it is no big thing. It's chilling.

But at the same time, as a person with a recently acquired fertility challenge, I find it difficult to accept from an emotional standpoint that IVF is off the table if things don't go as we hope. I understand and support the Church's teaching on it, but it does have emotional repercussions that I would not have appreciated as fully a year ago.[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
have you read the follow up document, Dignitas Personae?

[prose]

On a related note, I was reading that the Creighton Method was three times more successful in aiding couples to get pregnant than IVF.

Interesting.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
and another resource is the [url="http://www.ncbcenter.org/"]The National Catholic Bioethics Center[/url]

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='prose' post='1872797' date='May 21 2009, 09:54 PM']On a related note, I was reading that the Creighton Method was three times more successful in aiding couples to get pregnant than IVF.

Interesting.[/quote]
I'd heard it was more successful, but didn't know the numbers or anything. Very interesting.