A fertility test that doubles the chances of pregnancy offers new hope to childless couples.
The test helps identify the healthiest embryos for use in IVF treatment and could cut the risk of twins or triplets.
A trial involving couples
British experts are hoping to get permission from the fertility regulator here to offer it to women within the next few months.
Unlike most existing checks for a small number of abnormalities in embryos, the new CGH ( comparative genomic hybridisation) test examines the full complement of normal chromosomes.
The test is also more accurate because it can safely remove a greater number of cells from embryos for DNA testing before the healthiest ones are chosen. Findings from a trial at the Colorado Centre for Reproductive Medicine, near Denver, used results from women with hard-totreat infertility, where previous IVF attempts failed or ended in miscarriage.
They showed the chances of an embryo implanting in the womb were 62 per cent - more than double the 27 per cent rate expected.
Out of 23 women aged between 30 and 42 taking part in the trial, 18 conceived and their pregnancies passed the 12-week stage.
The predicted live birth rate is 78 per cent, which compares with an anticipated 62 per cent in this group.
Two have given birth and four more are expected to deliver their babies by the end of the year, according to data presented yesterday at the American Society of Reproductive Medicine in San Francisco.
Dagan Wells, of the Reprogenetics UK Clinic and the University of Oxford, whose team analyses DNA extracted from embryos at the Colorado clinic, said the findings were 'dramatic'.
He is hoping to offer the technique to couples for around £2,000, in addition to the cost of IVF treatment.
He predicted its use would reduce the occasions when multiple embryos have to be implanted.
'The pregnancy rates we've got so far are absolutely phenomenal. We're ready to begin a trial in the UK,' he said.
SOURCE: dailymail.co.uk
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Friday, December 12, 2008
Indian woman gives birth aged 70: report
An Indian woman has given birth to her first child at the age of 70 after receiving IVF treatment, newspapers reported her doctor as saying.
Rajo Devi, who married 50 years ago, gave birth to a baby girl on November 28 after in vitro fertilisation, said Anurag Bishnoi, a doctor at the Hisar fertility centre in Haryana state.
"Rajo Devi and [her husband] Bala Ram approached the centre for treatment and the embryo transfer was done on April 19," he told the Hindustan Times.
"Both the mother and child are in good health."
Dr Bishnoi claimed Ms Devi was the world's oldest mother.
Another 70-year-old Indian was reported to have given birth to twins via IVF in July this year, while a 66-year-old Spanish woman had twins in 2006.
Ms Devi's husband, aged 72, had also wed his wife's sister after 10 years of his first marriage did not result in children. His second wife also failed to become pregnant.
It was not clear whose egg and sperm were used in the successful treatment.
"IVF has revolutionised the way we look at infertility," said Dr Bishnoi.
"Infertility is no longer a social taboo or a divine curse. It can be treated scientifically."
Rajo Devi, who married 50 years ago, gave birth to a baby girl on November 28 after in vitro fertilisation, said Anurag Bishnoi, a doctor at the Hisar fertility centre in Haryana state.
"Rajo Devi and [her husband] Bala Ram approached the centre for treatment and the embryo transfer was done on April 19," he told the Hindustan Times.
"Both the mother and child are in good health."
Dr Bishnoi claimed Ms Devi was the world's oldest mother.
Another 70-year-old Indian was reported to have given birth to twins via IVF in July this year, while a 66-year-old Spanish woman had twins in 2006.
Ms Devi's husband, aged 72, had also wed his wife's sister after 10 years of his first marriage did not result in children. His second wife also failed to become pregnant.
It was not clear whose egg and sperm were used in the successful treatment.
"IVF has revolutionised the way we look at infertility," said Dr Bishnoi.
"Infertility is no longer a social taboo or a divine curse. It can be treated scientifically."
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
'IVF without hormones' hailed
Younger women undergoing fertility treatment may stand a better chance of getting pregnant with a new procedure that does not stimulate the ovaries with powerful hormone-containing drugs, doctors said yesterday.
Findings from the first fertility centre in Britain to use in-vitro maturation (IVM) as an alternative to IVF reveal that pregnancy rates are comparable between the two techniques but only for women under 35. In IVF, women are given hormones for about two or three weeks to stimulate their ovaries to produce mature eggs before they are surgically removed for in vitro fertilisation. In IVM, however, immature eggs are removed from the ovaries without the use of drugs and matured in the laboratory before being fertilised with sperm.
The new technique, which has only recently been introduced to Britain, is considered to be safer than conventional IVF because it does not increase the risk of potentially lethal hyperstimulation syndrome, where the ovaries respond adversely to the hormones used during IVF treatment.
Tim Child, of the Oxford Fertility Centre, said that 70 women in Britain had undergone IVM in the past year and for the 40 patients who were under 35 the pregnancy rate was 48 per cent – compared to a pregnancy rate of about 55 per cent for women undergoing conventional IVF.
The percentage of under 35-year-olds achieving a clinical pregnancy – where the heartbeat of the baby has been detected – was 33 per cent. Just 10 babies of mothers undergoing IVM and attending the Oxford centre have so far been born, so it is still too early to estimate an accurate live-birth rate, which is 31 per cent for IVF.
"What we've found looking back on the first year of using IVM is that it works particularly well for a group of women at the younger end of the scale that we have treated," said Dr Child.
"It's an improvement in that we've worked out which patients do best with IVM, so it's about offering it to the right couples," he said.
About 900 babies have been born worldwide by the IVM technique. The first IVM babies in Britain were born last year after the Oxford Fertility Centre was given a licence to use the procedure by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
The HFEA's experts found that there was no evidence to suggest that IVM was dangerous either to women or to their babies – although further safety studies are still in progress.
Dr Child said that when IVM was first used, pregnancy rates and live-birth rates were relatively low compared to conventional IVF but better laboratory procedures, as well as patient selection, had improved the success rate significantly. "I'm not sure we will ever get better than IVF but the aim is to achieve the same success rate. The advantages of IVM are so great – it is safer and easier. Women who have had both say that they prefer IVM because they do not need several weeks of drug treatment," Dr Child said.
Svend Lindenberg, of the Copenhagen Fertility Centre, who pioneered IVM, said it was best suited to younger women who have regular periods.
SOURCE: independent.co.uk
Findings from the first fertility centre in Britain to use in-vitro maturation (IVM) as an alternative to IVF reveal that pregnancy rates are comparable between the two techniques but only for women under 35. In IVF, women are given hormones for about two or three weeks to stimulate their ovaries to produce mature eggs before they are surgically removed for in vitro fertilisation. In IVM, however, immature eggs are removed from the ovaries without the use of drugs and matured in the laboratory before being fertilised with sperm.
The new technique, which has only recently been introduced to Britain, is considered to be safer than conventional IVF because it does not increase the risk of potentially lethal hyperstimulation syndrome, where the ovaries respond adversely to the hormones used during IVF treatment.
Tim Child, of the Oxford Fertility Centre, said that 70 women in Britain had undergone IVM in the past year and for the 40 patients who were under 35 the pregnancy rate was 48 per cent – compared to a pregnancy rate of about 55 per cent for women undergoing conventional IVF.
The percentage of under 35-year-olds achieving a clinical pregnancy – where the heartbeat of the baby has been detected – was 33 per cent. Just 10 babies of mothers undergoing IVM and attending the Oxford centre have so far been born, so it is still too early to estimate an accurate live-birth rate, which is 31 per cent for IVF.
"What we've found looking back on the first year of using IVM is that it works particularly well for a group of women at the younger end of the scale that we have treated," said Dr Child.
"It's an improvement in that we've worked out which patients do best with IVM, so it's about offering it to the right couples," he said.
About 900 babies have been born worldwide by the IVM technique. The first IVM babies in Britain were born last year after the Oxford Fertility Centre was given a licence to use the procedure by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
The HFEA's experts found that there was no evidence to suggest that IVM was dangerous either to women or to their babies – although further safety studies are still in progress.
Dr Child said that when IVM was first used, pregnancy rates and live-birth rates were relatively low compared to conventional IVF but better laboratory procedures, as well as patient selection, had improved the success rate significantly. "I'm not sure we will ever get better than IVF but the aim is to achieve the same success rate. The advantages of IVM are so great – it is safer and easier. Women who have had both say that they prefer IVM because they do not need several weeks of drug treatment," Dr Child said.
Svend Lindenberg, of the Copenhagen Fertility Centre, who pioneered IVM, said it was best suited to younger women who have regular periods.
SOURCE: independent.co.uk
Monday, November 3, 2008
Breakthrough Technology Takes Egg Freezing from Myth to Dependable Reality
The day of true reproductive freedom for women has arrived. A new scientific study confirms the efficacy of a revolutionary egg selection and freezing process that, at long last, offers women a viable and reliable fertility preservation option.
Developed and clinically tested by the scientists at ReproCure, a vanguard genetics products company, this process increases the live births derived from a cryopreserved egg almost seven-fold over the field's current standard. In simple terms, it means that for the first time, women in their prime childbearing years can freeze and bank their own eggs for future use, relatively confident that they will have a 26%-to-27% chance of a having a baby from each cryopreserved, genetically selected oocyte.
Significantly,these odds are better than those with conventional IVF at its best. The patent pending process called Egg Competency Testing (ECT), when coupled with ultra-rapid egg freezing technology known as vitrification (a protocol that minimizes egg damage), actually delivers on reproductive medicine's promise to liberate women from the tyranny of the biological clock. The stunning results of a rigorous multi-year ReproCure-funded study are published in the current issue of the prestigious journal Reproductive BioMedicine Online.
"Everything we've heard before about egg freezing needs to be put away," said Dr. Geoffrey Sher, Executive Medical Director of ReproCure and the Sher Institutes for Reproductive Medicine (SIRM(R)). Dr. Sher is a world-renowned trailblazer in the field of reproductive medicine for more than 25 years.
"I would heartily agree with medical governing agencies that in the past have strongly advised against the use of egg freezing and banking. Up until now, existing technology only offered a 1%-to-4% baby rate per frozen egg.... a false promise of success," noted Dr. Sher. "But ECT and vitrification, dual processes that allow us to select only chromosomally normal eggs for safe cryobanking are paradigm shifters.
They give women arealistic fertility preservation alternative they can count on." Normal Egg, Healthy Baby In essence, ECT, focuses on a relatively new DNA test called Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) to determine which eggs are chromosomally normal (euploid). It's well established that, barring othercompromising medical factors or male infertility, it is euploid eggs that are most likely to yield chromosomally sound embryos, which in turn are the ones most likely to develop into healthy babies. Indeed, ReproCure/SIRM investigators were able to illustrate that inthe vast majority of cases, the transfer of one or two chromosomally normal(competent) embryos to a receptive uterine environment produced a babyalmost 70% of the time. The ECT process involves handpicking chromosomally normal eggs forpreservation.
Researchers now know that most eggs, even in young healthy women, are chromosomally abnormal (aneuploid). Further complicating things is the fact that the incidence of aneupolidy is random. One month a woman opting for egg freezing may be stimulated to produce 12 eggs and none will be normal. The next month, the same woman might produce six that are normal. The key to a successful outcome is freezing only the euploid eggs.
In contrast to the scattershot approach of freezing every egg harvested - a minimum of 20 at most centers, ReproCure's technique requires that only four or five normal eggs be frozen and banked. The CGH Factor CGH is a delicate and complex test that screens the full complement of chromosomes in each egg. ReproCure/SIRM's dedicated team has an expertise and experience in egg/embryo CGH that is unmatched by any other center inthe world, giving it an unbeatable track record in identifying chromosomally normal eggs. Only these are selected for vitrification(ultra-rapid freezing) and banking.
Once frozen, these eggs are stored until the time the woman chooses to create her family. Until now, family building has been severely constrained by simple biology. If a woman wanted her own biogenetic children, she was under the gun to procreate before her eggs were too old and chromosomally abnormal to generate offspring.
That ratchets up the pressure on everything from education to economics and romance. Women who haven't found the right mate by 35 or who can't afford to leave the workplace, find themselves penalized by nature. For most, a genetically related child is not possible. If they want to experience pregnancy, the only option is egg donation. ECT and vitrification does an end-run around the biological clock. It affords a woman the luxury of time, precisely because she's stored her own eggs while in her reproductive prime. Those oocytes, when properly warmed, fertilized and transferred are as likely to yield offspring in five, 10 or even 20 years as they are today.
ECT liberates a woman to achieve emotional, psychological and financial maturity, secure in the knowledge that she can have children of her own.
About Dr. Geoffrey Sher
Dr. Geoffrey Sher, Executive Medical Director and co-founder of SIRM, is an internationally renowned expert in the field of Assisted ReproductiveTechnology (ART) and has been influential in the births of more than 16,000 babies throughout his career.
Over the last 26 years, Dr. Sher has helped fashion the entire field of ART. After training under "The Father of IVF" Dr. Patrick Steptoe, Dr. Sher established the first private IVF program in the United States in 1982. He later established a number of centers throughout California before foundingthe first SIRM office - in Las Vegas.
For more than two decades, Dr. Geoffrey Sher and his medical team have been on the leading edge of IVF research. Each significant breakthrough has been incorporated into SIRM treatment protocols - lending the benefit of those many years' of IVF experience to every SIRM office. Dr. Sher has more than 200 scientific papers and abstracts to his credit. He has authored one of the most widely read books on IVF, http://www.haveababy.com/why/artbook.aspIn Vitro Fertilization: The A.R.T.of Making Babies
About the Sher Institutes for Reproductive Medicine (SIRM(R))
SIRM is one of the largest networks of infertility medical practices in the country. Founded in 1998 by Drs. Geoffrey Sher and Ghanima Maassarani, the Sher Institute family of practices has since grown to include 13 offices across the United States.
Dr. Sher founded the first private InVitro Fertilization (IVF) clinic in the U.S. in 1982. The SIRM philosophy is centered on individualized patient care, backed by ongoing scientific and technological breakthroughs.
SIRM has offices in Los Angeles, Chino Hills, Sacramento and Pleasanton, CA; New York City,Westchester and Long Island, New York; Bedminster and Phillipsburg, New Jersey; Dallas, Texas; St. Louis, Missouri; Peoria, Illinois; and LasVegas, Nevada.
More information can be found on the SIRM website at http://www.haveababy.com.
About ReproCure, LLC
ReproCure, LLC, headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, is a specialty genetics testing laboratory focused on benefiting: (1) women and couples who require assistance in becoming pregnant and (2) women seeking reproductive alternatives such as freezing their eggs for later use.
ReproCure is led by Medical Director Geoffrey Sher, MD and ScientificDirector Levent Keskintepe, PhD.
Source: prwire.com
Developed and clinically tested by the scientists at ReproCure, a vanguard genetics products company, this process increases the live births derived from a cryopreserved egg almost seven-fold over the field's current standard. In simple terms, it means that for the first time, women in their prime childbearing years can freeze and bank their own eggs for future use, relatively confident that they will have a 26%-to-27% chance of a having a baby from each cryopreserved, genetically selected oocyte.
Significantly,these odds are better than those with conventional IVF at its best. The patent pending process called Egg Competency Testing (ECT), when coupled with ultra-rapid egg freezing technology known as vitrification (a protocol that minimizes egg damage), actually delivers on reproductive medicine's promise to liberate women from the tyranny of the biological clock. The stunning results of a rigorous multi-year ReproCure-funded study are published in the current issue of the prestigious journal Reproductive BioMedicine Online.
"Everything we've heard before about egg freezing needs to be put away," said Dr. Geoffrey Sher, Executive Medical Director of ReproCure and the Sher Institutes for Reproductive Medicine (SIRM(R)). Dr. Sher is a world-renowned trailblazer in the field of reproductive medicine for more than 25 years.
"I would heartily agree with medical governing agencies that in the past have strongly advised against the use of egg freezing and banking. Up until now, existing technology only offered a 1%-to-4% baby rate per frozen egg.... a false promise of success," noted Dr. Sher. "But ECT and vitrification, dual processes that allow us to select only chromosomally normal eggs for safe cryobanking are paradigm shifters.
They give women arealistic fertility preservation alternative they can count on." Normal Egg, Healthy Baby In essence, ECT, focuses on a relatively new DNA test called Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) to determine which eggs are chromosomally normal (euploid). It's well established that, barring othercompromising medical factors or male infertility, it is euploid eggs that are most likely to yield chromosomally sound embryos, which in turn are the ones most likely to develop into healthy babies. Indeed, ReproCure/SIRM investigators were able to illustrate that inthe vast majority of cases, the transfer of one or two chromosomally normal(competent) embryos to a receptive uterine environment produced a babyalmost 70% of the time. The ECT process involves handpicking chromosomally normal eggs forpreservation.
Researchers now know that most eggs, even in young healthy women, are chromosomally abnormal (aneuploid). Further complicating things is the fact that the incidence of aneupolidy is random. One month a woman opting for egg freezing may be stimulated to produce 12 eggs and none will be normal. The next month, the same woman might produce six that are normal. The key to a successful outcome is freezing only the euploid eggs.
In contrast to the scattershot approach of freezing every egg harvested - a minimum of 20 at most centers, ReproCure's technique requires that only four or five normal eggs be frozen and banked. The CGH Factor CGH is a delicate and complex test that screens the full complement of chromosomes in each egg. ReproCure/SIRM's dedicated team has an expertise and experience in egg/embryo CGH that is unmatched by any other center inthe world, giving it an unbeatable track record in identifying chromosomally normal eggs. Only these are selected for vitrification(ultra-rapid freezing) and banking.
Once frozen, these eggs are stored until the time the woman chooses to create her family. Until now, family building has been severely constrained by simple biology. If a woman wanted her own biogenetic children, she was under the gun to procreate before her eggs were too old and chromosomally abnormal to generate offspring.
That ratchets up the pressure on everything from education to economics and romance. Women who haven't found the right mate by 35 or who can't afford to leave the workplace, find themselves penalized by nature. For most, a genetically related child is not possible. If they want to experience pregnancy, the only option is egg donation. ECT and vitrification does an end-run around the biological clock. It affords a woman the luxury of time, precisely because she's stored her own eggs while in her reproductive prime. Those oocytes, when properly warmed, fertilized and transferred are as likely to yield offspring in five, 10 or even 20 years as they are today.
ECT liberates a woman to achieve emotional, psychological and financial maturity, secure in the knowledge that she can have children of her own.
About Dr. Geoffrey Sher
Dr. Geoffrey Sher, Executive Medical Director and co-founder of SIRM, is an internationally renowned expert in the field of Assisted ReproductiveTechnology (ART) and has been influential in the births of more than 16,000 babies throughout his career.
Over the last 26 years, Dr. Sher has helped fashion the entire field of ART. After training under "The Father of IVF" Dr. Patrick Steptoe, Dr. Sher established the first private IVF program in the United States in 1982. He later established a number of centers throughout California before foundingthe first SIRM office - in Las Vegas.
For more than two decades, Dr. Geoffrey Sher and his medical team have been on the leading edge of IVF research. Each significant breakthrough has been incorporated into SIRM treatment protocols - lending the benefit of those many years' of IVF experience to every SIRM office. Dr. Sher has more than 200 scientific papers and abstracts to his credit. He has authored one of the most widely read books on IVF, http://www.haveababy.com/why/artbook.aspIn Vitro Fertilization: The A.R.T.of Making Babies
About the Sher Institutes for Reproductive Medicine (SIRM(R))
SIRM is one of the largest networks of infertility medical practices in the country. Founded in 1998 by Drs. Geoffrey Sher and Ghanima Maassarani, the Sher Institute family of practices has since grown to include 13 offices across the United States.
Dr. Sher founded the first private InVitro Fertilization (IVF) clinic in the U.S. in 1982. The SIRM philosophy is centered on individualized patient care, backed by ongoing scientific and technological breakthroughs.
SIRM has offices in Los Angeles, Chino Hills, Sacramento and Pleasanton, CA; New York City,Westchester and Long Island, New York; Bedminster and Phillipsburg, New Jersey; Dallas, Texas; St. Louis, Missouri; Peoria, Illinois; and LasVegas, Nevada.
More information can be found on the SIRM website at http://www.haveababy.com.
About ReproCure, LLC
ReproCure, LLC, headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, is a specialty genetics testing laboratory focused on benefiting: (1) women and couples who require assistance in becoming pregnant and (2) women seeking reproductive alternatives such as freezing their eggs for later use.
ReproCure is led by Medical Director Geoffrey Sher, MD and ScientificDirector Levent Keskintepe, PhD.
Source: prwire.com
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Indian Clinics Woo Fertility Tourists
Indian clinics woo "fertility" tourists as medical travel booms:
"We are actively recruiting egg donors!" reads the advertisement on the website of one of India's top in-vitro fertilisation clinics.
"Our patients are happy to pay generously for your generosity! They pay you up to rupees 40,000 (800 dollars) every time you donate".
A lack of regulation surrounding fertility services in India and the lucrative returns on offer to those that provide them has turned India into a popular hub of "IVF tourism".
Childless couples from overseas are attracted by the relatively low-cost treatment, as well as "friendly rules" when it comes to egg donors and surrogate motherhood.
According to the private Indian Society for Assisted Reproduction (ISAR), there are some 400 IVF clinics in the country, providing an estimated 30,000 assisted reproductive treatments a year.
There are no precise estimates for what percentage are taken up by foreigners, but doctors say overseas demand is fuelling a boom.
"Nearly half of our patients come from overseas. Of them, nearly half are of Indian origin," said Aniruddha Malpani, whose IVF clinic in Mumbai is considered among the country's best.
A full IVF cycle at the Malpani clinic costs 4,500 dollars, including medicines. In the United States, the average cost is 12,400 dollars, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Malpani offers a top-end service, but the same treatment is available from other Indian clinics at less than half the price.
While cost is a big factor in drawing people from abroad, equally important is the lack of effective regulation.
"India has friendly rules. There are no restrictions on egg donation," said Manish Banker, vice president of the ISAR.
In Britain, the British Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has outlawed payments to surrogates and British IVF clinics allow doctors to implant only two embryos into the uterus in a treatment.
In India, five implants are allowed, substantially increasing the chances of pregnancy, and there is no shortage of egg donors.
"Attitudes towards egg donation are changing fast. Thirty years ago, Indians would balk at the idea of donating blood to a stranger, but now they don't," said Malpani.
A majority of Indian egg donors are housewives who are paid between 6,000 and 40,000 rupees (120-800 dollars), depending on their education level. Many of the women come from poor families.
Among the foreigners seeking fertility services in India, a good number are couples of Indian origin who come home to look for an Indian donor.
"Having a baby is an emotional issue," said Malpani, who runs the clinic with his wife Anjali.
"These people should be called reproductive exiles, not reproductive tourists. No one likes to travel for medical treatment," he said.
Critics, however, say the absence of regulation poses health dangers, as well as ethical issues about "rent-a-womb" exploitation.
"This business is like any other outsourcing industry. The only difference is the treatment offered here is very poor," said Puneet Bedi, a specialist in foetal medicine at New Delhi's Apollo hospital.
"Doctors here take short cuts, they implant more embryos than needed which multiplies risk to the mother."
A draft bill on assisted reproduction has been drawn up and is expected to be tabled in parliament soon, but women's health activists argue that it is aimed more at promoting a lucrative business than addressing health and ethical concerns.
"It was getting embarrassing for the government to keep saying there is no law in the country, so they had to come up with something," Bedi said.
On the back of a booming industry, medical companies have launched special deals that offer a range of health and travel services targeted at foreigners.
Right from arranging the medical visa -- which was introduced three years ago to boost medical outsourcing -- to providing recuperation holidays, companies like Mumbai-based Forerunners and Delhi's Life Smile take care of all requirements.
"Most people who come to us, especially for IVF, go in for a travel package too, since they have come all the way to India," said Kamal Parpyani, managing director of health tourism company Life Smile.
According to a 2004 study, India could earn as much as two billion dollars annually by 2012 through medical tourism, including from fertility services for overseas patients.
Doctors say Indians will benefit not just from the revenue, but also a reduction in the cost of expensive treatments as demand and competition grows.
"It's a market economy. The bad doctors will be weeded out and benefits will trickle down to people in smaller towns," Malpani said.
SOURCE: Agence France Presse
"We are actively recruiting egg donors!" reads the advertisement on the website of one of India's top in-vitro fertilisation clinics.
"Our patients are happy to pay generously for your generosity! They pay you up to rupees 40,000 (800 dollars) every time you donate".
A lack of regulation surrounding fertility services in India and the lucrative returns on offer to those that provide them has turned India into a popular hub of "IVF tourism".
Childless couples from overseas are attracted by the relatively low-cost treatment, as well as "friendly rules" when it comes to egg donors and surrogate motherhood.
According to the private Indian Society for Assisted Reproduction (ISAR), there are some 400 IVF clinics in the country, providing an estimated 30,000 assisted reproductive treatments a year.
There are no precise estimates for what percentage are taken up by foreigners, but doctors say overseas demand is fuelling a boom.
"Nearly half of our patients come from overseas. Of them, nearly half are of Indian origin," said Aniruddha Malpani, whose IVF clinic in Mumbai is considered among the country's best.
A full IVF cycle at the Malpani clinic costs 4,500 dollars, including medicines. In the United States, the average cost is 12,400 dollars, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Malpani offers a top-end service, but the same treatment is available from other Indian clinics at less than half the price.
While cost is a big factor in drawing people from abroad, equally important is the lack of effective regulation.
"India has friendly rules. There are no restrictions on egg donation," said Manish Banker, vice president of the ISAR.
In Britain, the British Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has outlawed payments to surrogates and British IVF clinics allow doctors to implant only two embryos into the uterus in a treatment.
In India, five implants are allowed, substantially increasing the chances of pregnancy, and there is no shortage of egg donors.
"Attitudes towards egg donation are changing fast. Thirty years ago, Indians would balk at the idea of donating blood to a stranger, but now they don't," said Malpani.
A majority of Indian egg donors are housewives who are paid between 6,000 and 40,000 rupees (120-800 dollars), depending on their education level. Many of the women come from poor families.
Among the foreigners seeking fertility services in India, a good number are couples of Indian origin who come home to look for an Indian donor.
"Having a baby is an emotional issue," said Malpani, who runs the clinic with his wife Anjali.
"These people should be called reproductive exiles, not reproductive tourists. No one likes to travel for medical treatment," he said.
Critics, however, say the absence of regulation poses health dangers, as well as ethical issues about "rent-a-womb" exploitation.
"This business is like any other outsourcing industry. The only difference is the treatment offered here is very poor," said Puneet Bedi, a specialist in foetal medicine at New Delhi's Apollo hospital.
"Doctors here take short cuts, they implant more embryos than needed which multiplies risk to the mother."
A draft bill on assisted reproduction has been drawn up and is expected to be tabled in parliament soon, but women's health activists argue that it is aimed more at promoting a lucrative business than addressing health and ethical concerns.
"It was getting embarrassing for the government to keep saying there is no law in the country, so they had to come up with something," Bedi said.
On the back of a booming industry, medical companies have launched special deals that offer a range of health and travel services targeted at foreigners.
Right from arranging the medical visa -- which was introduced three years ago to boost medical outsourcing -- to providing recuperation holidays, companies like Mumbai-based Forerunners and Delhi's Life Smile take care of all requirements.
"Most people who come to us, especially for IVF, go in for a travel package too, since they have come all the way to India," said Kamal Parpyani, managing director of health tourism company Life Smile.
According to a 2004 study, India could earn as much as two billion dollars annually by 2012 through medical tourism, including from fertility services for overseas patients.
Doctors say Indians will benefit not just from the revenue, but also a reduction in the cost of expensive treatments as demand and competition grows.
"It's a market economy. The bad doctors will be weeded out and benefits will trickle down to people in smaller towns," Malpani said.
SOURCE: Agence France Presse
Monday, October 20, 2008
IVF doctor: Patients view him with awe but rivals are less impressed
IVF doctor: Patients view him with awe but rivals are less impressed
He is Britain's most successful IVF doctor with a live birth rate twice the national average and a fortune founded on enabling women to have children, sometimes after years of fruitless treatment in other clinics.
But Mohammed Taranissi is also one of the most controversial, constantly pushing against the rules for fertility treatment and provoking the wrath of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). His rows with the regulator may have undermined his reputation but some, such as IVF pioneer Lord Winston, believe the publicity they have attracted has raised his profile.
Creating babies is as close as most doctors come to playing God and the Egypt-born specialist is viewed by his patients, many desperate, with something close to awe. He has regularly topped the league table of IVF clinics with a live birth rate of 60.7 per cent for women under 35 in 2007, 17 per cent ahead of his nearest rival.
What is his secret? Dr Taranissi says it is about being on duty 24 hours a day so each stage of the IVF process can be carried out at the right time. Rivals claim his results are achieved by cherry-picking the healthiest patients, a charge he rejects.
A more substantive criticism is that he transfers multiple embryos to improve the chances of at least one implanting in the womb. His two London clinics had the third and fourth-highest multiple birth rates at 33 and 32 per cent.
A twin or triplet birth increases risks for mother and babies as well as imposing a burden on the parents and the HFEA has set targets to reduce it. But Dr Taranissi argues this decision should be left to clinicians and their patients.
IVF treatment attracts some of the biggest personalities in medicine and brings huge rewards – Dr Taranissi's fortune was once estimated at £38m.
The HFEA has stumbled badly in its dealings with Dr Taranissi. Two years ago, it ordered a police raid on one of his clinics which he was suspected of operating without a licence – while at the same time contributing to a BBC Panorama investigation of the doctor screened on the day as the raids.
The incident drew charges of "trial by television" and led Dr Taranissi to launch a libel action against the BBC and a court action against the HFEA. The latter was settled last week with the withdrawal of all charges against him. His latest clash with the authorities before the GMC is being keenly watched.
SOURCE: independent.co.uk
He is Britain's most successful IVF doctor with a live birth rate twice the national average and a fortune founded on enabling women to have children, sometimes after years of fruitless treatment in other clinics.
But Mohammed Taranissi is also one of the most controversial, constantly pushing against the rules for fertility treatment and provoking the wrath of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). His rows with the regulator may have undermined his reputation but some, such as IVF pioneer Lord Winston, believe the publicity they have attracted has raised his profile.
Creating babies is as close as most doctors come to playing God and the Egypt-born specialist is viewed by his patients, many desperate, with something close to awe. He has regularly topped the league table of IVF clinics with a live birth rate of 60.7 per cent for women under 35 in 2007, 17 per cent ahead of his nearest rival.
What is his secret? Dr Taranissi says it is about being on duty 24 hours a day so each stage of the IVF process can be carried out at the right time. Rivals claim his results are achieved by cherry-picking the healthiest patients, a charge he rejects.
A more substantive criticism is that he transfers multiple embryos to improve the chances of at least one implanting in the womb. His two London clinics had the third and fourth-highest multiple birth rates at 33 and 32 per cent.
A twin or triplet birth increases risks for mother and babies as well as imposing a burden on the parents and the HFEA has set targets to reduce it. But Dr Taranissi argues this decision should be left to clinicians and their patients.
IVF treatment attracts some of the biggest personalities in medicine and brings huge rewards – Dr Taranissi's fortune was once estimated at £38m.
The HFEA has stumbled badly in its dealings with Dr Taranissi. Two years ago, it ordered a police raid on one of his clinics which he was suspected of operating without a licence – while at the same time contributing to a BBC Panorama investigation of the doctor screened on the day as the raids.
The incident drew charges of "trial by television" and led Dr Taranissi to launch a libel action against the BBC and a court action against the HFEA. The latter was settled last week with the withdrawal of all charges against him. His latest clash with the authorities before the GMC is being keenly watched.
SOURCE: independent.co.uk
Monday, October 13, 2008
Doctor in IVF furore is the best
Doctor in IVF furore is the best, says watchdog
• Taranissi success at 61%, double national average • Technique results in 12,596 births in UK overall
Britain's most controversial fertility doctor has once again been ranked as its most successful by the government's IVF watchdog, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
Mohammed Taranissi's Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre in London recorded the highest success rates among more than 100 clinics offering IVF in Britain, according to figures released by the regulator. Nearly two-thirds of Taranissi's patients who were under 35 had a live birth in 2006.
His success rate of 61% is almost double the national average of 31% for patients of the same age. Another clinic run by Taranissi, the Reproductive Genetics Institute, which has since closed, ranked second with a live birth rate of 50% for every cycle of treatment.
Overall, the figures show that there were 12,596 live IVF births in 2006, up 11.9% on the previous year, meaning that 16 babies out of every 1,000 born are IVF infants. They also show a substantial rise in couples seeking IVF across the country.
Nearly 35,000 women were treated in UK clinics in 2006, an increase of 6.8% on the year before. Success rates also rose across age groups, and markedly in women over 44, where live births rose from 0.8% to 4% for women using their own eggs. The use of donor sperm fell sharply, however, with 28% fewer treatments than in 2005. The fall, which the HFEA described as a "great concern", coincides with a change in the law that year which removed sperm donors' right to anonymity.
Lisa Jardine, chair of the HFEA, said: "In the year that we celebrated the 30th anniversary of the birth of the world's first IVF baby, these latest figures show just how far we've come. IVF is now commonplace, with the number of treatment cycles and births rising yet again." Last year, the average age of women having fertility treatment in Britain rose for the 10th consecutive year to 35.2 years old.
The HFEA has been in dispute with Taranissi for years. Last year his offices were raided by the HFEA on the evening of a BBC documentary about his clinics.
Taranissi is suing the broadcaster for libel. The BBC was yesterday ordered to pay an estimated £500,000 in legal costs to Taranissi. The BBC initially defended the documentary, IVF Undercover, which relied on undercover filming at Taranissi's clinic, saying it represented responsible journalism conveying matters in the public interest. However, it withdrew this defence last month. The BBC is continuing to defend its programme, citing the "hazards" of protecting confidential sources. It will seek to prove before the high court in January that the allegations are true.
Taranissi appeared before the General Medical Council this week to answer unrelated allegations from two patients who were treated at his clinic.
"We maintain a good service by being available seven days a week, because you have to be available to do things at the best time. We've also introduced a few new things which are not widely practised across the board, and some of them are still very controversial," said Taranissi.
London clinics completed the top five of the league table. The Lister Fertility Clinic and University College Hospital reported 44% live births in the under-35s, and Chelsea and Westminster Hospital 42%.
The HFEA figures also reveal which clinics created the most twins. Taranissi's clinic ranked second for multiple births, with 32% being twins.
Source: guardian.co.uk
• Taranissi success at 61%, double national average • Technique results in 12,596 births in UK overall
Britain's most controversial fertility doctor has once again been ranked as its most successful by the government's IVF watchdog, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
Mohammed Taranissi's Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre in London recorded the highest success rates among more than 100 clinics offering IVF in Britain, according to figures released by the regulator. Nearly two-thirds of Taranissi's patients who were under 35 had a live birth in 2006.
His success rate of 61% is almost double the national average of 31% for patients of the same age. Another clinic run by Taranissi, the Reproductive Genetics Institute, which has since closed, ranked second with a live birth rate of 50% for every cycle of treatment.
Overall, the figures show that there were 12,596 live IVF births in 2006, up 11.9% on the previous year, meaning that 16 babies out of every 1,000 born are IVF infants. They also show a substantial rise in couples seeking IVF across the country.
Nearly 35,000 women were treated in UK clinics in 2006, an increase of 6.8% on the year before. Success rates also rose across age groups, and markedly in women over 44, where live births rose from 0.8% to 4% for women using their own eggs. The use of donor sperm fell sharply, however, with 28% fewer treatments than in 2005. The fall, which the HFEA described as a "great concern", coincides with a change in the law that year which removed sperm donors' right to anonymity.
Lisa Jardine, chair of the HFEA, said: "In the year that we celebrated the 30th anniversary of the birth of the world's first IVF baby, these latest figures show just how far we've come. IVF is now commonplace, with the number of treatment cycles and births rising yet again." Last year, the average age of women having fertility treatment in Britain rose for the 10th consecutive year to 35.2 years old.
The HFEA has been in dispute with Taranissi for years. Last year his offices were raided by the HFEA on the evening of a BBC documentary about his clinics.
Taranissi is suing the broadcaster for libel. The BBC was yesterday ordered to pay an estimated £500,000 in legal costs to Taranissi. The BBC initially defended the documentary, IVF Undercover, which relied on undercover filming at Taranissi's clinic, saying it represented responsible journalism conveying matters in the public interest. However, it withdrew this defence last month. The BBC is continuing to defend its programme, citing the "hazards" of protecting confidential sources. It will seek to prove before the high court in January that the allegations are true.
Taranissi appeared before the General Medical Council this week to answer unrelated allegations from two patients who were treated at his clinic.
"We maintain a good service by being available seven days a week, because you have to be available to do things at the best time. We've also introduced a few new things which are not widely practised across the board, and some of them are still very controversial," said Taranissi.
London clinics completed the top five of the league table. The Lister Fertility Clinic and University College Hospital reported 44% live births in the under-35s, and Chelsea and Westminster Hospital 42%.
The HFEA figures also reveal which clinics created the most twins. Taranissi's clinic ranked second for multiple births, with 32% being twins.
Source: guardian.co.uk
Saturday, September 6, 2008
More Couples Turning to IVF
Approximately one in every 80 babies born in the UK is a result of IVF treatment, research has revealed. With one in seven couples experiencing difficulty conceiving, IVF has become an important part of family life for thousands of people across the country.
Figures show that IVF treatment has a success rate of 29% in women below the age of 35, and that number drops as a woman's age increases. According to some women who experienced IVF, natal hypnotherapy helped relax them, making the process more positive and less unpleasant. One new mum said: "The CDs really helped me to focus on my treatment, to remain calm and positive, and to be confident. Once I did get pregnant, I was in complete shock for about four months!"
Another added: "The CDs were a huge help in relaxing me and making me feel more in control during the process. I became pregnant at the third attempt and have now given birth to a lovely little girl."A survey found that out of 68 women who used the therapy, 46% became pregnant - 17% higher than the national success rate.
Source: Bounty.com
Figures show that IVF treatment has a success rate of 29% in women below the age of 35, and that number drops as a woman's age increases. According to some women who experienced IVF, natal hypnotherapy helped relax them, making the process more positive and less unpleasant. One new mum said: "The CDs really helped me to focus on my treatment, to remain calm and positive, and to be confident. Once I did get pregnant, I was in complete shock for about four months!"
Another added: "The CDs were a huge help in relaxing me and making me feel more in control during the process. I became pregnant at the third attempt and have now given birth to a lovely little girl."A survey found that out of 68 women who used the therapy, 46% became pregnant - 17% higher than the national success rate.
Source: Bounty.com
Sunday, August 17, 2008
'FIRST IVF BABY TURNS 30'
Happy 30th, Louise.
As I approach my 30th birthday, having delayed marriage and children, the social and biological clock of keeping time for childbearing ticks louder. However, thanks to another 30-year-old woman, it's possible for me to feel at ease. That woman is Louise Brown, the first child born via IVF. Last week marked not only her 30th birthday but thirty years of success in giving many women and men a second chance to have a biologically-related (at least, in part) child of their own. In fact, over 3 million babies worldwide have been born using IVF -- with over 52,000 infants born in the US, accounting for 1 percent of all births in the country.
In conversations with my close friends, it's been comforting to hear that we share the same concerns about starting a family later in life. We joke that after years of being on birth control--from condoms to pills to patches and rings and back to condoms again--diligently trying to avoid an unplanned pregnancy, we're fearful that we may, in fact, experience infertility.
Because of assisted reproduction and the tremendous successes gained in the past three decades, the clock is not ticking as loudly for me as it was for my mother. Instead, my generation has grown accustomed to this $3 billion industry--most of us know at least one friend, family member or colleague who has been through IVF. But this familiarity brings with it a whole new set of concerns. What are the ethical, moral, legal and financial impacts of this field? How do we grapple with these issues as a women's community, before others tell us what's best for our bodies and for our children? We've seen it before, and it will happen again.
It is incumbent upon the women's reproductive health community, particularly those who face these issues daily, to foster this debate. We might begin with the following concerns:
Number 1: Why is my generation of women and men more infertile than our parents? Currently, in the US, 1.2 million (or 2%) of women of reproductive age (defined by the CDC as age 10 to 49) have an infertility-related medical appointment each year; 10% receive infertility services at some point in their lives. As I've alluded, a big factor is age. To simplify things greatly, as more women gained equality in education and in the workplace, we also began to delay childbearing--for many reasons, including lack of maternity leave and inflexible work schedules.
But to highlight only age would be misleading. With so many individuals experiencing infertility (and in cases in which the underlying causes are never found), we cannot ignore the tremendous role that environmental contaminants are playing in this problem.
Exposure to ubiquitous dioxins, such as cigarette smoke, lead, mercury and some agricultural pesticides are direct threats to a couple's ability to conceive or have a healthy pregnancy. And, more troubling, new research suggests that a broader range of chemicals--including many that are associated with everyday products such as household cleansers, flame retardants, personal care and beauty aids, and even plastic water bottles--could have a complex and far-reaching impact on fertility.
Number 2: Are these procedures--the hormones, the retrieval of eggs, the implantation of one or multiple embryos--safe for women and their children? The answer, for the most part, is that we don't know. While IVF has generally been accepted as safe by the American public, there are in fact very little published data, let alone quality, standardized data, on the short and long term safety of these procedures on women and children's health. As we see an increase in women going through these procedures for either their own reproduction or to donate their eggs, how can we fully inform them of the potential risks and benefits?
Number 3: The growth of this industry and the growth in the numbers of assisted fertility clinics (now at 475 in total) have increased the demand for women's eggs. While most clinics offer women an average of $3,000 to $8,000, some "baby brokers" have offered as much as $50,000-80,000 for specific egg donors. (The American Society for Reproductive Medicine's (ASRM) guidelines allow for women to be compensated for their time and risk up to $5,000 or $10,000 in some cases, but this is neither mandated nor regulated by either state or federal law.) This issue poses its own ethical and moral dilemmas: should a woman be compensated for donating her eggs? Can payment create a coercive or exploitative situation? What are the race and class implications of who demands and who gets solicited for their eggs?
As with many momentous events in my life, as I approach my 30th birthday, I'm asking myself more questions than I know answers. I have found that asking questions--and listening to a broad range of voices who have their own personal and insightful answers--is the first step in the process in advocating for change. We must grapple with these issues and then propose solutions that follow our values and morals. So, in that vein, my parting question: what policies will empower all women to make their own decisions about having a child and yet protect her health? The answer to this will be the best 30th birthday present for me and Louise.
As I approach my 30th birthday, having delayed marriage and children, the social and biological clock of keeping time for childbearing ticks louder. However, thanks to another 30-year-old woman, it's possible for me to feel at ease. That woman is Louise Brown, the first child born via IVF. Last week marked not only her 30th birthday but thirty years of success in giving many women and men a second chance to have a biologically-related (at least, in part) child of their own. In fact, over 3 million babies worldwide have been born using IVF -- with over 52,000 infants born in the US, accounting for 1 percent of all births in the country.
In conversations with my close friends, it's been comforting to hear that we share the same concerns about starting a family later in life. We joke that after years of being on birth control--from condoms to pills to patches and rings and back to condoms again--diligently trying to avoid an unplanned pregnancy, we're fearful that we may, in fact, experience infertility.
Because of assisted reproduction and the tremendous successes gained in the past three decades, the clock is not ticking as loudly for me as it was for my mother. Instead, my generation has grown accustomed to this $3 billion industry--most of us know at least one friend, family member or colleague who has been through IVF. But this familiarity brings with it a whole new set of concerns. What are the ethical, moral, legal and financial impacts of this field? How do we grapple with these issues as a women's community, before others tell us what's best for our bodies and for our children? We've seen it before, and it will happen again.
It is incumbent upon the women's reproductive health community, particularly those who face these issues daily, to foster this debate. We might begin with the following concerns:
Number 1: Why is my generation of women and men more infertile than our parents? Currently, in the US, 1.2 million (or 2%) of women of reproductive age (defined by the CDC as age 10 to 49) have an infertility-related medical appointment each year; 10% receive infertility services at some point in their lives. As I've alluded, a big factor is age. To simplify things greatly, as more women gained equality in education and in the workplace, we also began to delay childbearing--for many reasons, including lack of maternity leave and inflexible work schedules.
But to highlight only age would be misleading. With so many individuals experiencing infertility (and in cases in which the underlying causes are never found), we cannot ignore the tremendous role that environmental contaminants are playing in this problem.
Exposure to ubiquitous dioxins, such as cigarette smoke, lead, mercury and some agricultural pesticides are direct threats to a couple's ability to conceive or have a healthy pregnancy. And, more troubling, new research suggests that a broader range of chemicals--including many that are associated with everyday products such as household cleansers, flame retardants, personal care and beauty aids, and even plastic water bottles--could have a complex and far-reaching impact on fertility.
Number 2: Are these procedures--the hormones, the retrieval of eggs, the implantation of one or multiple embryos--safe for women and their children? The answer, for the most part, is that we don't know. While IVF has generally been accepted as safe by the American public, there are in fact very little published data, let alone quality, standardized data, on the short and long term safety of these procedures on women and children's health. As we see an increase in women going through these procedures for either their own reproduction or to donate their eggs, how can we fully inform them of the potential risks and benefits?
Number 3: The growth of this industry and the growth in the numbers of assisted fertility clinics (now at 475 in total) have increased the demand for women's eggs. While most clinics offer women an average of $3,000 to $8,000, some "baby brokers" have offered as much as $50,000-80,000 for specific egg donors. (The American Society for Reproductive Medicine's (ASRM) guidelines allow for women to be compensated for their time and risk up to $5,000 or $10,000 in some cases, but this is neither mandated nor regulated by either state or federal law.) This issue poses its own ethical and moral dilemmas: should a woman be compensated for donating her eggs? Can payment create a coercive or exploitative situation? What are the race and class implications of who demands and who gets solicited for their eggs?
As with many momentous events in my life, as I approach my 30th birthday, I'm asking myself more questions than I know answers. I have found that asking questions--and listening to a broad range of voices who have their own personal and insightful answers--is the first step in the process in advocating for change. We must grapple with these issues and then propose solutions that follow our values and morals. So, in that vein, my parting question: what policies will empower all women to make their own decisions about having a child and yet protect her health? The answer to this will be the best 30th birthday present for me and Louise.
Jennifer Rogers
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
PARENTS TELL IVF TECHNIQUE SUCCESS
Evie Bloomer is the first IVF baby to be born in the UK using a pioneering technique to freeze embryos.
And Evie's parents, Ian and Rebecca, said they wanted their story to inspire other childless couples trying for a baby not to give up hope.
The childhood sweethearts, from Cwmbran, South Wales, had been trying for a baby since they married in 2001. But tests revealed that Mrs Bloomer, 28, had endometriosis, a condition which was making it difficult for her to conceive.
Desperate for a baby, the couple attended the IVF clinic at the University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff. After one failed attempt the hospital offered the Bloomers a new way of freezing their unused embryos - embryo vitrification - that gave them a better chance of survival when they were ready to try again. Mrs Bloomer fell pregnant almost immediately using one of these embryos and became the proud mother of a healthy baby girl on July 23.
She said: "I hope that if anybody going through treatment sees us and sees Evie it gives them one last little bit of hope to go for it."
Lyndon Miles, head of embryology and andrology for IVF Wales, explained how it works: "Vitrification involves rapidly cooling and storing cells at very low temperatures for future use.
"An IVF cycle produces a number of embryos. Those that aren't immediately transferred back to the patient and that are of good enough quality are cooled slowly to the temperature of liquid nitrogen (-196C) and stored until needed.
"Conventional slow freezing creates ice crystals which can damage the embryo as it is thawed. Vitrification differs from traditional cooling and storing techniques in that it allows instantaneous 'glass-like' solidification of eggs and embryos without the formation of ice crystals. Since no ice crystals form, a much greater percentage of embryos survive thawing following vitrification. With conventional freezing methods, post-thaw survival rates vary from 50% to 80% whereas we have achieved 98% with vitrification."
Mr Miles said 17 out of the 39 women offered the treatment so far had fallen pregnant. Four of those are expecting twins.
He said the process would also be helpful to women diagnosed with cancer who want to freeze a number of eggs in case chemotherapy leaves them infertile. It may also be used to allow women to delay motherhood by "banking" eggs while they are at their fertile peak and using them later after fertility has declined.
SOURCE: The Press Association
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
INTERESTING AND INFORMATIVE BLOG ON INFERTILITY
CHECK OUT THIS INTERESTING BLOG BY LOLLIPOP GOLDSTEIN; ABOUT INFERTILITY AND PREGNANCY LOSS, AN EXPLORATION OF ADOPTION AND DONOR GAMETES, A BITCH SESSION ABOUT DAILY LIFE AND BOOKS...ETC. AT:
http://www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com
http://www.stirrup-queens.blogspot.com
Sunday, July 27, 2008
The birth that started a revolution
Thirty years ago Louise Brown, the first test tube baby, was born, and the world of fertility changed forever.
Her mother, Lesley, 33, had blocked fallopian tubes, so Dr Patrick Steptoe and Bob Webster took an egg from one of her ovaries, under anaesthetic, and fertilised it with sperm from her husband, John, in a laboratory, before placing it in her uterus. Nine months later, on July 25, 1978, Louise was delivered by Caesarean section at Oldham and District General Hospital.
Since that day, a series of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) breakthroughs has enabled tens of thousands of couples to have the children they longed for. Other leaps have included treatments for male infertility, the use of donor eggs, surrogates and the genetic screening of embryos.
In Britain alone, 111,633 children have been born through fertility treatment; worldwide, the figure is estimated to be 3.5 million. The latest figures from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the regulatory body set up in 1991, show that 32,626 couples in Britain had IVF in 2005, leading to a total — including twins and triplets — of 11,262 children. About 25 per cent of IVF treatments are funded by the NHS; the rest are paid for privately, costing up to £8,000 (Dh58,525) a cycle.
Exceptions: But while IVF has answered the prayers of many couples, it is not a cure-all. The average success rate nationally for women under 35 is 29.6 per cent, while those aged between 40-42 have just a 10 per cent chance of conceiving using their own eggs. (There are exceptions: at the Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre in London, for example, the take-home baby rate is 59.9 per cent for women under 35). And fertility treatments are also transforming the family, raising ethical questions about concepts such as “saviour siblings”, babies genetically matched and created to provide tissue — often umbilical cord stem cells — to treat disease in an older child.
Similarly, treatment for post-menopausal women, same-sex couples and the spectres of sex selection for social reasons (illegal in the UK) and “designer babies”, where embryos are chosen or discarded for reasons other than health and viability, have also led to disquiet. Meanwhile, Louise, has a child of her own. Cameron, aged 18 months, was conceived naturally — an everyday miracle perhaps, but no less a miracle for that.
The first IVF triplets were born in 1984. In recent years, the HFEA has raised concern over the relatively high incidence of multiple births conceived through IVF; the risk of death before birth or within the first week after birth is more than four times greater for twins, and almost seven times greater for triplets, than for single births. Currently, around one in four IVF pregnancies results in twins or triplets, and the HFEA is now calling for more single embryo transfers to reduce this figure to 10 per cent —although clinicians are reluctant to do so, as replacing just one embryo reduces the chance of pregnancy. Mindy Vernon, 44, and her banker husband James, 43, live in Sevenoaks, Kent. They have triplets William, Thomas and Katherine, aged seven. “James and I got married when I was 32 and we tried for a year and a half to have a baby, without any success. Medical tests revealed no major issues and when the doctors diagnosed unexplained infertility, we decided to go for IVF. We had three rounds of treatment at Shirley Oaks hospital, at a cost of £2,000 a cycle, which failed. By the fourth cycle we were really losing heart, so we had three embryos replaced instead of the two we'd done previously. “Around the time of the IVF transfer I had terrible backache, so I had acupuncture treatments for the pain. When I mentioned that I was having fertility treatment, the practitioner said she could treat that, too, by inserting the needles at other sites on my body. Multiple pregnancy risk “I know there's conflicting opinion about whether acupuncture increases the success of IVF.
It may just have been coincidence, of course, but in my case it really did seem to work. “When we were told we were expecting triplets, we were overjoyed that I was pregnant at all and we didn't immediately take in the significance of what it meant to be carrying three babies at once.
Only later did we learn how much riskier it was for both me and the babies; we were informed that they might not all survive and were given a choice of terminating one of them. But after talking through the pros and cons, we knew we wanted to keep all three. “I have always felt it is important to keep fit, but I was told not to exercise and to eat as much as I could, so I stuffed myself and put on five stone.
I wasn't anxious during the pregnancy, because I had faith in my body and faith in the medical staff who were looking after me. I had a really easy pregnancy, too; I wasn't badly affected by morning sickness. “I gave up work at 22 weeks, and at 26 weeks my consultant advised me to go to hospital and stay there, so I could have complete rest and be monitored twice daily in case any problems arose. I knew I was having two boys and a girl, which the hospital had named A, B and C, and I spent my time listening to classical music and visualising them as individual little people.
“My mother was cooking for me at home every day and bringing food into the hospital, so I sat around getting fatter and feeling very special and quite serene. The babies were finally born by C-section at 34 weeks — a team of 21 doctors and nurses was involved in the delivery.
None of them had any medical problems at birth, or subsequently. “They were allowed home after three weeks, by which time they had put on weight — and then the work really started: I breast-fed them as best I could for two months, but I didn't have much milk so they also got through 24 bottles a day. “James and I were lucky to have lots of support from my mother, in particular, who stayed with us for a whole year, and in the first few months James's mum crossed half the country every weekend to help out. “My mother and I did the weekday shifts and James and his mother took over at weekends so we could rest. Those early days, months and years were utterly exhausting and looking back, I can't believe we managed, but somehow we did. Having triplets is a joy, but it's also emotionally and financially draining.
Not convinced “I feel ambivalent about the guidelines that only two or even just one embryo should be replaced. There's no doubt that replacing three embryos maximises a woman's chances of getting pregnant, but it's not without its medical risks and bringing up three babies is not for the fainthearted. Still, we were fantastically lucky with our three; we love them dearly and wouldn't swap them for the world.”
The first commercial surrogacy took place in Britain in 1985 when Kim Cotton, a mother of two, was paid £6,500 to carry a child conceived using her egg and the infertile woman's husband's sperm. It is now illegal for a surrogate to charge fees, but reasonable expenses may be paid to cover clothing, travel, food, time off work, etc, amounting to anything from £7,000 to £15,000.
Two types of surrogacy: There are two types of surrogacy. Straight surrogacy uses the egg of the surrogate and the sperm of the intended father and is usually carried out via artificial insemination at home. Host (or gestational) surrogacy requires IVF, as embryos are created using eggs and sperm from the intended mother and father and transferred into the surrogate mother. Fiona O'Driscoll, 38, who works for the charity Save the Children, is married to Andrew, 39, a business consultant. A surrogate mother is carrying their baby, due in October. “I have a condition called Mayer Rokitansky Kuster Hauser Syndrome (MRKH), which means I was born without a womb — although I do have ovaries — so I knew that if I wanted a family I would need to use a surrogate mother or adopt. We looked at adoption, but it's almost impossible to get a baby, and we really wanted to create one that is genetically ours. “We got in touch with the non-profit organisation Surrogacy UK in order to make contact with a surrogate and find out more about the process. The ethos is one of friendship before surrogacy and, at the social events, we got to know another couple, Kate and Dennis, really well over a period of months. They already have two children and offered to help us. “To be honest, my first instinct was: ‘Why on earth would someone offer to carry another woman's baby?' It was hard to believe anyone would do something so momentous purely out of the goodness of their own heart. But Kate is such a selfless person and she's certainly not in it for the money; all we do is make sure she's not out of pocket by covering expenses like multivitamins and maternity wear, taxis and childcare. “We were treated at the London Fertility Clinic in Harley Street; I took drugs to stimulate my egg production. These were fertilised by Andrew's sperm, and the resulting seven embryos were frozen. Two survived the thawing process and were transferred into Kate, who had taken drugs to prepare her body. Two nail-biting weeks later, Kate, Andrew and I were all together in a coffee shop in central London when the call came through that she was pregnant and we all burst into tears. “Kate is now 28 weeks pregnant. Andrew and I — and Dennis — will all be at the birth; it's very exciting. We're so proud of what they are doing. You read horror stories about surrogacy costing a fortune or the surrogate trying to keep the baby, but the truth is, it's about a good friend giving you the most extraordinary gift imaginable.”
Names have been changed
SOURCE: Daily Telegraph
Friday, July 25, 2008
HOW DO COUPLES COPE WHEN IVF FAILS?
Broke, babyless and in need of help. John Naish examines the taboo question of how couples cope when it all goes wrong:
Across Britain next Friday, thousands of couples will brace themselves for a welter of “miracle-baby” stories as the world marks the 30th birthday of Louise Brown, the first test-tube child. In the shadow of assisted conception's many successes are the 75 per cent of women patients for whom the gruelling medical process never works. The vast majority are neither monitored nor offered counselling but, it seems, are expected to slink away, marked “failed.”
Caroline Gallup is among the 25,000 women each year whose fertility treatment proves fruitless, often after spending all their available funds and putting their relationships under perilous strain. Rather than quietly grieving, Gallup is campaigning for the NHS and high-earning private clinics to give support after assisted conception has failed and to fund studies into what happens to these people's lives.
Very little research has been done, but in 2000 a small study of 76 women by the Royal Maternity Hospital in Belfast found that five years after their unsuccessful treatment they suffered “significant psychological dysfunction”, particularly stress and depression. The research, published in the journal Human Fertility, concluded: “There is a strong need to prepare women better for treatment failure and to ensure that counselling is available when further treatment is no longer appropriate.” This echoes the findings of a Hull University study three years earlier. Both recommendations have fallen on deaf ears.
The government watchdog, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, says that it sees issues about follow-up monitoring and counselling as outside its remit, because it regulates only the process of infertility treatment itself.
Hence Gallup's campaigning. “I see the routine provision of post-treatment counselling as a moral duty,” says the 44-year-old Londoner. “When you are treated, you have to believe that a baby will grow. When it doesn't, the crash is awful, but you're buoyed as long as you can go through another cycle. I think it's only morally right for clinics to carry on with ‘after-sales service' when that hope has disappeared.”
COUPLES HAVE THE UTMOST OPTIMISM
“The clinics do tell you at their open days that there is a 76 per cent failure rate across the board, but couples aren't in a position to take that in,” says Gallup. “The only way you can enter into something so grim is with the utmost optimism.” Indeed, a study in The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist journal found that although clear information on success rates is given to couples, “the majority believe that they will be the minority who achieve pregnancy”.
Gallup and her husband decided to stop trying after they had paid £8,000 for private treatment. “It was partly down to money - we'd run out - and partly the fact that it was wrecking our relationship. My husband said he didn't want to go through it any more. It was turning me into a total obsessive,” she says, adding: “Blame can play a really big part in relationships after treatment failure. It's one of the big reasons why counselling is needed.”
Four years after the treatment ended, she says: “My husband and I are still dealing with it. I have had to reinvent myself. I didn't know what my identity was after we had finished. That's a huge psychological thing.” Now she has taken a less demanding job in her career in events management to spend time lobbying interest groups and politicians. She is also trying to develop a career as a writer, having published a book on her fertility treatment experiences, 'Making Babies the Hard Way.'
Emerging from fertility treatment babyless, broke and in need of professional support to get back on the rails is a common experience, according to the British Infertility Counselling Association. “A lot of people come out of the process highly stressed and they think they can go for free counselling, but there is no such thing,” says a spokeswoman. “Funding is a big problem for most people. They may well not be able to pay for private counselling because they have spent all their money on treatment.”
One of the few organisations to provide social support is More To Life, which helps involuntarily childless people to develop networks and swap advice. Membership costs £20 annually and has grown rapidly in the two years since it was established, says Susan Seenan, one of the organisers. “Social life can be difficult for infertile couples, especially women,” she says. “Wherever you go - barbecues, parties, christenings - everyone has children.
“It's difficult to talk about infertility and childlessness. It's seen as a stigma. But with more people leaving it until later in life to try for children, there is bound to be more infertility, more treatment, and more disappointed couples.”
It is not only infertile women who face bereavement and loss of purpose. David Downage regularly attends More To Life social events. He and his wife went through treatment in the NHS and privately, but ultimately decided that their hopes were beyond slim. “It was a traumatic decision, but the danger is that you go on trying too long and damage your relationship,” he says. “So we decided to move on.”
The Downages joined More To Life to extend their social network beyond old friends with their new families. “We had to find it by searching the web,” he says. “It's strange that clinics can't point you to organisations like this after the treatment has failed,” says David, 47, a property developer. “For a man, discovering that you're going to be childless raises questions about what you are doing with your life. Once you can pay the bills, what is there after that? My wife and I came to view it as an opportunity to do other things. She is keen to get involved in charity work with children. We plan to retire early and, hopefully, be able to put some of our money into building children's schools. Certainly we will be able to do that as a legacy.”
Finding renewed purpose is one of the best survival strategies, says Jacky Boivin, a researcher at Cardiff University's School of Psychology. She has followed more than 100 women undertaking IVF over seven years, and is running a five-year study of 818 couples in Denmark.
“There is not much research into what happens to people in the long term after unsuccessful treatment, but our data indicates that about 40 per cent of couples are highly distressed at having to stop. After they have made the decision, around 5 to 10 per cent remain stuck in that state. People who come to the end of the IVF treatment and feel they could have had more are often seized with resentment.
“You have to reinvent a life that is not about having a family,” she stresses. “You have to look for the positive while acknowledging the negative. People have to regain a sense of control over their lives, after having it taken over by regimens that tell them exactly when they should be having sex. And they need to look at the experience as an opportunity to renew life interests. Sadly, the lack of post-treatment counselling means people don't have support in this.”
AND NOW THE GOOD NEWS
There is one surprise. Boivin says: “Oddly, the divorce rate is much lower among couples whose fertility treatment failed than for the general population: 10 per cent versus 50 per cent. We don't know why. There is life after infertility treatment. Not always an easy one, but most people will go on to find contentment, though the experience will always carry a sting.”
SOURCE: THE TIMES ONLINE
Across Britain next Friday, thousands of couples will brace themselves for a welter of “miracle-baby” stories as the world marks the 30th birthday of Louise Brown, the first test-tube child. In the shadow of assisted conception's many successes are the 75 per cent of women patients for whom the gruelling medical process never works. The vast majority are neither monitored nor offered counselling but, it seems, are expected to slink away, marked “failed.”
Caroline Gallup is among the 25,000 women each year whose fertility treatment proves fruitless, often after spending all their available funds and putting their relationships under perilous strain. Rather than quietly grieving, Gallup is campaigning for the NHS and high-earning private clinics to give support after assisted conception has failed and to fund studies into what happens to these people's lives.
Very little research has been done, but in 2000 a small study of 76 women by the Royal Maternity Hospital in Belfast found that five years after their unsuccessful treatment they suffered “significant psychological dysfunction”, particularly stress and depression. The research, published in the journal Human Fertility, concluded: “There is a strong need to prepare women better for treatment failure and to ensure that counselling is available when further treatment is no longer appropriate.” This echoes the findings of a Hull University study three years earlier. Both recommendations have fallen on deaf ears.
The government watchdog, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, says that it sees issues about follow-up monitoring and counselling as outside its remit, because it regulates only the process of infertility treatment itself.
Hence Gallup's campaigning. “I see the routine provision of post-treatment counselling as a moral duty,” says the 44-year-old Londoner. “When you are treated, you have to believe that a baby will grow. When it doesn't, the crash is awful, but you're buoyed as long as you can go through another cycle. I think it's only morally right for clinics to carry on with ‘after-sales service' when that hope has disappeared.”
COUPLES HAVE THE UTMOST OPTIMISM
“The clinics do tell you at their open days that there is a 76 per cent failure rate across the board, but couples aren't in a position to take that in,” says Gallup. “The only way you can enter into something so grim is with the utmost optimism.” Indeed, a study in The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist journal found that although clear information on success rates is given to couples, “the majority believe that they will be the minority who achieve pregnancy”.
Gallup and her husband decided to stop trying after they had paid £8,000 for private treatment. “It was partly down to money - we'd run out - and partly the fact that it was wrecking our relationship. My husband said he didn't want to go through it any more. It was turning me into a total obsessive,” she says, adding: “Blame can play a really big part in relationships after treatment failure. It's one of the big reasons why counselling is needed.”
Four years after the treatment ended, she says: “My husband and I are still dealing with it. I have had to reinvent myself. I didn't know what my identity was after we had finished. That's a huge psychological thing.” Now she has taken a less demanding job in her career in events management to spend time lobbying interest groups and politicians. She is also trying to develop a career as a writer, having published a book on her fertility treatment experiences, 'Making Babies the Hard Way.'
Emerging from fertility treatment babyless, broke and in need of professional support to get back on the rails is a common experience, according to the British Infertility Counselling Association. “A lot of people come out of the process highly stressed and they think they can go for free counselling, but there is no such thing,” says a spokeswoman. “Funding is a big problem for most people. They may well not be able to pay for private counselling because they have spent all their money on treatment.”
One of the few organisations to provide social support is More To Life, which helps involuntarily childless people to develop networks and swap advice. Membership costs £20 annually and has grown rapidly in the two years since it was established, says Susan Seenan, one of the organisers. “Social life can be difficult for infertile couples, especially women,” she says. “Wherever you go - barbecues, parties, christenings - everyone has children.
“It's difficult to talk about infertility and childlessness. It's seen as a stigma. But with more people leaving it until later in life to try for children, there is bound to be more infertility, more treatment, and more disappointed couples.”
It is not only infertile women who face bereavement and loss of purpose. David Downage regularly attends More To Life social events. He and his wife went through treatment in the NHS and privately, but ultimately decided that their hopes were beyond slim. “It was a traumatic decision, but the danger is that you go on trying too long and damage your relationship,” he says. “So we decided to move on.”
The Downages joined More To Life to extend their social network beyond old friends with their new families. “We had to find it by searching the web,” he says. “It's strange that clinics can't point you to organisations like this after the treatment has failed,” says David, 47, a property developer. “For a man, discovering that you're going to be childless raises questions about what you are doing with your life. Once you can pay the bills, what is there after that? My wife and I came to view it as an opportunity to do other things. She is keen to get involved in charity work with children. We plan to retire early and, hopefully, be able to put some of our money into building children's schools. Certainly we will be able to do that as a legacy.”
Finding renewed purpose is one of the best survival strategies, says Jacky Boivin, a researcher at Cardiff University's School of Psychology. She has followed more than 100 women undertaking IVF over seven years, and is running a five-year study of 818 couples in Denmark.
“There is not much research into what happens to people in the long term after unsuccessful treatment, but our data indicates that about 40 per cent of couples are highly distressed at having to stop. After they have made the decision, around 5 to 10 per cent remain stuck in that state. People who come to the end of the IVF treatment and feel they could have had more are often seized with resentment.
“You have to reinvent a life that is not about having a family,” she stresses. “You have to look for the positive while acknowledging the negative. People have to regain a sense of control over their lives, after having it taken over by regimens that tell them exactly when they should be having sex. And they need to look at the experience as an opportunity to renew life interests. Sadly, the lack of post-treatment counselling means people don't have support in this.”
AND NOW THE GOOD NEWS
There is one surprise. Boivin says: “Oddly, the divorce rate is much lower among couples whose fertility treatment failed than for the general population: 10 per cent versus 50 per cent. We don't know why. There is life after infertility treatment. Not always an easy one, but most people will go on to find contentment, though the experience will always carry a sting.”
SOURCE: THE TIMES ONLINE
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Science thinks big for better IVF
A new IVF technique involves selecting sperm with a shape and size that indicate good genetic quality. The best are injected into eggs to fertilise them. Results show improved pregnancy rates
Infertile men can more than double their chances of fatherhood with a new IVF technique, according to the most comprehensive study of the procedure yet conducted.
The results of a major trial of the approach, which builds upon the technique of injecting sperm directly into an egg, suggest dramatic benefits for the one in 12 couples affected by male factor infertility. A far more powerful microscope is used to identify the sperm most likely to succeed.
The results, from a team in Italy, are encouraging for men with an especially poor fertility prognosis and who have tried and failed to have children by IVF at least twice in the past. Their prospect of becoming fathers using the therapy was double that with standard methods, the study found.
The method, which was first developed in 2004 by a team led by Benjamin Bartoov, of BarIlan University in Israel, is called intra-cytoplasmic morphologically-selected sperm injection (IMSI). It involves examining sperm under a high-magnification microscope, about five times more powerful than standard laboratory equipment, to select those with a shape and size that indicates good genetic quality. The best-looking sperm are then injected into eggs.
British scientists hailed the results as the strongest demonstration yet of the new therapy’s benefits. “I don’t think a lot of people in the UK have woken up to this yet, but they are going to have to,” said Allan Pacey, Lecturer in Andrology at the University of Sheffield. “This is strong evidence from a well-designed study. If it can be repeated in two or three studies, people would seriously have to think about changing their approach.”
The treatment builds on the success of intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), a therapy for male infertility that has enabled thousands to become fathers since it was developed in the early Nineties. ICSI involves fertilising an egg in a laboratory by injecting it with a single sperm. As the sperm does not have to swim up to the egg and penetrate it, the method can help men whose sperm would otherwise be too weak. Even when men produce no sperm, doctors can sometimes recover them surgically from the testes.
ICSI is now used in about 40 per cent of the 41,000 IVF cycles performed annually in the UK, and accounts for about 4,500 children born each year. This suggests that upwards of 10,000 men a year could be appropriate patients for the new technique.
The Italian team, led by Monica Antinori, of the Raprui clinic in Rome, has conducted the largest randomised controlled trial to compare outcomes for IMSI and ICSI. It involved 446 couples in which the man was infertile and the woman was not known to have any problems.
The results, which are published in the journal Reproductive Biomedicine Online, show that the IMSI method can deliver considerable improvements in pregnancy rate. The overall pregnancy rate for the IMSI group was 39.2 per cent, compared with 26.5 per cent for the ICSI patients.
Among men with the worst prognosis, who had had at least two failed attempts at ICSI before, the improvement was better still. The pregnancy rate for IMSI was 29.8 per cent, compared with 12.9 per cent for standard ICSI. The miscarriage rate also fell considerably.
Dr Antinori said the findings demonstrate that the technique has potential, particularly for men with a history of IVF failure. “By treating this kind of patient with this technique, we offer them an opportunity to solve their fertility problems. As you can see from the results, the group that has had two or more IVF failures can get more than twice the opportunity to have a pregnancy with this new technique.”
She cautioned, however, that IMSI is about twice as expensive as ICSI, which typically costs between £3,000 and £5,000 per cycle in Britain. It also requires special training for embryologists, and the purchase of expensive high-magnification microscopes.
IMSI is not yet offered in the UK, though it is performed by clinics in Italy, Israel, Switzerland and Spain.
Dr Pacey said: “People have been seduced into thinking that, as long as you’ve got a sperm that’s half decent, it’s got as good a chance as any. But it looks like we can do better than that.”
Source: The Times July 7 2008
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
COFFEE CUTS CHANCE OF HAVING BABY
Drinking too much coffee or tea can cut the chances of a woman getting pregnant by a quarter if she already has fertility problems. The effect is the same as drinking excessive alcohol, according to researchers in the Netherlands. They looked at 8,669 women who had undergone IVF treatment and found the likelihood of pregnancy was significantly reduced for those who smoked, drank too much coffee and alcohol, and were overweight. Fertility expert Prof Bill Ledger, of the University of Sheffield, said: ‘A lot of women can have 20 cups of coffee a day and get pregnant while falling off a log, but if you’re already sub fertile it could push you over the edge.’
Source: Metro newspaper Tue, July 8, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
New Treatment may increase IVF Success Rate
To increase the chances of conception to a 100 percent, among couples undergoing fertility treatment, University of Adelaide researchers have come up with a new formula.
To increase the chances of conception to a 100 percent, among couples undergoing fertility treatment, University of Adelaide researchers have come up with a new formula.
They claim that their technique can improve embryo implantation rates significantly, and reduce pregnancy complications in assisted reproductive technology (ART). The researchers say that they have applied it in a study on mice, which provided proof-of-concept that the treatment doubles pregnancy rates. Associate Professor Claire Roberts, who led the study, has revealed that he has received 294,750 dollars in from the Federal Government for showing that the treatment is safe, and that it improves pregnancy outcome and postnatal health in offspring.
"Assuming our success, the concept will be taken to the next stage in human trials with the help of the University's commercial partner for this technology, MediCult," Roberts says. The researcher says considers the funding to be a major breakthrough for those couples who are either infertile or suffer from recurrent miscarriages. "Assisted reproductive technologies provide some hope for these couples, but they have a relatively poor success rate with only 15-40 per cent of embryo transfers resulting in ongoing pregnancies, depending on maternal age," Roberts says. "Fertility in women declines significantly with age, and so too does the success of ART. Since women are delaying childbearing, ART is increasingly required to make couples' desire to have children a reality.
Currently, two-three per cent of the 250,000 annual births in Australia are a result of ART and this number is expected to rise," Roberts adds.
To increase the chances of conception to a 100 percent, among couples undergoing fertility treatment, University of Adelaide researchers have come up with a new formula.
They claim that their technique can improve embryo implantation rates significantly, and reduce pregnancy complications in assisted reproductive technology (ART). The researchers say that they have applied it in a study on mice, which provided proof-of-concept that the treatment doubles pregnancy rates. Associate Professor Claire Roberts, who led the study, has revealed that he has received 294,750 dollars in from the Federal Government for showing that the treatment is safe, and that it improves pregnancy outcome and postnatal health in offspring.
"Assuming our success, the concept will be taken to the next stage in human trials with the help of the University's commercial partner for this technology, MediCult," Roberts says. The researcher says considers the funding to be a major breakthrough for those couples who are either infertile or suffer from recurrent miscarriages. "Assisted reproductive technologies provide some hope for these couples, but they have a relatively poor success rate with only 15-40 per cent of embryo transfers resulting in ongoing pregnancies, depending on maternal age," Roberts says. "Fertility in women declines significantly with age, and so too does the success of ART. Since women are delaying childbearing, ART is increasingly required to make couples' desire to have children a reality.
Currently, two-three per cent of the 250,000 annual births in Australia are a result of ART and this number is expected to rise," Roberts adds.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
NATURAL IVF
For an ivf cycle, a woman’s body is practically bombarded by powerful drugs; first to shut down her ovaries (down regulation), and then other drugs to stimulate them to produce more eggs(FSH), and yet another drug to trigger ovulation (HCG). Women react to these drugs in different ways and one (costs aside), may understandably be wary of subjecting the body to them. The effects of long term use of these drugs (necessary when one has to repeat treatment cycles) can be worrisome and is still being studied.
NATURAL CYCLE IVF is definitely worth considering. In effect, you get the best of both worlds. For this procedure, it is the single egg produced in a woman’s normal cycle that is inseminated. Also known as no or low stimulation IVF, it is an invitro fertilisation procedure which uses no artificial fertility drugs, or very low dose ones.
Why Would I Want To Have IVF Without Fertility Drugs?
For some couples, the choice is financial. It is done at a fraction of the cost of standard IVF, so it may be their only chance at treatment. Some people prefer to try this method before moving on to traditional IVF.
For others, the choice may be medical. They may be contraindicated to fertility drugs (for instance, with a previous history of ovarian cancer or depression) or they may have reacted badly to a course of fertility drugs before. Women who have suffered with ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome may be offered this type of treatment as the syndrome is very serious and can be life-threatening so it may not be safe for them to continue with standard IVF.
Some couples just don't like drugs and prefer a more natural approach to infertility.
A point to note is that because of the improvement in the embryo culture technology, we are now at a point where even one egg gives a reasonable chance of success – about 15% per cycle. Therefore, in women who do not wish to use fertility medications, cannot afford fertility medications, or who do not produce many eggs even when they use fertility medications – Natural Cycle IVF is a logical and often successful alternative. Given that the success is 15% per attempt, it has been the experience of many centers that with several cycles of Natural IVF, one can achieve the same success rate of one cycle of stimulated IVF (45%).
Indeed, a study published in Europe’s leading reproductive medicine journal, Human Reproduction*, has found that for the majority of women the chances of pregnancy are just as good if doctors rely on the woman’s natural menstrual cycle.
The researchers’ view is that, in 60% to 70% of cases, a series of treatment cycles without using ovarian stimulation would be safer, less stressful and mean fewer multiple births. It also costs only a fifth of the price of current practice and would bring IVF within the reach of more childless couples worldwide and enable countries that state-fund IVF to help more women.
Dr Geeta Nargund and colleagues reached their conclusion following a study of 181 treatments in 52 women at the Assisted Conception Unit at King’s College Hospital, London. All the women had treatment based around their natural menstrual cycles.
They were found to have the same chance of having a baby after an average of three to four cycles of treatment as women undergoing conventional drug-stimulated treatment – about a third (32% as against 34%).
The first test-tube baby – born in 1978 in England – was the result of normal menstrual cycle IVF treatment, but the practice was pretty well abandoned with the onset of extensive use of hormonal drugs to stimulate the ovaries into producing more eggs per cycle. This new study is the first to establish that basing treatment on a woman’s natural cycle can achieve comparable results with those of drug-stimulated cycles.
Dr Nargund, who now directs the fertility centre at St. George’s Hospital, London, said: "We’ve demonstrated that it is an effective and potentially cost-effective option for certain groups. With a trend now to reducing the number of embryos transferred, our study must open the debate as to whether a series of natural cycle treatments should become a mainstream conception technique for female infertility."
MORE ADVANTAGES OF NATURAL CYCLE IVF
Natural cycle IVF has several advantages over stimulated cycle IVF:
*Natural cycle IVF utilizes the body's normal ovulation process
*There are no expensive hormones to buy and fewer injections with natural cycle IVF.
*Natural cycle IVF may be repeated month after month, if necessary.
The cumulative pregnancy rate from three months of natural cycle IVF is over 50%
*At Olympia Women's Health, the cost of three cycles of natural cycle IVF is less than the cost of one stimulated cycle.
DISADVANTAGES
*usually, there is only one follicle... one chance for an egg.
*one may not be able to retrieve the egg
*the egg may fail to fertilize
*the fertilized egg may not develop into an embryo
How is Natural IVF done? – Timing is Everything
There are 2 ways to determine follicle maturity.
*Ultrasound determines follicular diameter.
*The Estradiol and/or the start of the LH (luteinizing hormone) surge.
Ultrasound studies are done daily several days before ovulation is expected and when the follicle size reaches 16-18mm and/or the LH begins to rise, the retrieval is planned shortly afterwards. Interestingly, indomethacin (50mg 3 times daily with food) has been used by some clinicians once the follicle reaches maturity to help prevent collapse of the sac before the time of aspiration. In summary, Natural Cycle IVF is a useful and logical technique for selective patients.
The cost for Natural Cycle IVF is around $1800.
This includes the following:
cycle monitoring
office visits
all ultrasounds
all lab work (Estradiol, LH, Progesterone and your first pregnancy test)
the retrieval
anesthesia fee
cryopreservation fee
WOMEN SUITED FOR NATURAL IVF CYCLES
The women most suited are those with reasonably regular menstrual cycles who ovulate normally but who have problems with their fallopian tubes, or those couples where the reason for the infertility is inexplicable. It would not be suitable for women who don’t ovulate or who have very erratic menstrual cycles and probably also not for couples undergoing ICSI (the injection of a single sperm into the egg), although research into its feasibility for ICSI is to be carried out.
NATURAL CYCLE IVF is definitely worth considering. In effect, you get the best of both worlds. For this procedure, it is the single egg produced in a woman’s normal cycle that is inseminated. Also known as no or low stimulation IVF, it is an invitro fertilisation procedure which uses no artificial fertility drugs, or very low dose ones.
Why Would I Want To Have IVF Without Fertility Drugs?
For some couples, the choice is financial. It is done at a fraction of the cost of standard IVF, so it may be their only chance at treatment. Some people prefer to try this method before moving on to traditional IVF.
For others, the choice may be medical. They may be contraindicated to fertility drugs (for instance, with a previous history of ovarian cancer or depression) or they may have reacted badly to a course of fertility drugs before. Women who have suffered with ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome may be offered this type of treatment as the syndrome is very serious and can be life-threatening so it may not be safe for them to continue with standard IVF.
Some couples just don't like drugs and prefer a more natural approach to infertility.
A point to note is that because of the improvement in the embryo culture technology, we are now at a point where even one egg gives a reasonable chance of success – about 15% per cycle. Therefore, in women who do not wish to use fertility medications, cannot afford fertility medications, or who do not produce many eggs even when they use fertility medications – Natural Cycle IVF is a logical and often successful alternative. Given that the success is 15% per attempt, it has been the experience of many centers that with several cycles of Natural IVF, one can achieve the same success rate of one cycle of stimulated IVF (45%).
Indeed, a study published in Europe’s leading reproductive medicine journal, Human Reproduction*, has found that for the majority of women the chances of pregnancy are just as good if doctors rely on the woman’s natural menstrual cycle.
The researchers’ view is that, in 60% to 70% of cases, a series of treatment cycles without using ovarian stimulation would be safer, less stressful and mean fewer multiple births. It also costs only a fifth of the price of current practice and would bring IVF within the reach of more childless couples worldwide and enable countries that state-fund IVF to help more women.
Dr Geeta Nargund and colleagues reached their conclusion following a study of 181 treatments in 52 women at the Assisted Conception Unit at King’s College Hospital, London. All the women had treatment based around their natural menstrual cycles.
They were found to have the same chance of having a baby after an average of three to four cycles of treatment as women undergoing conventional drug-stimulated treatment – about a third (32% as against 34%).
The first test-tube baby – born in 1978 in England – was the result of normal menstrual cycle IVF treatment, but the practice was pretty well abandoned with the onset of extensive use of hormonal drugs to stimulate the ovaries into producing more eggs per cycle. This new study is the first to establish that basing treatment on a woman’s natural cycle can achieve comparable results with those of drug-stimulated cycles.
Dr Nargund, who now directs the fertility centre at St. George’s Hospital, London, said: "We’ve demonstrated that it is an effective and potentially cost-effective option for certain groups. With a trend now to reducing the number of embryos transferred, our study must open the debate as to whether a series of natural cycle treatments should become a mainstream conception technique for female infertility."
MORE ADVANTAGES OF NATURAL CYCLE IVF
Natural cycle IVF has several advantages over stimulated cycle IVF:
*Natural cycle IVF utilizes the body's normal ovulation process
*There are no expensive hormones to buy and fewer injections with natural cycle IVF.
*Natural cycle IVF may be repeated month after month, if necessary.
The cumulative pregnancy rate from three months of natural cycle IVF is over 50%
*At Olympia Women's Health, the cost of three cycles of natural cycle IVF is less than the cost of one stimulated cycle.
DISADVANTAGES
*usually, there is only one follicle... one chance for an egg.
*one may not be able to retrieve the egg
*the egg may fail to fertilize
*the fertilized egg may not develop into an embryo
How is Natural IVF done? – Timing is Everything
There are 2 ways to determine follicle maturity.
*Ultrasound determines follicular diameter.
*The Estradiol and/or the start of the LH (luteinizing hormone) surge.
Ultrasound studies are done daily several days before ovulation is expected and when the follicle size reaches 16-18mm and/or the LH begins to rise, the retrieval is planned shortly afterwards. Interestingly, indomethacin (50mg 3 times daily with food) has been used by some clinicians once the follicle reaches maturity to help prevent collapse of the sac before the time of aspiration. In summary, Natural Cycle IVF is a useful and logical technique for selective patients.
The cost for Natural Cycle IVF is around $1800.
This includes the following:
cycle monitoring
office visits
all ultrasounds
all lab work (Estradiol, LH, Progesterone and your first pregnancy test)
the retrieval
anesthesia fee
cryopreservation fee
WOMEN SUITED FOR NATURAL IVF CYCLES
The women most suited are those with reasonably regular menstrual cycles who ovulate normally but who have problems with their fallopian tubes, or those couples where the reason for the infertility is inexplicable. It would not be suitable for women who don’t ovulate or who have very erratic menstrual cycles and probably also not for couples undergoing ICSI (the injection of a single sperm into the egg), although research into its feasibility for ICSI is to be carried out.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
IVF IN THE UNITED STATES (II)
According to a 2006 survey by the Genetics and Public Policy Center at John Hopkins University, there are 415 ivf clinics in the United States.
Faced with such a daunting number, anyone considering ivf treatment in the US can certainly do with careful guidance because the choice of clinic plays a large, if not most important part in determining the final outcome of fertility treatment. In fact it is the belief of Rhonda Levy, that had she been well informed (at the time of her own ivf treatment) as to the choices she had, she would have achieved conception in the very first cycle of her ivf treatment. She has this to say:
"Although I was finally the mother I so desperately longed to be, I could not erase the horror of our long struggle from my thoughts. What troubled me most was the naiveté of my early assumption that I could place my faith in my physicians to guide me through the maze. I now understood that I had been handicapped because I did not know what I did not know: that there was an enormous disparity between the best and worst of the more than 400 fertility clinics in the United States, and that the vast majority offered low or only average odds for success with assisted reproduction. Unless a couple had the good fortune to find themselves in treatment at a superior clinic, they would be more likely to spend more time, more money, and to suffer significantly greater heartache than necessary. Reproductive medicine had become one of the most lucrative industries in medical history and its landscape was littered with dangerous landmines."
PLEASE CLICK BELOW TO READ HER FULL STORY:
Friday, February 15, 2008
IVF IN THE UNITED STATES
SOURCE: ANSWERS.GOOGLE.COM
United States
The Costs According to the American Society of Reproductive Medicine: the average cost of an IVF cycle in the U.S. is $ 12,400. “This price will vary depending on where you live, the amount of medications you're required to take, the number of IVF cycles you undergo, and the amount your insurance company will pay toward the procedure. You should thoroughly investigate your insurance company's coverage of IVF and ask for a written statement of your benefits. Although some states have enacted laws requiring insurance companies to cover at least some of the costs of infertility treatment, many states haven't.” “Also be aware that some carriers will pay for infertility drugs and monitoring, but not for the cost of IVF or other artificial reproductive technology. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association publishes a booklet called the "Infertility Insurance Advisor," which provides tips on reviewing your insurance benefits contract.”RESOLVE's website is at www.resolve.org. Success Rates “Success rates for IVF vary depending on a number of factors,including the reason for infertility, where you're having the procedure done, and your age. The CDC compile national statistics forall assisted reproductive technology procedures performed in the U.S.The statistics group together all procedures that constitute assisted reproduction technology (ART), including IVF, GIFT and ZIFT, although IVF is by far the most common.” The most recent report from 2000 found: “Successful pregnancy was achieved in 30.7% of all cycles. About 69% of the cycles carried out did not produce a pregnancy. Less than 1% of all cycles resulted in an ectopic pregnancy. About 11% of these pregnancies involved multiple fetuses. About 83% of pregnancies resulted in a live birth. About 17% of pregnancies resulted in miscarriage, induced abortion, or a stillbirth.”
United States
The Costs According to the American Society of Reproductive Medicine: the average cost of an IVF cycle in the U.S. is $ 12,400. “This price will vary depending on where you live, the amount of medications you're required to take, the number of IVF cycles you undergo, and the amount your insurance company will pay toward the procedure. You should thoroughly investigate your insurance company's coverage of IVF and ask for a written statement of your benefits. Although some states have enacted laws requiring insurance companies to cover at least some of the costs of infertility treatment, many states haven't.” “Also be aware that some carriers will pay for infertility drugs and monitoring, but not for the cost of IVF or other artificial reproductive technology. RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association publishes a booklet called the "Infertility Insurance Advisor," which provides tips on reviewing your insurance benefits contract.”RESOLVE's website is at www.resolve.org. Success Rates “Success rates for IVF vary depending on a number of factors,including the reason for infertility, where you're having the procedure done, and your age. The CDC compile national statistics forall assisted reproductive technology procedures performed in the U.S.The statistics group together all procedures that constitute assisted reproduction technology (ART), including IVF, GIFT and ZIFT, although IVF is by far the most common.” The most recent report from 2000 found: “Successful pregnancy was achieved in 30.7% of all cycles. About 69% of the cycles carried out did not produce a pregnancy. Less than 1% of all cycles resulted in an ectopic pregnancy. About 11% of these pregnancies involved multiple fetuses. About 83% of pregnancies resulted in a live birth. About 17% of pregnancies resulted in miscarriage, induced abortion, or a stillbirth.”
IVF IN THE UNITED KINGDOM (II) DR.TARANISSI'S ARGC
THE medical establishment doesn’t much like Mohammed Taranissi. He’s not too keen on them, either.
Depending on which side of the debate you’re on, he is seen as either a maverick or a miracle worker.
But the founder of London’s Assisted Reproduction And Gynaecology Centre is happy to be judged by his record.
He says 10,000 of his patients have had babies after having treatment at his clinic.
RAIDS ON HIS CLINICS
E PETITIONS FOR HIM SOURCE: IPETITIONS.COM
Tricia Mullen:
I found Mr T and his team to be highly professional, never was i pushed into taking unwanted treatments. Regarding IVIG I was informed this was a theory based treatment and that currently there was no research to back up this treatment, i consented to the treatment. I believe Mr T's stats speak for themselves. I do not believe Mr T cherry pick patients whilst having my treatment i met other ladies (patients) who had previously had many failed cycles at other clinics and Mr T did not turn them away as if they were a bad bet they received all there treatment at the upper wimpole clinic like me. I thank Mr T and his team for my lovely 8 week old daughter.
Anonymous:
I am due to start treatment at the ARGC next week. I made this decision after weeks and weeks of my own investigations.
KIRSTEN LANG:
I have written a rather large complaint to BBC tonight saying exactly what I think of their " witch hunt " and their unbalanced reports. To say I am disgusted is an understatement and it's not good for my blood pressure as I'm 7 months pregnant thanks to Mr. T and his team. 5 years of trying unsuccessfully and 1st time with ARGC... We're all with you.
Anonymous:
I have only ever heard positive things about Mr T. He has brought joy to many in helping to create their special miracles. Long may he keep up the good work.
Simon Bone:
Well, Robert Winston has sunk to a new low ... disgusting (& very bad acting). Thank you Mr T for my son.
ann turner:
I was very happy with my treatment at argc Thanks to mr Taranissi I have a wonderful son
robina bashir:
I am appalled and disgusted at this biased programme,the majority of us have had experiences at other clinics who happily took our money with no result. i am sitting here with my 1 week old baby tonight thank you Mr T.
CARMELA SIDERAS:
THIS IS A DISGRACE MR T SHOULD BE GIVEN HELP NOT HOUNDED. PURE WITCH HUNT. ARE THEY GOING TO INVESTIGATE THE OTHER CLINICS WHO OFFER THE SAME TREATMENTS?
R Phillips:
I only wish my consultant was as forward thinking and dedicated as Mr Taranissi appears to be.
Anonymous:
I am apalled by the biased editing of tonight's Panarama programme. Having had 4 failed cycles at a previous clinic where the treatment is 'one size fits all' the treatment offered by ARGC is tremendous with twice daily tests & different drugs to adapt to your particular circumstances. I know that anyone who has had treatment at anywhere other than ARGC & then gone to ARGC will fully endorse my views. This programme simply portrays the deep jealousy of other fertility experts who cannot come even close the the ARGC stats & stop at no lengths to cause scandal & attempt to ruin Mr Taranasi's reputation. Anybody who has any comprehension of the pain & suffering of not only infertility, but being at the hands of a poor, second rate provincial clinic, will simply dismiss this programme as utter nonsence & will continue to seek the treatment of a dedicated team who provide patients with a real chance of allowing their dream of becoming mothers to become true. If the programme really seeks to uncover the scandalous state of IVF treatment in the UK, the perhaps their time would be better spent carrying out a serious investigation of regional IVF centres, that at best deliver a 22% success rate, whilst relieving their patients of £4,000 per cycle. I would politely suggest that if there is any inappropriate treatment it is carried out in these clinics. It is also worth noting that at least 1 member of your 'impartial' panel has a vested interest in 1 such clinic
Sarah Murrin:
I chose the ARGC because the HFEA advertised the high success rates, not the clinic itself! I was given a registration pack, which clearly asks for a referral from your GP (you can't just walk in off the street as Panorama suggest). I am starting treatment at the end of the month as I have gone through monitoring and I am happy with the clinic. They offered me the immune blood test which I decided not to have, but they didn't force the issue.
Katie Conway:
Mr. T fufilled my dream of becoming a mother. Never at anytime did I find Mr. T or any staff at the ARGC unprofessional or unsupportive.
Anonymous:
Those that fling accusations at Mr Taranissi should remember that it wasn't so long ago that IVF was also unproven - where would we be today if they had listened to the sceptics? Once again, this country does its' damndest to quash innovation, for the sake of a few shocking headlines. We have had two failed ICSI cycles at one of the top five UK clinics where everything appeared to run smoothly, but still they failed. With dual infertility including PCOS and anti-sperm antibodies, surely it's not inconceivable to consider a potential immunological issue? Don't criticise unless you can explain results of over 55% - ARGC has been the top clinic in the UK since 1995 - he must be doing something right! As for using ARGC - we will still do so - I am far more likely to belive the testimonials of thos couples who have finally been successful at ARGC after numerous unsuccessful treatments elsewhere. Why no investigation into the clinics who offer hope, take our money but don't get the results?
Marie:
Thank you Mr T for Matthew (age 2 - first IVF) and another due in May. You never misled me or suggested anything other than "normal" ICSI (my husband has absence of the vas deferens) and have treated my husband and I with respect over the years. We are forever grateful to you.
Nikki Leimer:
Without Mr Taranissi I wouldn't be sitting here looking at my little girl playing happily with her toys. He gave us a chance that no other doctor in this country could or would do - he helped us professionally, emotionally and financially with our treatment - he is a truly wonderful man.
Cheryl Popham:
The biased, unjust, totally one sided programme only confounded my respect and trust for Mr Taranissi and his team.
Karen Randall:
I didn't recognise the description of Mr T or ARGC in Panorama's programme. It seems to me that the other IVF 'professionals' were themselves lacking in integrity. Had Prof Winston forgotten that he featured the ARGC doing successful IViG in his recent documentary 'A Child against the Odds'? The ARGC is the best. That is the problem - it causes jealousy and suspicion. Mr T gave me a 1% chance of getting pregnant but left it to my husband and I to decide if 1% was worth it for us. He treated us as intelligent adults able to make that decision. Just as he treated the 26 year old as an adult in the programme last night. If she had been trying for 12 months and preferred to go for treatment then that's HER choice. We don't all want to wait 2 years to see if it happens naturally, and it is disingenuous of the professionals to suggest that GPs don't refer to ACU Departments after a year because I know they do! And when you get there what happens? They talk about chlomid, IUI, HSGs, laparoscopies, hysteroscopies and IVF. Just as ARGC did. Good for ARGC for allowing us patients the right to make our own decisions. I thank god we didn't have endless counselling and ethics committee hoops to jump through - infertility is bad enough without the paternalism that goes with it so often. Not least from the likes of Prof Winston et al. The ARGC didn't help me have a baby - I did that via surogacy in the end - but they did help me explore all avenues that I wanted to and they helped me move on and away from IVF at the right time for me. THANK YOU for that! I hope they keep on doing what they do best - helping people have babies in the most successful way available. Yes, that costs money. Yes it's worth it.
Anonymous:
Dr Taranissi and his team have been nothing short of dedicated and professional. They have performed miracles and brought lots of joys to many families who have been trying for a baby. My husband and I were successful in our first attempt at IVF and we were never once coerced at any point and were given lots of time to make our decision.
ALLISON RYDER:
The treatment I recieved by Mr Taranissi and the whole team at the ARGC was exceptional compared to my previous experiences when I have felt exploited both emotionally and finacially (my own personal opinion). I was never given any additional treatments or investigations that were not necessary and the Clinic did everything possible to reduce costs (allowing me to buy drugs daily to avoid waste). The programme was biased no comparisions have been made with other IVF clinics. I will not hestitate to have a further cycle under his care and will continue to recommend the ARGC.
Ruth Heaffey:
I am sitting here with my 7 week old daughter next to me, thanks to Mr Taranissi. I took steroids and had ivig and maybe I wouldnt have her if I hadnt have made the decision to go through with those things. I am glad I did. No one made me, it was my choice, Mr Taranissi offered me a way to have my dream - her name is Grace Rose - and I will always be in support of him. He may be the richest doctor in england, but is he off on holiday all the time spending that money - no - everyday he is at work 24/7 - 365 days a year - that says it all about his commitment. Ruth Heaffey
victoria perratt:
The panorama programme and the BBC should be ashamed at the quality of its investigative journalism.
Lucy McCabe:
I had 4 treatments at another clinic that did not work. 2 years later (and older) Mr T got me pregnant 1st time. It is other fertility clinics, with Docs that barely spend 2 days a week in their clinic, that are ripping patients of by putting them through the same production line time after time. Shame on the HFEA for raiding the clinic on the day of the Panorama program - do they not think that IVF couples go through enough pain. What have the HFEA done for me? How about asking other clinics why their success rates are so appallingly low, how come they have so many instances of OHSS etc etc Finally I hope that the image of the other so called experts on last nights program - gigglying like bulllying school children round a table at Mr T efforts - will come to haunt them
Anna Franklin:
As an IVF patient although not at ARGC I was incensed by the one-sided reporting of the Panorama. It made the assumption that we are all vunerable, ill informed idiots who need protecting, whereas the majority are intellingent, educated individuals capable of making their own decision. The proof of Mr Taranassi's hard work and dedication is the thousands of babies born to women who had almost lost hope of ever being a mother. Unless you have experienced the pain of infertility first hand, please do not try to decide for me what is best.
Louise Holden:
I am disgusted by the biased programme aired by panorama last night that offended the very delicacy of my nature. I am seething that a show normally held with high regard would tarnish not only itself by twisting it lies and using a panel of jealous ridden so called experts to destroy the man who has completed so many peoples lives. I honestly feel that because of his high results a pack of bitter not as successfull jackals are trying to drag him down.
Joanna Murphy:
I am upset and angry at the way in which both the HFEA and the BBC have bullied Mr. Taranissi. I feel it is a case of him being a victim of his own success, which is as a result of hard work and dedication and nothing else. He is a tall poppy who stands out and people are jealous of his success. As a patient of his I am so sad that he may not be able to continue to help couples achieve their dreams as he did with me.
arlene anderson:
there are two other clinics ranked top by hfea,why aren they investigated as they offer the same controversial treatment. this is a travesty. ask the patients what they tink if Mr T is tobe sut down.
Simi Treanor:
This clinic really tailor makes each individual treatment for each patient. They are a hard work and dedicated team. Why are they being portrayed as result fixing money grabbing people. It is simply not true.
Charlotte Nicholl:
ARGC is still most definitely on my list of options for future treatment. Get some additional help to sort your administration and the licencing problems out, so you can concentrate on doing what you do best - making dreams come true.
Anonymous:
Mr T and his ARGC team are amazingly dedicated, and the work they do to help couples like us is second to none. This was a total stitch-up and the BBC should be ashamed of itself.
Anonymous:
Mr T has our support 100%. We can't believe that the media are doing this and trying to close such a great and successful clinic down that has made so many couples dreams come true.
Anonymous:
I am deeply upset about the way Mr T has been treated and potrayed by the BBC. This is a man who has made the dreams of many women come true - women who have been to a number of fertility clinincs in Endland and have failed. This reeks of irresponsible journalism (I am surprised at the BBC producing something like this) and professional jealousy. Could it also be that he is a succesful non-english doctor?!
Anonymous:
Even though I have had 3 failed ICSI cycles at ARGC, I cannot praise Mr T highly enough for his dedication and hard work. There are things at the clinic that could do with changing, but the panorama program was totally biased and focussed on the perceived negatives. What about all the hard work and good the clinic does ? What about an investigation into the HFEA and what value they really add ? What other countries have such a strict regulatory body that ties the hands of the expert and the paying patient and charges them for the privilege ? Its no wonder the UK's success rates are amongst the lowest. Another example of bureaucrats and ignorance getting in the way of science and people's happiness.
Catherine Steele:
Without this clinic hundreds of women would never have achieved their dream of having a child. Thank you to Mr T and all your team for our beautiful daughter conceived during our first attempt at IVF. The BBC and the HFEA should be ashamed of themselves for their handling of this matter.
Ersilia Franklin:
I think its disgusting how the BBC have percieved Mr Taranissi. He is a wonderful man and is totally dedicated to his patients. He works 365 days a year from 7am till late what other doctor would be as dedicated as him.
Louise Archer:
This sort of biased, sensationalist and unfair programming is outrageous. It is certainly not in the public interest of ARGC patients and staff. To see such a sensitive and complex issue as IVF handled in this brutal, simplistic and unfair way is frankly irresponsible and cruel. After the BBC and HfEA have got their 30 minutes of sensational airtime, it will be the patients and staff who are left with the pain of struggling on in even more difficult circumstances. As if it wasn't tough enough for us already.
Hanne Berit Boffey:
Having used another clinic earlier, it was an enormous positive change to be treated by the ARGC. The investigation and monitoring prior to and follow-up during treatment to optimise outcome of the cycle is brilliant, and I believe their success is as much due to this as anything else.
Anonymous:
Feel Panorama programme grossly unfair and biased - think there are a few hidden agendas between certain individuals. Personally owe the birth of my beautiful 3 year old son to Mr Taranissi. Will defend him and his procedures to the hilt.
Anonymous:
I am 100% behind Mr T, and fully support his team of very dedicated workers. Please stay strong and keep going you are doing a wonderful job !
Depending on which side of the debate you’re on, he is seen as either a maverick or a miracle worker.
But the founder of London’s Assisted Reproduction And Gynaecology Centre is happy to be judged by his record.
He says 10,000 of his patients have had babies after having treatment at his clinic.
RAIDS ON HIS CLINICS
E PETITIONS FOR HIM SOURCE: IPETITIONS.COM
Tricia Mullen:
I found Mr T and his team to be highly professional, never was i pushed into taking unwanted treatments. Regarding IVIG I was informed this was a theory based treatment and that currently there was no research to back up this treatment, i consented to the treatment. I believe Mr T's stats speak for themselves. I do not believe Mr T cherry pick patients whilst having my treatment i met other ladies (patients) who had previously had many failed cycles at other clinics and Mr T did not turn them away as if they were a bad bet they received all there treatment at the upper wimpole clinic like me. I thank Mr T and his team for my lovely 8 week old daughter.
Anonymous:
I am due to start treatment at the ARGC next week. I made this decision after weeks and weeks of my own investigations.
KIRSTEN LANG:
I have written a rather large complaint to BBC tonight saying exactly what I think of their " witch hunt " and their unbalanced reports. To say I am disgusted is an understatement and it's not good for my blood pressure as I'm 7 months pregnant thanks to Mr. T and his team. 5 years of trying unsuccessfully and 1st time with ARGC... We're all with you.
Anonymous:
I have only ever heard positive things about Mr T. He has brought joy to many in helping to create their special miracles. Long may he keep up the good work.
Simon Bone:
Well, Robert Winston has sunk to a new low ... disgusting (& very bad acting). Thank you Mr T for my son.
ann turner:
I was very happy with my treatment at argc Thanks to mr Taranissi I have a wonderful son
robina bashir:
I am appalled and disgusted at this biased programme,the majority of us have had experiences at other clinics who happily took our money with no result. i am sitting here with my 1 week old baby tonight thank you Mr T.
CARMELA SIDERAS:
THIS IS A DISGRACE MR T SHOULD BE GIVEN HELP NOT HOUNDED. PURE WITCH HUNT. ARE THEY GOING TO INVESTIGATE THE OTHER CLINICS WHO OFFER THE SAME TREATMENTS?
R Phillips:
I only wish my consultant was as forward thinking and dedicated as Mr Taranissi appears to be.
Anonymous:
I am apalled by the biased editing of tonight's Panarama programme. Having had 4 failed cycles at a previous clinic where the treatment is 'one size fits all' the treatment offered by ARGC is tremendous with twice daily tests & different drugs to adapt to your particular circumstances. I know that anyone who has had treatment at anywhere other than ARGC & then gone to ARGC will fully endorse my views. This programme simply portrays the deep jealousy of other fertility experts who cannot come even close the the ARGC stats & stop at no lengths to cause scandal & attempt to ruin Mr Taranasi's reputation. Anybody who has any comprehension of the pain & suffering of not only infertility, but being at the hands of a poor, second rate provincial clinic, will simply dismiss this programme as utter nonsence & will continue to seek the treatment of a dedicated team who provide patients with a real chance of allowing their dream of becoming mothers to become true. If the programme really seeks to uncover the scandalous state of IVF treatment in the UK, the perhaps their time would be better spent carrying out a serious investigation of regional IVF centres, that at best deliver a 22% success rate, whilst relieving their patients of £4,000 per cycle. I would politely suggest that if there is any inappropriate treatment it is carried out in these clinics. It is also worth noting that at least 1 member of your 'impartial' panel has a vested interest in 1 such clinic
Sarah Murrin:
I chose the ARGC because the HFEA advertised the high success rates, not the clinic itself! I was given a registration pack, which clearly asks for a referral from your GP (you can't just walk in off the street as Panorama suggest). I am starting treatment at the end of the month as I have gone through monitoring and I am happy with the clinic. They offered me the immune blood test which I decided not to have, but they didn't force the issue.
Katie Conway:
Mr. T fufilled my dream of becoming a mother. Never at anytime did I find Mr. T or any staff at the ARGC unprofessional or unsupportive.
Anonymous:
Those that fling accusations at Mr Taranissi should remember that it wasn't so long ago that IVF was also unproven - where would we be today if they had listened to the sceptics? Once again, this country does its' damndest to quash innovation, for the sake of a few shocking headlines. We have had two failed ICSI cycles at one of the top five UK clinics where everything appeared to run smoothly, but still they failed. With dual infertility including PCOS and anti-sperm antibodies, surely it's not inconceivable to consider a potential immunological issue? Don't criticise unless you can explain results of over 55% - ARGC has been the top clinic in the UK since 1995 - he must be doing something right! As for using ARGC - we will still do so - I am far more likely to belive the testimonials of thos couples who have finally been successful at ARGC after numerous unsuccessful treatments elsewhere. Why no investigation into the clinics who offer hope, take our money but don't get the results?
Marie:
Thank you Mr T for Matthew (age 2 - first IVF) and another due in May. You never misled me or suggested anything other than "normal" ICSI (my husband has absence of the vas deferens) and have treated my husband and I with respect over the years. We are forever grateful to you.
Nikki Leimer:
Without Mr Taranissi I wouldn't be sitting here looking at my little girl playing happily with her toys. He gave us a chance that no other doctor in this country could or would do - he helped us professionally, emotionally and financially with our treatment - he is a truly wonderful man.
Cheryl Popham:
The biased, unjust, totally one sided programme only confounded my respect and trust for Mr Taranissi and his team.
Karen Randall:
I didn't recognise the description of Mr T or ARGC in Panorama's programme. It seems to me that the other IVF 'professionals' were themselves lacking in integrity. Had Prof Winston forgotten that he featured the ARGC doing successful IViG in his recent documentary 'A Child against the Odds'? The ARGC is the best. That is the problem - it causes jealousy and suspicion. Mr T gave me a 1% chance of getting pregnant but left it to my husband and I to decide if 1% was worth it for us. He treated us as intelligent adults able to make that decision. Just as he treated the 26 year old as an adult in the programme last night. If she had been trying for 12 months and preferred to go for treatment then that's HER choice. We don't all want to wait 2 years to see if it happens naturally, and it is disingenuous of the professionals to suggest that GPs don't refer to ACU Departments after a year because I know they do! And when you get there what happens? They talk about chlomid, IUI, HSGs, laparoscopies, hysteroscopies and IVF. Just as ARGC did. Good for ARGC for allowing us patients the right to make our own decisions. I thank god we didn't have endless counselling and ethics committee hoops to jump through - infertility is bad enough without the paternalism that goes with it so often. Not least from the likes of Prof Winston et al. The ARGC didn't help me have a baby - I did that via surogacy in the end - but they did help me explore all avenues that I wanted to and they helped me move on and away from IVF at the right time for me. THANK YOU for that! I hope they keep on doing what they do best - helping people have babies in the most successful way available. Yes, that costs money. Yes it's worth it.
Anonymous:
Dr Taranissi and his team have been nothing short of dedicated and professional. They have performed miracles and brought lots of joys to many families who have been trying for a baby. My husband and I were successful in our first attempt at IVF and we were never once coerced at any point and were given lots of time to make our decision.
ALLISON RYDER:
The treatment I recieved by Mr Taranissi and the whole team at the ARGC was exceptional compared to my previous experiences when I have felt exploited both emotionally and finacially (my own personal opinion). I was never given any additional treatments or investigations that were not necessary and the Clinic did everything possible to reduce costs (allowing me to buy drugs daily to avoid waste). The programme was biased no comparisions have been made with other IVF clinics. I will not hestitate to have a further cycle under his care and will continue to recommend the ARGC.
Ruth Heaffey:
I am sitting here with my 7 week old daughter next to me, thanks to Mr Taranissi. I took steroids and had ivig and maybe I wouldnt have her if I hadnt have made the decision to go through with those things. I am glad I did. No one made me, it was my choice, Mr Taranissi offered me a way to have my dream - her name is Grace Rose - and I will always be in support of him. He may be the richest doctor in england, but is he off on holiday all the time spending that money - no - everyday he is at work 24/7 - 365 days a year - that says it all about his commitment. Ruth Heaffey
victoria perratt:
The panorama programme and the BBC should be ashamed at the quality of its investigative journalism.
Lucy McCabe:
I had 4 treatments at another clinic that did not work. 2 years later (and older) Mr T got me pregnant 1st time. It is other fertility clinics, with Docs that barely spend 2 days a week in their clinic, that are ripping patients of by putting them through the same production line time after time. Shame on the HFEA for raiding the clinic on the day of the Panorama program - do they not think that IVF couples go through enough pain. What have the HFEA done for me? How about asking other clinics why their success rates are so appallingly low, how come they have so many instances of OHSS etc etc Finally I hope that the image of the other so called experts on last nights program - gigglying like bulllying school children round a table at Mr T efforts - will come to haunt them
Anna Franklin:
As an IVF patient although not at ARGC I was incensed by the one-sided reporting of the Panorama. It made the assumption that we are all vunerable, ill informed idiots who need protecting, whereas the majority are intellingent, educated individuals capable of making their own decision. The proof of Mr Taranassi's hard work and dedication is the thousands of babies born to women who had almost lost hope of ever being a mother. Unless you have experienced the pain of infertility first hand, please do not try to decide for me what is best.
Louise Holden:
I am disgusted by the biased programme aired by panorama last night that offended the very delicacy of my nature. I am seething that a show normally held with high regard would tarnish not only itself by twisting it lies and using a panel of jealous ridden so called experts to destroy the man who has completed so many peoples lives. I honestly feel that because of his high results a pack of bitter not as successfull jackals are trying to drag him down.
Joanna Murphy:
I am upset and angry at the way in which both the HFEA and the BBC have bullied Mr. Taranissi. I feel it is a case of him being a victim of his own success, which is as a result of hard work and dedication and nothing else. He is a tall poppy who stands out and people are jealous of his success. As a patient of his I am so sad that he may not be able to continue to help couples achieve their dreams as he did with me.
arlene anderson:
there are two other clinics ranked top by hfea,why aren they investigated as they offer the same controversial treatment. this is a travesty. ask the patients what they tink if Mr T is tobe sut down.
Simi Treanor:
This clinic really tailor makes each individual treatment for each patient. They are a hard work and dedicated team. Why are they being portrayed as result fixing money grabbing people. It is simply not true.
Charlotte Nicholl:
ARGC is still most definitely on my list of options for future treatment. Get some additional help to sort your administration and the licencing problems out, so you can concentrate on doing what you do best - making dreams come true.
Anonymous:
Mr T and his ARGC team are amazingly dedicated, and the work they do to help couples like us is second to none. This was a total stitch-up and the BBC should be ashamed of itself.
Anonymous:
Mr T has our support 100%. We can't believe that the media are doing this and trying to close such a great and successful clinic down that has made so many couples dreams come true.
Anonymous:
I am deeply upset about the way Mr T has been treated and potrayed by the BBC. This is a man who has made the dreams of many women come true - women who have been to a number of fertility clinincs in Endland and have failed. This reeks of irresponsible journalism (I am surprised at the BBC producing something like this) and professional jealousy. Could it also be that he is a succesful non-english doctor?!
Anonymous:
Even though I have had 3 failed ICSI cycles at ARGC, I cannot praise Mr T highly enough for his dedication and hard work. There are things at the clinic that could do with changing, but the panorama program was totally biased and focussed on the perceived negatives. What about all the hard work and good the clinic does ? What about an investigation into the HFEA and what value they really add ? What other countries have such a strict regulatory body that ties the hands of the expert and the paying patient and charges them for the privilege ? Its no wonder the UK's success rates are amongst the lowest. Another example of bureaucrats and ignorance getting in the way of science and people's happiness.
Catherine Steele:
Without this clinic hundreds of women would never have achieved their dream of having a child. Thank you to Mr T and all your team for our beautiful daughter conceived during our first attempt at IVF. The BBC and the HFEA should be ashamed of themselves for their handling of this matter.
Ersilia Franklin:
I think its disgusting how the BBC have percieved Mr Taranissi. He is a wonderful man and is totally dedicated to his patients. He works 365 days a year from 7am till late what other doctor would be as dedicated as him.
Louise Archer:
This sort of biased, sensationalist and unfair programming is outrageous. It is certainly not in the public interest of ARGC patients and staff. To see such a sensitive and complex issue as IVF handled in this brutal, simplistic and unfair way is frankly irresponsible and cruel. After the BBC and HfEA have got their 30 minutes of sensational airtime, it will be the patients and staff who are left with the pain of struggling on in even more difficult circumstances. As if it wasn't tough enough for us already.
Hanne Berit Boffey:
Having used another clinic earlier, it was an enormous positive change to be treated by the ARGC. The investigation and monitoring prior to and follow-up during treatment to optimise outcome of the cycle is brilliant, and I believe their success is as much due to this as anything else.
Anonymous:
Feel Panorama programme grossly unfair and biased - think there are a few hidden agendas between certain individuals. Personally owe the birth of my beautiful 3 year old son to Mr Taranissi. Will defend him and his procedures to the hilt.
Anonymous:
I am 100% behind Mr T, and fully support his team of very dedicated workers. Please stay strong and keep going you are doing a wonderful job !
IVF IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
SOURCE: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4572377.stm
Fertility success gulf revealed
Fertility treatment success rates vary widely from clinic to clinic, according to the first comprehensive guide to be published on services in the UK.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's publication on 85 clinics shows the average success rate for IVF for women under 35 to be just 27.6%.
But some centres achieve more than twice this rate.
HFEA chairwoman Suzi Leather said the guide aimed to help couples struggling to conceive to make informed choices.
She said many felt "left in the dark" about the treatment choices available to them at what could be a "difficult and emotional" time.
She said: "With one in seven people having some difficulty conceiving - almost 3.5m people across the UK - there is clearly a need for straightforward, independent information about infertility, its causes and the treatment options.
"Our guide is designed to cut through the jargon and complex science behind hi-tech fertility treatments to explain the causes of infertility, the possible treatments available and then give detailed information to let people make informed choices about the options available for them."
GPs lack information
Ms Leather said two out of five GPs had told the HFEA that they did not have enough information about fertility services.
"With treatment costing many thousands of pounds, it is right that the people paying for the treatment - the individual or the NHS - should get a proper sense of what they are paying for," she said.
The guide breaks down individual results according to the age of the women treated, showing success rates to be higher for younger women.
And Ms Leather pointed out that clinics specialising in treating younger women would be more likely to achieve high levels of success.
But she added that this alone could not account for the wide differences in success levels between clinics.
She told BBC News it was most likely that some clinics were simply "better" at delivering treatment, with more highly skilled embryologists.
Among the more successful clinics is London's Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre, which has a 59% success rate among women under 35 undergoing IVF using fresh eggs.
The guide reveals the most common age for women receiving IVF treatment to be 35.
It also indicates that 8,800 babies (1.5% of all births) are now born every year by IVF, 3,650 every year are born by intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), and many more thorough other assisted reproductive technology (ART).
The guide is available as an online, interactive version which allows patients to enter their details and receive tailored information about services and treatments in their area.
Infertility Network UK, a support group, said many people were still unable to access NHS treatment despite guidelines published last year which called for patients to be offered at least one full IVF cycle on the NHS.
Thus it was important that comprehensive information was available to help patients make the right choice for them.
Professor Alison Murdoch, of the British Fertility Society, said: "More and more couples are now coming to fertility clinics and many clinics take on couples who have really quite difficult fertility problems, which may be reflected in individual clinics' performance indicators.
"Infertility is a common medical condition, and the important challenge for the NHS now is to expand the level of fertility treatment available to those unable to have children through natural conception." Shadow Health
Secretary Andrew Lansley accused the government of ignoring guidelines to redress the restricted availability of fertility services.
HOW THE CLINICS FARED
IVF cycles resulting in live births
Clinic
NHS/Private
Live birth rates (%)
Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre, London
Both (NHS/Private)
58.5%
Woking Nuffield Hospital
Private
48.1 %
Centre for Assisted Reproduction, Gateshead
Both (NHS/Private)
43.4 %
Essex Fertility Centre, Buckhurst Hill
Private
39.5 %
UCH, London
Private
38.5%
Cromwell IVF and Fertility Centre, Swansea
Private
36.4%
Leicester Fertility Centre
Both (NHS/Private)
17.5 %
Cromwell IVF and Fertility Centre, London
Private
17.0 %
Brentwood Fertility Centre, Essex
Private
14.9%
Esperance Private Hospital, Eastbourne
Both (NHS/Private)
14.0%
St Mary's Hospital, Manchester
NHS
13.2 %
Willow Suite, Thames Valley Nuffield Hospital, Slough
Private
10.3 %
Source: HFEA (2005)
Fertility success gulf revealed
Fertility treatment success rates vary widely from clinic to clinic, according to the first comprehensive guide to be published on services in the UK.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's publication on 85 clinics shows the average success rate for IVF for women under 35 to be just 27.6%.
But some centres achieve more than twice this rate.
HFEA chairwoman Suzi Leather said the guide aimed to help couples struggling to conceive to make informed choices.
She said many felt "left in the dark" about the treatment choices available to them at what could be a "difficult and emotional" time.
She said: "With one in seven people having some difficulty conceiving - almost 3.5m people across the UK - there is clearly a need for straightforward, independent information about infertility, its causes and the treatment options.
"Our guide is designed to cut through the jargon and complex science behind hi-tech fertility treatments to explain the causes of infertility, the possible treatments available and then give detailed information to let people make informed choices about the options available for them."
GPs lack information
Ms Leather said two out of five GPs had told the HFEA that they did not have enough information about fertility services.
"With treatment costing many thousands of pounds, it is right that the people paying for the treatment - the individual or the NHS - should get a proper sense of what they are paying for," she said.
The guide breaks down individual results according to the age of the women treated, showing success rates to be higher for younger women.
And Ms Leather pointed out that clinics specialising in treating younger women would be more likely to achieve high levels of success.
But she added that this alone could not account for the wide differences in success levels between clinics.
She told BBC News it was most likely that some clinics were simply "better" at delivering treatment, with more highly skilled embryologists.
Among the more successful clinics is London's Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre, which has a 59% success rate among women under 35 undergoing IVF using fresh eggs.
The guide reveals the most common age for women receiving IVF treatment to be 35.
It also indicates that 8,800 babies (1.5% of all births) are now born every year by IVF, 3,650 every year are born by intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), and many more thorough other assisted reproductive technology (ART).
The guide is available as an online, interactive version which allows patients to enter their details and receive tailored information about services and treatments in their area.
Infertility Network UK, a support group, said many people were still unable to access NHS treatment despite guidelines published last year which called for patients to be offered at least one full IVF cycle on the NHS.
Thus it was important that comprehensive information was available to help patients make the right choice for them.
Professor Alison Murdoch, of the British Fertility Society, said: "More and more couples are now coming to fertility clinics and many clinics take on couples who have really quite difficult fertility problems, which may be reflected in individual clinics' performance indicators.
"Infertility is a common medical condition, and the important challenge for the NHS now is to expand the level of fertility treatment available to those unable to have children through natural conception." Shadow Health
Secretary Andrew Lansley accused the government of ignoring guidelines to redress the restricted availability of fertility services.
HOW THE CLINICS FARED
IVF cycles resulting in live births
Clinic
NHS/Private
Live birth rates (%)
Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre, London
Both (NHS/Private)
58.5%
Woking Nuffield Hospital
Private
48.1 %
Centre for Assisted Reproduction, Gateshead
Both (NHS/Private)
43.4 %
Essex Fertility Centre, Buckhurst Hill
Private
39.5 %
UCH, London
Private
38.5%
Cromwell IVF and Fertility Centre, Swansea
Private
36.4%
Leicester Fertility Centre
Both (NHS/Private)
17.5 %
Cromwell IVF and Fertility Centre, London
Private
17.0 %
Brentwood Fertility Centre, Essex
Private
14.9%
Esperance Private Hospital, Eastbourne
Both (NHS/Private)
14.0%
St Mary's Hospital, Manchester
NHS
13.2 %
Willow Suite, Thames Valley Nuffield Hospital, Slough
Private
10.3 %
Source: HFEA (2005)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
