Wednesday November 4, 2009
If I had to say which two causes of infertility get the most press, I'd say it was age related infertility and polycystic ovarian syndrome, also known as PCOS. PCOS is a common endocrine disorder in women, affecting up to 8% of women.
There are a lot of misconceptions about polycystic ovarian syndrome. For one, some women (and even doctors!) seem to assume if a woman is having trouble with ovulation, and age isn't the cause, then PCOS is an obvious answer. But that's simply not true! There are a range of causes of anovulation, and while polycystic ovarian syndrome is a common cause, it's important to rule out other causes before diagnosis.
Another misconception about PCOS is that only women who are overweight have PCOS. This is one I've run into personally. I had just switched my gynecologist, and had a polycystic ovarian syndrome diagnosis from my previous doctor, based on blood work, ultrasound confirmation of polycystic ovaries, and symptoms.
But when giving over my history to my new doctor, when I said I have PCOS, she said, "No you don't." I didn't even know how to respond to that! I felt like a four year old when I said, "Yes, I do."
My new doctor was looking at me - at a healthy weight - and assuming I could not possibly have PCOS. I eventually had to "prove" it with my old records, but it was an uncomfortable situation.
Learn more about what you need to know about polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) in this article.
Sunday October 25, 2009
Could reflexology become the next alternative medicine option for infertility? According to a news article at the UK DailyMail website, the IVF unit at Derriford Hospital in Plymouth, England will be starting a two year clinical trial to find out.
The article says that some women feel reflexology has helped them become pregnant, but as of today, no research has looked into the claims. This will be the first study on reflexology and infertility.
Reflexology is an alternative treatment method that believes certain "reflex" points on the feet and hands correspond to particular organs and systems in the body.
For the trial, 150 women will be offered reflexology treatment instead of treatment with the fertility drug Clomid.
The study sounds interesting, and I'm curious of what the results will be. It's good to see researchers looking into more alternative treatment methods.
Right now, acupuncture is one of the few research studied alternative treatment methods for infertility, but there are quite a few alternative treatment methods claiming their "way" works. My hope is that researchers will take the time to look into these different techniques and claims, so women will not only have more options, but also, so that money, time, and effort isn't wasted on methods that just do not really work.
Have you ever tried reflexology, or any other alternative treatment method? Share your experiences in the comment section below. I'd love to hear from you!
More information:
Wednesday October 21, 2009
A new article at MSNBC.com reported that a sperm donor from San Francisco passed on a genetic heart condition to 9 out of 24 of his biological children. One of those children died from heart failure at age 2.
The genetic heart condition, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, is apparently not that uncommon of a genetic condition, affecting 1 in 500. The donor bank where the condition was passed on has now started screening all potential donors for this condition (which does not always express symptoms) by giving the men an ECG.
The article also mentioned that most banks screen for genetic disorders via blood test, but this particular disorder has been pretty much ignored. The genetic disorders that have been included in regular screening are actually less common than this heart condition.
The story highlights the need for careful screening of all donors - sperm and egg donors. Of course, when a couple has a baby (without using a sperm donor), there is the potential to pass on whatever health conditions may exist in their families. But they have the benefit of having good access to their family history.
For children of sperm or egg donors, they only have the information made available through the sperm bank, which may or may not be enough if medical problems arise later.
Plus, when choosing a donor, you want the best you can get, healthwise. Why choose a donor who may pass on a serious medical condition, when you can choose a donor with a healthier track record?
What are your thoughts? Please share in the comments below, I'd love to hear from you!
Sunday October 11, 2009
There's an interesting article at the New York Times online titled "The Gift of Life, and Its Price." The article talks about IVF treatment and the rate at which twin pregnancies result. It goes on to explain that while many people think of twins as not a "big deal" risk wise, the fact of the matter is that twins are riskier than a singleton pregnancy.
Twins are conceived from IVF treatment often because couples choose to have two or more embryos transferred, rather than one, to increase the odds of success. The hope is that at least one baby will "stick", but often, both babies stick, leading to twins.
The article also talks about how much more expensive twins are, in terms of medical costs, and that this is one of many reasons single-embryo transfer should be used for IVF treatment, in women with a high chance of success.
In my opinion, the article spends very little wordage on one of the biggest barriers to single-embryo transfer - and that's the cost to a couple who is going through fertility treatment.
Yes, it's true -- the overall medical costs for twins can be much, much higher. But couples rarely see that expense. Health insurance usually covers the bill. On the other hand, the cost of IVF treatment is often solely paid for by the couple. When looking at their budget, opting for two embryos instead of one embryo looks like the best choice (especially when the risks of twin pregnancies aren't understood, or when they can only afford one treatment cycle).
I know that at least a few fertility clinics have started offering incentives to those opting for a single embryo transfer. The deal is that you pay for the first treatment cycle, and they will freeze any extra embryos and transfer them at a later cycle if the first treatment cycle fails, without added cost. This is an excellent idea.
The question is, how popular will it become? I'd like to see it become standard protocol, and I suspect that would be more likely if insurance companies were paying for treatments. (They seem to have a way of reducing costs when they want to.)
I have a feeling if health insurance had to cover fertility treatment, it'd be good for everyone - even those insurance companies who are now refusing to cover IVF.
It'd be better for the doctors, as they would get more business (from those who could not otherwise afford treatment).
It'd be better for the couples, who wouldn't feel as pressured to transfer more than one embryo at a time.
It'd be better for the insurance companies, who could spend a little now to increase a couple's odd at having one baby, instead of paying high costs when multiples result instead.
And it'd be better for the babies, who might have a better chance at being born at the right time.
What are your thoughts? Please share in the comments below, I want to hear from you!
More about twins and fertility treatment risks:
