To think we don’t know the long term impacts of ivf

[Redteapot67]

I read shocking research (albeit in the daily fail) today that ivf children are x6 more likely to have hypertension, which of course puts them at risk of cardiovascular disease.
It’s a stark reminder the first ivf baby is only 40 years old - we have no idea about the long term impacts on a baby of being born this way which I find frightening.
Please - I just want to discuss this if you are going to be upset by the debate look at another thread.
My personal take is that despite the possible unknown health risks if ivf were my only route to having a baby I would have it.

I’m must admit I’m confused over the health status of red wine too! Do you think it’s soneones job to do a stock red wine and health article every 2/3 months?

ok here are things I need to know.

Why not test adults of ivf also not just teens

What method of ivf was used. Egg fertilised outside the body? or inseminaiton. With or without the use of drugs. (not all rounds of ivf use drugs to alter the cycle.

What type of drugs, how long for and how many rounds of ivf. We know the drugs can affect the mother.

...Lazy journalist.

What method of ivf was used. Egg fertilised outside the body? or inseminaiton. With or without the use of drugs. (not all rounds of ivf use drugs to alter the cycle.

An egg that isn't fertilised outside the body isn't IVF

IVF means in vitro fertilisation

Hence 'test tube babies'

The egg is either fertilised via standard insemination in vitro (IVF), or by the embryologist selecting a sperm and injecting it into the egg (ICSI)

If the egg isn't fertilised in a dish in an embryology lab, then it's natural conception in the fallopian tube. Whether the sperm is deposited just outside the womb at the neck of the cervix via either ejaculation through intercourse, or home insemination with a syringe; or a couple of inches closer to the fallopian tube via intrauterine insemination in a fertility clinic - once the sperm is in the body its irrelevant how it got there.

It's true that some cycles of IVF are completely drug free, but natural cycle IVF is still pretty unusual - as it's got very very low chances of success with just one single egg retrieved. High cost for low chance of success. Mild IVF using lower doses of stims is becoming more prevalent, but that's not drug free

Natural cycle frozen embryo transfers are very common, but it's deeply unlikely that the embryo being transferred won't have been created via conventional IVF, using routine doses for ovarian stimulation

Why not test adults of ivf also not just teens

Because hypertension typically develops as a result of exposure to risk factors (smoking, diet, age). If you looked at adults it would be very difficult to work out whether they'd developed hypertension due to other these other factors or because of what you're studying (IVF). By testing teenagers who've had limited exposure to these other risk factors, you can be more confident (obviously not certain) that it's the IVF that is having an effect.

YANBU to think that we don't know enough about the possible effects of IVF but as it is a widely used medical procedure of course people are going to use it.

We carry a dominant gene in our family for a very rare chromosomal disorder and could qualify for PGD. I had genetic counselling about 15 years ago and the consultant said he did not favour any method of IVF as in his opinion on a genetic level the risks were too high. If I had been desperate for another baby I would have gone for it though.

The birth of these IVF multiple births is often celebrated in certain newspapers but there is never any mention later on of all the health issues that arise - I know that some women are desperate for a family but I just feel that nature should not be tampered with in this instance.

or cottongusset is there perhaps a case for only one embryo being implanted, which would be a more sensible conclusion, and is what a lot of US clinics recommend now as success rates have gone up. More research is the answer, rather than us giving up on something that has brought life changing happiness to so many.

I think SET would be good.
However
Some couples have very few eggs/very few fertilise.
So eg 2 embryos if you use SET you would be charged for no2 except thats expensive to store /freeze etc 1. Plus there was 50% chance of it not defrosting!!
So then you could prep for frozen cycle time drugs etc to not have ir go ahead.
This happened to us all 3 times.
Imo then to encourage SET clinics should not charge for freezing and storage especially if you technically could have used that embryo.
The other factor with SET is that if you had 10 embies if only one is good it's going to take 10 frozen cycles or 5 frozen cycles. So again a huge difference in time and cost.

OTOH some countries also dont let you dispose of unused frosties so you continue to pay for storage. So obviously this affects their storage criteria.
Also if the drugs do affect mum/baby frozen cycle with lower oestrogen may be better for baby.
But doing more frozen cycles because you are putting more back could affect mum.

More research into egg quality with age is needed. I guess pgd may provide more info.
Maybe asd genes testing on older mums/dads embies.
Will this look similar to the results for DS probabilities in older women

The meant to say we had 2 embies each time. We didnt freeze any at any point as luckily we were allowed to put both back each time