Clearblue Fertility Monitor Support Group Buddies Vol 5!!

[boba82]

Ladies from Vol4 - welcome to our new home.

There you go Roastie

In School
AnytimeNOW TTC#3, Cycle #6, CBFM Cycle 5, age 38, UCL 28, CD50
Michelle2222 TTC#2, CBFM Cycle 1, age 27, UCL?, CD47
Birdietimesthree TTC#1, Cycle #3, CBFM Cycle 2, age 36, UCL 24-25, CD40
IzzyWizzyletsgetbusy TTC#3 Cycle #4, CBFM Cycle 4, age 34, UCL 26-30 CD40
Ses TTC#2, cycle #5, CBFM cycle #7, age 37, UCL 28-30, CD37
Missyraines TTC#1, Cycle #13, CBFM Cycle 8, age 33, UCL 32, CD32
Sufferingbabyfever TTC#1, Cycle #4, CBFM Cycle 1, age 27, UCL 28 , CD31
wantbaby TTC#1, Cycle #11, CBFM cycle 6, age 38, UCL 30, CD27
CrazyAlien TTCno.1 cycle 5 CBFM Cycle 2 age 28 UCL 31-35??! CD25
Lychees TTC#2, Cycle #14, CBFM cycle 10, Aged 36, UCL 30-35, CD23
Twowoulddo TTC#2, Cycle #6, CBFM cycle 1?, Aged 31, UCL 31, CD22
Keziah TTC#1, Cycle #28, CBFM Cycle 16, age 35, ucl 28-31, CD19
ZebedeetheZebra TTC#2, age 43, UCL TMI!, CD18
PinkCustard TTC#2, Cycle #12, CBFM Cycle 7, age 34, UCL 30-32, CD17
KnackeredCow TTC#1, Cycle #15, CBFM Cycle 4, age 31, UCL 28, CD16
IloveKittyElise TTC#1, Cycle 2, CBFM Cycle 2, age 34, UCL 28, CD14
Fr00tbat TTC#1, Cycle 6, CBFM Cycle 2, age 32, UCL 30-38 (av 34), CD13
Boba82 TTC#1 Cycle 19, CBFM cycle 6, age 28, UCL 30 (FX), CD12
Roastie TTC#1, Cycle #?, CBFM Cycle 1, age 32, UCL ?, CD9

The Dog Ate My Homework
EmmaC29 TTC#1, Cycle #11, CBFM Cycle 1, age 29, UCL 26-29, CD67
Starlet22 TTC#1, Cycle #15, CBFM cycle 9, age 34, ucl 25, CD59
Littlefan TTC#1, Cycle 9, CBFM cycle 2 , age 31, UCL 32-38, CD52

Playing Truant
FlyingCat TTC#1, Cycle #26, CBFM cycle 2, age 30, UCL 28-29, CD156
Rach879 TTC#1 Cycle #7, CBFM cycle 1, age 30, UCL 30-34, CD123
Jenni4 TTC#2, Cycle #5, CBFM Cycle 2, age 36, UCL 26, CD103

Graduates
Emmylou30 BFP 22/10/10
MissLolita BFP 30/10/20
Notnearly BFP 6/11/10
StormBird BFP 10/11/10

Cycle # is the total number of cycles that you have been trying for, including any without the CBFM.

UCL = usual cycle length

Thanks KnackeredCow :)

So here are my stats

TTC#1, Cycle # 23, CBFM Cycle 1, age 32, UCL 29, CD9

knackered cow - i finally went 'hi' on day 12; yesterday was day 13 and i was starting to get O cramps, still am today but still hi on day 14...i think im just delayed due to the early MC as last month i hit peak on 13....all very annoying!

thanks for doing the stats....i echo your sentiments about the long cycle ladies - please share good news if you have any we could all do with a bit of encouragement!!!

Stats take 3!

In School
AnytimeNOW TTC#3, Cycle #6, CBFM Cycle 5, age 38, UCL 28, CD50
Michelle2222 TTC#2, CBFM Cycle 1, age 27, UCL?, CD47
Birdietimesthree TTC#1, Cycle #3, CBFM Cycle 2, age 36, UCL 24-25, CD40
IzzyWizzyletsgetbusy TTC#3 Cycle #4, CBFM Cycle 4, age 34, UCL 26-30 CD40
Ses TTC#2, cycle #5, CBFM cycle #7, age 37, UCL 28-30, CD37
Missyraines TTC#1, Cycle #13, CBFM Cycle 8, age 33, UCL 32, CD32
Sufferingbabyfever TTC#1, Cycle #4, CBFM Cycle 1, age 27, UCL 28 , CD31
wantbaby TTC#1, Cycle #11, CBFM cycle 6, age 38, UCL 30, CD27
CrazyAlien TTCno.1 cycle 5 CBFM Cycle 2 age 28 UCL 31-35??! CD25
Lychees TTC#2, Cycle #14, CBFM cycle 10, Aged 36, UCL 30-35, CD23
Twowoulddo TTC#2, Cycle #6, CBFM cycle 1?, Aged 31, UCL 31, CD22
Keziah TTC#1, Cycle #28, CBFM Cycle 16, age 35, ucl 28-31, CD19
ZebedeetheZebra TTC#2, age 43, UCL TMI!, CD18
PinkCustard TTC#2, Cycle #12, CBFM Cycle 7, age 34, UCL 30-32, CD17
KnackeredCow TTC#1, Cycle #15, CBFM Cycle 4, age 31, UCL 28, CD16
IloveKittyElise TTC#1, Cycle 2, CBFM Cycle 2, age 34, UCL 28, CD14
Fr00tbat TTC#1, Cycle 6, CBFM Cycle 2, age 32, UCL 30-38 (av 34), CD13
Boba82 TTC#1 Cycle 19, CBFM cycle 6, age 28, UCL 30 (FX), CD12
Roastie TTC#1, Cycle #23, CBFM Cycle 1, age 32, UCL 29, CD9

The Dog Ate My Homework
EmmaC29 TTC#1, Cycle #11, CBFM Cycle 1, age 29, UCL 26-29, CD67
Starlet22 TTC#1, Cycle #15, CBFM cycle 9, age 34, ucl 25, CD59
Littlefan TTC#1, Cycle 9, CBFM cycle 2 , age 31, UCL 32-38, CD52

Playing Truant
FlyingCat TTC#1, Cycle #26, CBFM cycle 2, age 30, UCL 28-29, CD156
Rach879 TTC#1 Cycle #7, CBFM cycle 1, age 30, UCL 30-34, CD123
Jenni4 TTC#2, Cycle #5, CBFM Cycle 2, age 36, UCL 26, CD103

Graduates
Emmylou30 BFP 22/10/10
MissLolita BFP 30/10/20
Notnearly BFP 6/11/10
StormBird BFP 10/11/10

Kitty Ovulation pains can start before ovulation when the follicle is growing so the CBFM may be working OK for you. I am sure next month it will be spot on once things have settled down. Hope you are feeling a little better now.

Welcome roastie

How is everyone? Hope you're all ok?

bored at work but at least i've finished all the crap i had to get done for tomorrow's board meeting and can leave in about an hour....finally.....

Ps for the stats wouldnt i be hilarious to have a flashing obscene graphic for 'mid-cyclers'...just to remind them?!

Hello, I read this thread avidly but rarely post. I'd like to ask a question of you CBFM-users which I asked on another thread.

I had unplanned sex with DH the day after my 2 peak days. It always goes to low fertility on that day. I think it would be very unlikely to have conceived, what do you all think?

I'd say it was relatively unlikely as the egg only has a short life span and apparently most conceptions result from before ovulation rather than after. No guaratees though!

Hi Kat, thank you, yes that's what I was thinking! Can you ovulate on either of the 2 peak days? Or is it the first peak day when you ovulate?

I had assumed the day you went back to low fertility on the monitor that the egg was gone - ie that the 2 peak days were the 48 days AFTER ovulation when the egg was still "available".
Is that right?

i think it kind of depends very much on the timing of when your peak is picked up: the peak is shown when the surge of LH is detected, which can occur 12-36 hours before ovulation. If you test first thing the surge could have been the previous afternoon (apparently it is common for LH surge to take place in afternoon), so by the time you test and pick it up the next morning it could already be 12 hours later and you could literally be ovulating then and there, and only be fertile that day, or conversely, it could pick up the beginning of the surge that morning and you could be ovulating 36 hours later (ie evening of second 'peak' day) and could still be fertile the following morning...

in short i think its very individual and very variable, and by applying the above logic cautiously, i dont think you can always assume that you are fertile on peak day 2....

i still havent had a peak. had some unfulfilling sex and a big row with my husband though. does that count?!!!

Kitty I know what you mean. I really do hate baby-making sex sometimes.

Arabella I agree with what all the other ladies on here have said. You are most likely to conceive if you have sex before ovulation. NICE combined some studies and found that the highest rates of conception are found to occur when sex is two days prior to ovulation. They did find that conception can occur if you have sex on the day of ovulation, but rarely occurs if sex is after ovulation as the egg doesn't live very long.

Before sperm are capable of fertlisation they have to undergo capacitation (the head of the sperm changes shape to make it capable of penetrating the egg), which is induced by the female reproductive tract. This takes quite a few hours, so although the sperm can get to the fallopian tubes relatively quickly they aren't very useful for a while! The guy that won the nobel prize for Medicine this year was the person who developed IVF. His bit of genius was developing a medium that would allow sperm to undergo capacitation outside of the reproductive tract so that fertilization could occur in-vitro.

Anyway, that's why I don't bother charting. The temperature increase is useful to confirm that ovulation has definitely taken place, but by this point it's generally a bit late for conception to occur.

However, as Kitty says with the monitor it does depend on what point it picks up your LH surge and how long an individual's surge lasts. But as Kat says, probably unlikely.

Hi ilovekittyelise, I didn't get a peak this month til day 16, so I'm guessing yours could well arrive over the next couple of days.

I think men can feel very pursued when you're TTC which they're not always happy about, hee hee. I know that mine did last time

From your explanation of the ovulation/peak day relationship I think I'll almost certainly not be pregnant this month(I'm not supposed to be trying this month you see because of work, hence the reassurance-seeking!

Knackered cow (love the name!), you have a fantastic knowledge of how this works - thank you for such a good explanation

My pleasure.

There's a really good book by Robert Winsotn called A Child Against All Odds. It really does explain the science behind fertility from somebody who was a real pioneer in the field. I was unaware that he developed fallopian tube microsurgery. It's also worth a read if interested in the ethics of IVF and fertility treatment.

Knackered - I think I'll try to get hold of that book. I liked Winston's style of explaining things in his TV programmes. He manages to make scientific stuff sound not too dry. Does he make any comment on the usefulness of CBFM or ovulation sticks?

He's not a fan of them, but I can see his point. The issue he has is that women may use them and assume they are ovulating. However, in some medical conditions such as PCOS, LH levels are high all the time and so the sticks can give false positives.

On the flip side to that I'd argue they are fine if a woman knows she's ovulating. I also like the control they give and so if the effect is purely psychological, I don't think there's any harm in using them.

He thinks taking temperature daily is better, BUT it does only confirm ovulation (progesterone causes the elevation in temp). Obviously, it's too late to conceive by the time temperature is elevated.

I personally don't believe in alternative therapies because as far as I can see the evidence simply shows that the effect is placebo, so I am enjoying Winston's book. However, if you do believe in the use of acupuncture and homeopathy etc he is very scathing and so the book might not be for you.

The book is warmly written, easy to read and there's some funny stories in there about his own research. It's a good account of the history of fertility too.

I got my copy from Amazon. I think it cost around £7.

Knackered, have you ever heard Dara O'Briain holding forth on the topic of homeopathic remedies? Absolutely hilarious!! He talks about how the research world has tested ALL remedies, and the ones that have actually been shown to work are called "medicine". Mmmm, it's funnier when he tells it!

Having said that, I think if people find that homeopathic techniques help to relax them, then that is of real benefit when trying to conceive. Also, placebo effect can be very powerful if a person thinks something will work. I'm frightened of offending someone who uses homeopathy, but no offence is intended.

Same here. No offence is intended and the placebo effect is VERY powerful and real. Always seen in the control group whenever they test a new drug. The psychological effects of any sort of intervention are very strong. So I guess in that respect they do work.

Also, anything to aid relaxation and reduce stress is good too. I guess my only concern is that there are some charlatans out there who could take pecuniary advantage of a woman who is vulnerable and desperate to conceive.

Haven't heard Dara O'Briain but will have a look for the sketch. If you like that sort of thing have a look for Homeopathic A&E on You Tube. It was on That Mitchell & Webb Look

I'll look out for that mitchell& Webb sketch. Agree wholeheartedly with you on the potential for such charlatans to take money from people while allowing them to believe their treatment can do more for them than is realistic. Even more so if it prevents the person from seeking medical help which is more likely to work.

It's different when the customer has realistic expectations of what can be achieved. Oh dear, this is all getting very serious

I'm enjoying everyone's thoughts on homeopathic remedies. I come from a science background (my undergrad degree is in chemistry, did some pharmacology electives also and have worked in a big pharma co).

I kind of think there is a broad line down the middle of homeopathy, between products and therapies that emulate drugs (whilst pretending not to) and therapies that work in a completely different way.

On the 'drug' front my thoughts are this. Take something like St John's wort, a 'natural' antidepressant. Compare this to various prescription medicines also derived from 'natural' sources (eg various types of antibiotics). The only real difference is that the homeopathic product is not licensed to be used for it's purpose. Obviously this is a fairly broad brush statement and i know there are exceptions; but if something which can be easily obtained with little R&D cost could be proven fit for purpose and patented by a pharma giant, believe me they would do it...if they can prove through pre and clinical trials that a particular group of molecules is fit for purpose they purify it and leap on whether it comes purely from a synthetic research lab of from the sap of the rare old gum tree whatever...

on the other hand, chinese medicine. i will admit i was a sceptic, but when a GP friend of mine was training in acupuncture to complement her traditional practice (which by the way is a concept i love, the two going hand in hand), i thought why not give it a go and be a free guinea pig for stress and constipation. i went in there with a good deal of healthy sceptcism and can only say i was amazed with the results. i left feeling the way i had previously only done after 6 months on antidepressants, got home, and did a big poo!

long opinionated rant over....in short, some of it's just garbage but i think its worth keeping an open mind!

It's an interesting debate. Ilovekittyelise - my main issue with st. Johns wort is that the dose varies significantly from brand to brand, and people don't know this without looking into it. They can just buy it without speaking to a doctor/ pharmacist. And it can interact with some prescription medicines. And some people mistakenly think because it's viewed as "herbal" that it's just like taking a vitamin and they don't have to worry about side effects. And some think it's safer than taking something prescribed by their doctor.

Why not get an antidepressant from a doctor who can at least tell you what the dose is and what the side effects/interactions are! They're both drugs after all!

Definitely interesting to think about! I like hearing others' opinions on this too

i agree....thats a really interesting point especially on st johns wort...i guess it holds a very unique position in the market - ie people who need an antidepressant that dont want to be labelled as taking an antidepressant; i've never tried st johns wort myself, iv suffered quite badly with anxiety over the years and to be honest i tend to manage it by undertaking a healthy lifestyle (mostly!), swimming, and taking the odd course of antidepressants when i get really bad; not ideal, but i know it gets me back on an even keel and yes, i would far rather do that in a medically supervised way...

Enjoying reading this debate.

St John's Wort does contain an active compound within in it (hypericum). Some herbal remedies at the right dosage can and do work although the caveat is that a person may not seek appropriate medical advice, as arabella said, and risk interaction with other medications.

My understanding with homeopathy is that the "active" ingredient is diluted down so much that it's the treatment is simply water or a sugar pill with no active compound. To my mind that's why no good quality study has ever shown homeopathy to be effective beyond the placebo effect.

Sorry, just making the distinction between herbal (which may contain an unrefined active ingredient and consequently work) and homeopathy where there is no active compound.

Some herbal remedies have been shown to work in good quality clinical trials. St John's Wort is one of them (The Cochrane Colllaboration, which seeks to look for the highest level of evidence looked at this), but the problem is getting the dosage right. The positive effect was found to be greater than placebo, but less than other anti-depressants. However, on the other side, there were less side effects. I guess though the benefits aren't quite great enough to make it worth Big Pharma developing it, and do remember it does reduce the effectiveness of some hormonal contraception, which is a bad major side effect for many women and, being cynical, massively reduces the market for the product. The reason I am cynical is until I gave up work recently I spent the last four years as a marketing manager for a medical company. Although I worked in devices rather than pharma, I saw us scrap a number of products at the R&D stage because, although they worked and would have really benefitted a patient, the potential market wasn't large enough to repay the costs and make a profit.

Anyway, I digressed. As far as I can see there is no good evidence for homeopathy.

But that is my personal opinion and I certainly don't want to upset anyone.