The Predatory Practice of Fertility Mongering

Blastocyst on day 5 after fertilization Courte...

5 day old blastocyst - Image via Wikipedia


I know this girl who went through this whole thing with in vitro fertilization. It never worked. I think she had two miscarriages. She was miserable and sad. I understand it is a painful process. And, oh yes, it is expensive. She ultimately gave up because the false hope, heartbreak and stress were just entirely too much. Not to mention the sheer physical pain and discomfort.

They adopted a child.

She got pregnant twice afterward, the out-dated way, and now has three children.

Why was she able to get pregnant? I have some ideas which I will share momentarily. But guess what? The folks that took thousands of dollars from her and failed to deliver don’t have a clue. Or at least I hope they don’t, in a way. Because if they do know, then they simply took advantage of her. But then, they took advantage of her anyway. Because they failed.

IVF holds out this hope to discouraged and desperate couples. “We can get you pregnant.” People that want to have a baby become so desperate they are willing to try anything, and to believe any encouragement. They are given information regarding the chances for success and the potential complications. But, this is all offered within the context of “This is your only hope.” Which is flatly and unambiguously a lie.

Why do I say such a thing? Because they said “This is your only hope.” But, she did not get pregnant using IVF. She did get pregnant later.

If IVF did not get her pregnant, and then she got pregnant twice since then, and has two healthy children, then IVF was not her only hope. In other words, “This is your only hope” was not true. Which is a nice way of saying it was a lie. She’s had two babies. Demonstrable by simple reality, IVF was not her only hope.

What changed? Why was she able to have not one but two babies when they had been trying and failing for years? I think it’s pretty simple. Women respond hormonally to having children, even adopted ones*. She adopted a baby, now she had someone to care for. She adopted a baby, now she could quit worrying about having one. Hormonally, something changed, in response to the need to care for a life. We are, after all, wondrously designed to have babies.

Her body responded to being a mother. And she became fertile.

Well, guess what. There are fertility doctors that understand this. When something clearly designed to propagate fails to propagate, there is a reason. It can be addressed. I know this is true because how else do you explain this woman getting pregnant when the only thing that changed was the fact she adopted?

There is serious cash to be made with in vitro fertilization and this frankly is what drives this pseudo-technology. In the year 2000, the “pregnancy success rate” of IVF was 30.7 percent. Note, however, that this is a clever way of reporting the data. Of those 30.7 %, only 83% resulted in actual live birth. Which means the actual success rate is 25.5%. Also not disclosed in that 30.7 success rate is the percentage of premature births and incidence of birth defects. When you factor all that in, the actual live healthy baby rate falls below 20%

If you do a little bit of internet searching, it will be presented that IVF is a last resort for those people who basically can’t have babies. That is an obvious lie. Because that would mean that my friend could not have a baby. Yet, she adopted and then had two in a row. Obviously, she could have babies.

There are other statistics that people don’t want to talk about with regard to IVF. Like the number of couples that get divorced after going through IVF as compared to infertile couples that don’t. And did you know that there are now court cases of custody battles over frozen embryos?

When there is a buck to be made, none of this matters. The truth of IVF is this: Scientists are experimenting on women and their children for money. Any procedure done on someone with a known failure rate of 75% is experimental. It’s an experiment. “Let’s see what happens. But, check their credit first.”

Remember: my infertile friend, that could not have a baby, that had ostensibly “tried everything” that science had to offer, has had two babies. And apparently God only knows why.

Real fertility doctors don’t default to invasive experimental surgery, but instead study the actual problem and determine the solution. There are doctors out there that specialize in fertility that don’t initiate treatment by handing the patient a credit app. The approach is called NaPro, which is short for Natural Procreation. If you follow the link, you will read an article that describes this as a way to prevent pregnancy. However, that is only part of the truth. This process also helps people get pregnant. Basically, it treats the fact of infertility as a symptom of some other underlying cause, and searches for and addresses that cause. My opinion is that IVF doesn’t care about the underlying cause, because, simply there’s no money in treating the underlying cause.

Why? I’ll tell you why – $10,000 to $12,000 per IVF cycle. Cycles are approximately 1 month.

NaPro costs? Around $2,500 per 12 treatment cycles going over 12 to 18 months.

Let’s see, ten to twelve thousand dollars a month versus 2500 dollars a year. Hmmmmm.

——————————————————————————————-

* Adoption Reverses Impairment in Glucocorticoid Feedback; See also Conception after Adoption

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s