Postings about donating, selling or re-selling any drugs are not allowed on this board. Thank you for your cooperation. Anyone who posts about donating, buying or selling drugs will be banned from this board. If you need to contact the board monitor send an email message to: Over 40 High FSH Board Monitor


 


  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Back to square one (success, or lack thereof ment)

March 23 2012 at 12:41 PM
No score for this post
  (no login)

 
So, after having spent some time getting an opposing opinion of how to handle the aging ovaries of ME and what might be the best protocol for success, I have now come to the conclusion that I have JUST ABOUT as much success TTC on my own as I would using ANY medical intervention AND I won't be putting my body through untold challenges due to medications AND I won't be potentially spending upwards of 20K per shot trying to have a 1% chance of success.

Who knew that being 45 was going to be such a sucky year?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Kim
(no login)

So sorry you are feeling this way!!!!

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 2:27 PM 

Feeling the same way if it make you feel any better! We are hoping to do one more round of IVF but with ZIFT - which is slightly more expense than regular IVF. I feel like the $'s would be better spent on other things we need at this point! I'm 43 but headed to 44 in a few months so wondering about making this last effort. If I just did not have high FSH I'd feel better.

I have a friend on another board that used the same doctor I am and tried ZIFT at age 45 and had success on the first try. She had NO issues with high FSH and responded well (10 eggs) to moderate stims (starting at 300 step up to 450). The RE put back 8 embies into her fallopian tubes. Anyway she must be in her second trimester by now - and passed the CVS test on her little boy a month ago. Any way wanted to share some hope and success at 45 with you!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: So sorry you are feeling this way!!!!

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 2:51 PM 

Yes I have just had a phone call with SIRM and while they don't say I won't have a shot, my takeaway from the analysis is that even with that shot I will be looking at spending a lot of money for very little chance of pregnancy at this point. The odds that they give ALONG with the odd of medicated TI or IUI seem to offer about as much success as my trying to conceive naturally given my only factors for failure right now is the diagnosis of DOR due to age. I guess some people are ready to jump on those odds but I am not feeling like I can afford the risk NOR do I want to spend the time traveling back and forth. I am not opposed to medicated cycles of IUI or TTC but would like to find someone who is flexible on protocol as I am not sure my RE is currently.

Ugh.

I might feel MORE inclined to be aggressive if I were 41 but at 45 it is like I have reached the magical cut off point for all success.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: So sorry you are feeling this way!!!!

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 2:56 PM 

What WAS your friend's FSH by the way? AMH?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: So sorry you are feeling this way!!!!

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 3:07 PM 

We talked about ZIFT just so you know. And we also talked about EZ-STIM. My consult was WONDERFUL do NOT misconstrue my reality check with dissatisfaction. I found it to be quite informative and helpful and I learned a heck of a lot.

I was thrilled the doctor was so very kind and frankly humble in sharing knowledge.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

Not sure

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 3:50 PM 

Not sure if she would even know what her FSH is or AMH. I asked her if our doctor did ICSI and she said not sure....so doubt she knows what FSH or AMH is-lol!!!

I laugh and wish I could be like these women who know nothing about fertility treatments and get lucky!

I think her AMH is lower and FSH normal because she tried IVF at 44 (a year earlier) her true first time and had 10 embies but none viable for transfer b/c she tried to do genentic testing. So, our doctor recommended she try ZIFT - and it worked on her first try.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Not sure

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 4:18 PM 

My FSH is 10.5 to 13 and my AMH is .55. My estradiol is kind of low: 21 and 12 but I had 8 AFC on a count recently.


I just do NOT think I can swing a ZIFT out of state and incur that much cost only to find that I not only feel like CRAP but I am NOT pregnant and 20K in debt. I think it helped that the doctor told me my odds were not great even with ZIFT.

UGH.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ChickenLittle
(no login)

I'm in the same boat TTC naturally...

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 4:31 PM 

I hope you can find comfort in the fact that you'll be saving yourself a lot of stress and $$$ by TTC naturally! It seems that the vast majority of women I know who get PG at 42+ do so TTC naturally, while ART procedures yield others no luck. It may be that the actual mechanism/integrity of the eggs of older women don't fare so well with all the stims and jostling around that they get with ART...You've got the same odds either way, so why not get down with your bad self naturally--starting by getting an ovulation/fertility monitor (if you don't already have one) and some good supplements?

I decided to let go of IVF after an unsuccessful cycle last year at 42 years 10 months. Once I really examined the stats, the 5% success that women over 43 have, at the top clinics, is matched by Mother Nature, so why throw away $$$ I don't have on such long odds? TTC naturally isn't stress-free, but at least the price is right. wink.gif

Do I wish there was more I could try? Sure. But I have to be realistic and follow both my gut and my rational mind, rather than that keening, yearning, "OMG, I'll do anything as long as I have a shot!" part of my heart that wants a child so badly, it pushes me toward any glimmer of ART hope, however slight.

But enough about me! Regardless of what you decide. good luck to you.

May you find success! xo Chix

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: I'm in the same boat TTC naturally...

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 5:32 PM 

I like that I am not alone in this mentality. Tell me more about your journey if you feel comfortable sharing?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login miraclex2)

8:1 yield tells me that chromosome abnormalty is a HUGE problem

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 5:39 PM 

She is incredibly lucky of course. But getting one to work with 8 embryos? That is very sobering for the kind of chromosome abnormalty we are dealing with at 40+. It also sounds like her ovaries are much younger than her cohort. Her ovaries are barely 40.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

Agreed, but there was another woman at 43 with only 3 put back

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:45 PM 

I read this other woman a year ago posted on another site that she had luck with ZIFT with only 3 fertilized eggs put back with ZIFT at age 43 and had a take home baby.

Deep down I truly feel that the top few (2-5) follicles probably hold a good egg - just a feeling and nothing scientific holding that one up:)

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

Last thing - I really like the idea of banking too

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 10:28 PM 

Banking a 1 to a few embies really is such a great idea! Wish I had the stamina to carry on to try banking with vitrifying embryos but think my husband and I are getting to the end of the process - but I must say he has been quite a good sport at "giving" in so many places! If it were a year ago and not have gone through as much as we have, I'd say let's give it a go.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Kim

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 10:33 PM 

I don't know your story but just want to offer HUGS to you as your post sounded as if you are so exhausted from a process that I have only just begun to research.

My hat is SO COMPLETELY TIPPED to the women who have struggled with fertility in their desires to have a family. I think if anything my below rant was a generalized SHOUT TO THE UNIVERSE that there should be heightened awareness of both reproductive health and viability of having a child in later years so that women have the ability to make informed choices while living their lives.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

It's fine - we are so incredibly lucky to have a wonderful child of our own

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 10:50 PM 


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

that is how I feel too

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 11:10 PM 

but I surely wish I had thought more about #2 earlier in the game. Sigh.....

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
anne
(no login)

your numbers are pretty good for your age

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 4:39 PM 

most of us at your age have crap numbers. perhaps you could supplement with a bit of estrogen?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: your numbers are pretty good for your age

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 5:24 PM 

I KNOW I asked my RE about that and she didn't seem to think much of it but she doesn't like my insight or questioning her knowledge much either. The person I talked to at SIRM today was SOOOO nice in telling me that she thought we should be able to ask our REs ANYTHING and they not be bothered and that they should be willing to try other protocols.

I AM eating food supplements that increase estrogen: Maca, Wild Yam and also eating a little more soy in the form of tofu but nothing crazy just to see what happens but wasn't sure if I could get a prescription and find a way to get some MORE into my body.

I do have another RE that I talked to locally that is a bit more flexible so if THIS RE won't budge I think he will.

I am in agreement that I might as well just TTC naturally because my odds are NOT that great with ART and I don't really have 20K X 3 to blow on trying. I COULD try some IUI with meds or TI with meds but then the question becomes WHICH protocol is worth doing AND am I messing up my old body by doing it.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

DE and success ment.

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 5:28 PM 

When and if your ready there are some low cost DE options. So sorry ,but yes 45 is going to be a challenge..

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

I know (DE and child ment)

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 5:31 PM 

I know. Trust me. The very minute I walk into the door of an RE the FiRST thing out of their mouths is DONOR EGG.

I am just not at that point that I am feeling that yet. I am also considering adoption very strongly AND I have a biological child so perhaps my urgency is not as intense as it might be for others? I don't know yet. I swear I go up and down all day long every day with all of this stuff. It is a roller coaster ride.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login phoebegrace)

I too had a genetic child and thought adoption was my next best step

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 4:03 PM 

And that DE was not an idea I wanted to entertain. Then after a loony drawn out adoption disaster where teen bithmum changed her mind... We couldn't risk more heartache and time following that route. We eventually got to DE after we were offered embies that I would have run with but my DH then did an about face and said yes to DE. I'm nursing her now.
Good luck with whatever you decide.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Mtoto2
(no login)

Feel the same way. Keep wondering whether I am

No score for this post
March 23 2012, 9:41 PM 

Chasing a pipe dream @ 45. Is there any advantage to Zift for old egg syndrome or is the chromosomal issue just a matter of luck no matter which procedure. After a BFN in Dec 2011 via ivf, I decided I was going to try naturally, then like an addict went for an IUI which is also a BFN as of Tuesday. Not sure why I never get BFP's when TTC? I have added supplements & even used preseed per Sarah H for last 2 cycles. Not sure why none of my REs have suggested a post coital test though it seems to be routine for Dr C.heck. Good luck

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Feel the same way. Keep wondering whether I am

No score for this post
March 24 2012, 10:38 AM 

based on my conversation with SIRM it seems that ZIFT, while the most aggressive option, is still a very long shot to work in a women my age's case. With that in mind, I have decided that I will NOT be pursuing IVF because to do so for me, I would have to spend 20K for full stim PLUS travel costs and while as someone indicated here that her friend caught an egg the first go round, I can't be sure that odds of 1% are worth putting my family in financial jeopardy and further take time from the child I have.

It is such a puzzle and what I REALLY wish is that someone at my dumb ob-gyn's office had offered counseling on egg retrieval and freezing/storage when I had indicated to them in my late 30s that I wasn't really planning on anymore.

As many can say by now, things change, situations change, life is dynamic and we should TRY to prepare for all options when we can.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

what is the advantage of ZIFT over IVF?

No score for this post
March 24 2012, 10:05 PM 

Just wondering--I know that it is more invasive and am wondering why do ZIFT over IVF?

Also, you probably weren't offered egg freezing because 6-7 years ago it wasn't at all common (still isn't) and was considered very ineffective. Someone I know looked into it then and was told the odds were incredibly low. They are better now because there is vitrification. Your OB probably didn't give it a thought considering that you had two kids and said you were done.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

RANT ABOUT IT ALL: almost everything mentioned.

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 11:30 AM 

I am not sure who to whom you are addressing this?

I have one child but here is some information about them both:

http://www.americanpregnancy.org/infertility/zift.html

As for why one vs the other. I think ZIFT offers the MOST aggressive approach BUT does not guarantee success AND most importantly AGE again is the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR in anticipating success with any approach attempted in women over a certain age. The doctor with whom I spoke at SIRM said that the MOST success was offered in conjunction with PGD: pre-genetic implantation diagnosis. (this adds another 3-5K to the cost) She indicated that when they have older patients that opt out of the PGD and there is failure then they are led to believe that is the AGE OF THE EGGS and the lack of PGD that is impacting the success.

My conversation with SIRM was quite refreshing IN THAT I was told absolutely we are WILLING to try the most aggressive protocol with you even if you are 45 and we are will offer another less aggressive protocol (EZ-STIM) but STILL more aggressive than what most REs will offer.

In the case of EZ STIM there most certainly is vitrification.


BUT with that offered the doctor was very frank in telling me that we can still not make any promises above a 1% success.


So with that said I feel almost as if my already having had two pregnancies AND no other factors determining that I should NOT be able to succeed EXCEPT my age (DOR) I would be just as well off to stick with my local RE, try the medications she will offer and TTC with TI or IUI. I may also see if I can work with another local RE who is willing to try the medication protocol offered by SIRM. Even the good doctor I spoke with at SIRM didn't seem to think this was unwise thing to do in face of the odds. The good thing is that SIRM/New Hope offers the MOST aggressive approaches available for women 43 and up and do not subscribe to these arbitrary cut offs which are currently 43-44 depending on the reproductive center philosophy. (and let's not get me STARTED on these Hutterite data collection analysis, that REALLY boils my BLOOD)

SO because, a) I will not add the inordinate amount of stress to my life by worrying about cost and travel and probable lack of success, AND b) I am limiting the amount of stimulation and invasion to my body based on approach I have decided that I am not going for the MOST aggressive approaches and I am OKAY with that acceptance.

I also have come to realize that I am better off mentally by setting a time frame of how many attempts that I am even willing to make using medicated cycles with or without TI and/or IUI.

Additionally my RE and the SIRM RE have completely different medication protocols. BUT that said I have now spent HOURS culling anecdotal accounts of how women over 40 (with specific interest of how women over 44) achieve pregnancy and what I am finding is that while a) various protocols are successful, there is not ONE that offers a guaranteed success b) there seems to be very little relevant statistics offered by REs for women in this age group as this appears to be a reproductive "no man's land" currently and c) there seem to be just as many women who conceive naturally with success at this point than those who go the route of TTC with ART. In fact I am beginning to think that natural conception at this point offers the most likely route of success in that FORCING the process may often result in a pregnancy which ends in miscarriage for reasons that support the SIRM doctor's advice that the MOST important thing in all of this was to utilize PGD. Which in support of my self created theory means that "catching the good egg means you are catching the GOOD egg".

*please bear in mind that I am making this analysis based off many hours of reading various forums and this is NOT a scientific analysis AND I do believe that right now the whole act of fertility and women in the OVER 43/44 crowd is much more of an art than science at this point. I hope that with places such as New Hope and SIRM willing to dip their toes into the world of the dreaded over 43/44 crowd that we will begin to have more substantial evidence based proof on what will work vs what doesn't work.

Finally with all of this research I have also begun to realize that all doctors involved in fertility and women's health are doing the ENTIRE FEMALE population a disservice by NOT addressing women's fertility earlier in the game. I think women should have better baseline testing done at a much younger age so that they can make more informed decisions when planning their futures. It is heartbreaking for me to read of these very young women in their 20s and 30s who WAITED to reproduce only to fine that they are full of endometriosis or PCOS or have only one functioning tube or a septate uterus etc etc. Why couldn't they have been given more thorough fertility screenings at some point? To me it seems that ob-gyns are FIXATED on us NOT getting pregnant than the reverse. And I wonder what IF ANY impact all the products devised for birth control have in this process. I cannot tell you how many young women on various fertility forums I am visiting discuss things like having very unhealthy menstrual periods and their doctor's first solution is to offer some form of BC versus determining the underlying cause. The mantra seems to be fix the symptom not cause.

Additionally I wonder why my ob-gyn didn't sit down with me after I had my child when I told them at the age of 38 that I didn't think I wanted to have another child, THAT perhaps I might consider egg storage for future planning. Had I done that I might not even be in the position that I am now. But for some reason this is NOT EVEN addressed as far as I can tell in the many conversations I have now had with women. In fact NOTHING like this is addressed at any stage. It is becoming more of a topic of interest now but I have sat and conversed with several female friends who had no idea of the issues of the complexity of fertility. I also think that male infertility is increasing from what REs have been telling me and that this is going to place some new stress to the process in the future. One has to wonder what is causing that increase.

I would also like doctors to be more aggressive with addressing women's hormonal imbalances as they age versus seemingly saying: this is just what happens as you get old. It very obviously has deleterious effects on our health and is important. Why are there NOT more serious approaches to help our bodies maintain our health as impacted by these hormones. I watched a news piece yesterday about women's knee health and the "big" conclusion from this was that they THINK there is a significant link between the drop in estrogen in aging women and arthritis but there have not been any truly effective studies to support this hypothesized link. Jeez, part of me thinks if this were all about men the research dollars would be flowing. I think back to the "days of yore beliefs" about women and heart disease and how doctors just assumed that women didn't have problems and all the research was done on men where we are now left with these misnomers that have women unaware that heart disease is the leading cause of death of American women, killing more than a third of them and more than 200,000 women die each year from heart attacks- five times as many women as breast cancer. (sourcehttp://www.womenheart.org/resources/cvdfactsheet.cfm) Yet with all the money being dumped into the Susan B Komen breast cancer machine we are all terrified it is our breasts that are going to be the death of us. In fact it is more likely to be heart disease. That ALSO leaves me to wonder how much of that heart disease is due to underlying hormonal imbalances versus environmental factors but WHO is going to push for this cause except Suzanne Somers at this point?

I wish all women here success in whatever avenue that they choose to feel that they are doing the MOST that they can do to achieve a pregnancy.


Sorry for my Sunday morning rant.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login SillyPuppy)

Rant above^ from me: SillyPuppy

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 11:45 AM 


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Re: Rant above^ from me: SillyPuppy

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 12:02 PM 

Agree with alot of your comments and again egg freezing was not a viable option for almost forty seven years ago so do not beat yourself up. Dr. are a business and give us each fifteen minutes hopefully women will be better educated in the next few years . DE will give you a beautiful child if you want one as well as adoption. Time to accept reality and move forward thank goodness we have options.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login SillyPuppy)

Re: Rant above^ from me: SillyPuppy

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 12:40 PM 

well as I said above I am still going to TTC but NOT using IVF. And I could have had my eggs frozen as recently as a year ago from what I am now being told SO that WAS an option but that IS NOT an option now.

I think saying this in this manner "Time to accept reality and move forward thank goodness we have options"

seems just a tad unfeeling as if I won't get pregnant successfully at all at this age when in fact I very well might.

What IS being taken off the table is AGGRESSIVE forms of ART and with that I am finding a certain amount of peace.

What we can all cull from my post is that there is NO guarantee that one will get pregnant using aggressive ART at any age and certainly no guarantee for a THB. And there is NO 100% statement of fact that correlates that a woman of 45 cannot get pregnant or have a THB. What we do have are certain ODDS of chance that it MIGHT happen. So using risk analysis I am NOT going to move forward with IVF in my arsenal.

As my OB-GYN said the women in my age group who come to her DO NOT come in with all the data that I have: CD3 FSH, ESTRADIOL,LH,AFC, or AMH. They come in pregnant and 45 so WHO knows what their numbers really were/are?

I think saying "time to accept reality" is in my mind tantamount to saying: "you won't get pregnant with a THB" and at this point 2 months into the game I am not willing to make that statement yet.

And yes, there are many options and we should be glad for that.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

TTC naturally is a viable option

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 2:32 PM 

I know of plenty of women on another board that conceived at 45 naturally. I think there are RE's willing to treat 45+ by IVF, so that option is still open to you. Just make sure the decision you make is what works for you.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Re: Rant above^ from me: SillyPuppy

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 2:54 PM 

Your right I was not being very thoughtful. Of course you should keep trying ask some gals about low stim IVF and want clinics will work with you are you east coast?? Options include IVF so keeping looking..

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login SillyPuppy)

Thanks and TTC Naturally

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 3:19 PM 

Hi

thanks all.

My whole analysis was to say that I am PROBABLY just as likely to TTC naturally or with medicated cycles and TI or IUI then go super aggressive with IVF either GIFT or ZIFT.

Having had that conversation with the SIRM doctor about success with IVF made me have some really good analysis about whether my odds really changed vs my local RE who won't even it consider as an option.


Am I making sense?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

I'm sorry, is your rant directed at me?

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 3:25 PM 

I can't understand after reading it. I was merely asking an innocent question about whether ZIFT is better than IVF. I am not familiar with ZIFT and was curious. People ask questions like this all the time on this board.

About egg freezing, the technology just wasn't good back when you are saying that it should have been suggested to you. It was very costly with almost zero chance of working. I was just telling you that is why your OB didn't bring it up.

I guess I don't get this. If you are ranting against IF and people not giving you a shot, then fine. If it's against me, then I don't see what I did.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login SillyPuppy)

Oh my GOODNESS no it wasn't

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 3:56 PM 

My rant is directed at the whole industry of ART and medicine and women's bodies. I could have frozen eggs more recently than when I turned 38 by the way. So it was not NOT an option. You know when I went to my local RE would have attempted IVF on me had I walked into her office at the age of 44 years and 29 days. She told me that. 44 is her group's arbitrary cut off so yes I find that frustrating.

But more importantly I think that fertility health and choices need to be made a MUCH more important discussion than it is now between women and their healthcare providers. Like I said I am in communication with YOUNGER women (some in their early 20s) who suffered from very unhealthy periods and were given birth control to MANAGE their cycles only later to find out that the CAUSE of their cycles being so bad was related to a GREATER underlying cause such as endometriosis. So they just very likely covered up the problem with a solution that was making a potentially greater problem affecting their underlying reproductive health.

I just threw in the whole women's aging and hormones and heart disease deaths versus breast cancer deaths and perception of which is more likely to occur as reasons why in all of this discussion, women just need to be the best advocates they can be for their health.

What about any of that does not make sense?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

okay, good to know

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:19 PM 

Yeah, I think that all of us here agree that younger women should be given much more information. That's something that really needs to be communicated.

The frozen egg thing is tough - - it's my understanding that there are no live births using frozen eggs for women 40+. Maybe MIR will come along and reconfirm this, but most places won't freeze your eggs if you are 40 or older. And frozen eggs generally don't work unless they are vitrified, a process which has only been widely available the past few years. So if it helps you at all to put that regret away, please do. It just wasn't an option when you would have needed to do it, back at 38-39 (and it's a real roll of the dice then. Only about 2-3 out of 10 eggs are normal then for most women).

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Not sure where you heard that?

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:31 PM 

But read this because it is not true from WHAT I have read/heard:

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/31/136363039/egg-freezing-puts-the-biological-clock-on-hold

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

AND

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:35 PM 

I am going to continue to move forward believe NOW more than ever after having had so many conversations with women who wish to have babies later in life that INDEED there should be a requirement implicit in the role of our ob-gyns to talk about the realities of that perceived choice, with frozen eggs or embryos or NOTHING at all.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

right here

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:44 PM 

There is a very, very informed poster, MIR, who has posted numerous times that there are no live births to date from eggs that have been frozen from women 40+. That is a nice awareness article but notice there are no age cutoffs mentioned or hard facts about the success of egg freezing and live births. It is much more appropriate for women in their 20s and 30s, and that is only since vitrification. Conventional freezing did not work with eggs which is why it was not popular until very recently.

Vitrification only came into the best clinics around three years ago, when you would have been 42. It would have been hard to find a place to even freeze a 40+ woman's eggs, and your odds of success would still not be good at all at that age.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

read this thread--discusses egg freezing 40+

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:46 PM 


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: right here

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 8:22 PM 

arguing about this is all academic at this point, no?

Seems like you want to be right so yes you are RIGHT wink.gif

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

thanks! :-)

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 8:35 PM 

It's really not that . . . I just want this board to be a forum for accurate information so women viewing these threads get good info and make good decisions. I wouldn't want somebody reading it and thinking that egg freezing is a magic bullet for older women (US!).

I really, really hope for success for you. Would be fantastic. We had a 45 year-old on here about two years ago who had a baby with her own eggs. Hope you are next!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Thank YOU too ;)

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:19 PM 

that WOULD be fantastic and I would be SURPRISED to say the least given all the doom and gloom I am finding EVERYWHERE.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Jamie & MIR are spreading MISINFORMATION re: over 40 egg freezing

No score for this post
March 28 2012, 12:02 AM 

Sorry to barge in here, but if you're so concerned about getting inaccurate info, don't be inaccurate!
In some cases, frozen egg transfers are more successful in the 40-43 age group, for sure... Maybe New Hope doesn't have great stats, but take a look at other clinics on the CDC stats.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Sorry, Correction: Frozen embryo transfers work well over 40

No score for this post
March 28 2012, 12:08 AM 

Not frozen eggs- sorry if you were talking about freezing/storing eggs.
FET work really well, maybe better for over 40....

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

be careful before you call people out

No score for this post
March 28 2012, 1:21 AM 

There is a HUGE difference between frozen eggs and frozen embryos . . . the original poster talked about frozen eggs. That is what we were discussing.

You could at least sign your name if you are going to accuse me of spreading misinformation. I have been on here since March 2008 and I believe that I have a decent track record of factual posting.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Kim
(no login)

About ZIFT

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 4:58 PM 

ZIFT is the same as IVF except zygotes (fertilized eggs or 2pn stage) are transferred to the fallopian tubes the day after retrieval by laproscopy (minor surgery). The idea is that 40+ fertilized eggs are more fragile so better to get them back to their natural environment faster in hopes they will be higher quality rather than waiting 2 more days for a day 3 transfer back to the uterus. The RE's think there is something that goes on the fallopian tube as the fertilized egg travels down over a few days to the uterus to implant that may help. ZIFT has "slightly" higher success rates than regular IVF for 40+ women because of this.

Not many RE's practice this old form of IVF procedure because it is invasive and petri dish cultures embies are grown on have improved immensely from the old days. I think RE's offer ZIFT - A) if they offer it and B) as a last ditch effort before saying they have done all they can do to help you.

One concern with ZIFT is going under back to back days - retrieval and the day after. Think it best to find a RE that does this procedure on a fairly regular (few times per year) basis too - in my opinion. Just one of the many options available - so always good to know and ask about them.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jamie
(no login)

thanks Kim!

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:20 PM 

This is really interesting . . . . I read about it on wikipedia but wondered what the real advantage is, given how good blast culturing has gotten. Thanks!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login SillyPuppy)

Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 5:02 PM 

that when we are talking about freezing we are on the same page:

embryo freezing of fertilized eggs has been available for a long time.

I am not sure why people are saying that it was not available when I was 37? I am NOT talking about oocyte cryopreservation which is an UNFERTILIZED egg but rather freezing of fertilized eggs.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Piper
(no login)

I think I am still confused--

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 6:14 PM 

You are correct that egg freezing was not a possibility at age 38 a few years ago. Even now at that age, it would be a pretty big risk, unless there was a real reason to wait.

But you said that you indicated to your OB that you were not planning on having another child at that point.

So...are you now wondering why your OB did not bring up the fact that you might want to consider going through an expensive and rather invasive course of IVF, and freeze fertilized eggs ie; embryos, just in case you changed your mind about having future children a few years later??

Am I confused or is this what you were suggesting?


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: I think I am still confused--

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:23 PM 

to be frank, my OB actually never brought up my continues child bearing in "serious" discussion.

If memory serves me I may have offered up that I didn't think I was interested in having more than one children.

At that point it might have been proactive for the doctor to have had a more thorough discussion about the implications of time etc in the decision making process.

But let's be frank, for those who have not struggled to have a child, how often doe doctors ever sit down and have long discussions about how these decisions are made?

They don't. It is too complex a process in my mind's eye for them to arrive at a process that is "correct and acceptable" in doing so.

Like I said, the standard of care seems to be more focused on pregnancy prevention than pregnancy PROMOTION.

I am still asked when going to ALL healthcare providers if I am "pregnant" and what my method of birth control is when seeing my OB-GYN.

Interesting to me that when I go to my OB-GYN to talk about pregnancy and meeting with an RE at the age of 45 she says NOW (just a few months after having a wellness appt where BC is discussed) that the likelihood of a woman my age having a successful pregnancy is not very great at all.


Surely I am NOT the only one that finds it a bit odd,no?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

can't edit the above for some reason and

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:24 PM 

where I say:

"my continues" I meant my CONTINUED

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
di_nyc
(Login di_nyc)

Re: I think I am still confused--

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:06 PM 

Look, I just think you're being unrealistic here. If you find that a helpful coping mechanism, then that's your choice, but seriously, all the doctors I see in the US are usually very busy and not going to sit down and discuss ALL my health care options about ANYTHING with me unless I'm presenting with a problem to be solved or I specifically ask them questions. (Not sure how it is in the UK, but we're kind of in the middle of a health care crisis here!) More to the point, while I understand that you want someone to blame for not having been offered these options for trying to extend your fertility--or at least I know I've felt that way, personally--if I were an OBGYN and a 38 year old woman with a child came to me and said she was done having kids, I would take her at her word. (If she asked about fertility preservation options, that would be a different story.)

And frankly, I find it really problematic when women AREN'T taken at their word in these situations. I know friends of mine who DON'T want kids have to go through these paternalistic conversations with doctors over and over again where the doctors are like "but you can't be SURE you won't want kids!"--even though some women just don't, have always known they don't, and those doctors should treat them like reasonable adults who know their own minds! Again, if you had said you thought you were probably done, but weren't sure, then I would hope your doctor would have told you what your options would be to have a child later on... but if that wasn't the case, as by your own account here it sounds like it wasn't, I don't think it was her responsibility to try to read your mind or have a crystal ball and see that you might change your mind in the future.

Do I think we need better fertility education--in school, from our health care providers, and in the media--so we as women don't end up in the position that so many of us on these boards find ourselves in now? YES. But I think it's still important to be realistic about what you should and shouldn't reasonably expect... and as other posters have suggested, I hope that doing so will allow you to let go of some of your regrets and just do your best coping with where you are at now.

Please forgive me if I don't reply further to this thread or any response you may make, as I don't feel I have anything further to add that would be helpful here.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: I think I am still confused--

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:14 PM 

I am not looking at ANYONE to blame. There is where you are wrong.

I truly think there is a NEED that is not being filled by the only professionals that I can imagine being the ones to do it and that is ob-gyns.

Like I said they will certainly spend lots of time talking about NOT having babies and what to do in that case but certainly do not address the what if's about planning your future as a mother (or not)/


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
BabyDance
(no login)

Dittooooooooooooo.

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:16 PM 

And wow, I'm just speechless. I can't even discuss how I feel about what's going on with this board lately.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

not sure if you are addressing that to me?

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:18 PM 

my intent here was NOT to upset anyone, but rather to reflect upon my experience

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

and please do NOT feel obliged to respond to my posts.

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:16 PM 

thanks for your time and NO skin off my nose. I think you just do not "get" where I am coming from and that is OKAY with me.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login di_nyc)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 6:26 PM 

That wasn't actually clear at all from your post--which is no big deal, but you said freezing eggs, not embryos, and fertilized eggs are embryos. All I think the PP was saying is that the technology for freezing EGGS (and for that matter, embryos, but that wasn't her point) was not as available or advanced seven year ago as it is now, which is why you weren't told about it then.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 7:15 PM 

Freezing embryos has been around and available a long time.

http://www.extendfertility.com/oocyte-cryopreservation.htm

Sorry if I was not clear on which I meant but in EITHER CASE:

I could have been offered either one at different points in my reproductive history and would have had more options than I have now.

thanks.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
di_nyc
(Login di_nyc)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 8:52 PM 

Hey, like I said, no big deal to me--but people respond to what you actually said, not what you meant, so if you weren't clear that's what caused the confusion. As the link you just posted makes clear, an oocyte is an unfertilized egg. An embryo is a fertilized egg. That's all I was saying.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:10 PM 

yes that is why I clarified what I said.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 9:56 PM 

Freezing EGGS seven years ago(( BIG)) difference from freezing embryos seven years ago

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 10:19 PM 

look, I could have frozen FERTILIZED EGGS 7 years ago or oocytes 2 years ago and still have a hell of a lot more going on than I do right now with all the options I seem to have right now.

I don't mean to belabor this point but ye GODs why can't the same doctor who is constantly pushing birth control or Prozac (they seem to LOVE the SSRIs if you even MENTION PMS) also mentioned freezing fertilized eggs or the fact that fertility doesn't last into your late 40s....

Does NO ONE else feel the way I feel here?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anon
(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 10:44 PM 

Did you really not know that fertility drops off at 40? Really? You couldn't have frozen eggs 2 years ago. Fertility does not last into late 40's. It doesn't last for many to early 40's. Look, you are in shock. We've all been there. Try naturally and if it doesn't work, you have a child, and you gave it your best shot. If it does, lucky you. Good luck.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Just making sure

No score for this post
March 25 2012, 11:33 PM 

ugh. You are a peach happy.gif

You just don't get it but that is okay like I said to you BEFORE.

Have a nice day. Seriously, I mean that.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
di_nyc
(Login di_nyc)

Um, that was actually someone else

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 9:40 AM 

That anon above wasn't me. I sign my posts (or if I post anon it's by accident), and like I said at the end of my longer post last night, I'd already said everything I have to say to you. And it's fine with me that I don't "get it", because your posts on this subject seem inconsistent at best and still make no sense to me! But I do truly wish you every success in conceiving naturally, and every happiness in your life.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(no login)

Re: Um, that was actually someone else

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 9:54 AM 

Why do I feel like I am being judged by you?

Please I prefer not to have any communication at all if this is the way you present support.

My posts are consistent and I am actually asking that all women become better advocates for their health in all arenas.

Just because I took a turn and threw in the kitchen sink does not mean I am not capable of a cogent thought process.


Sorry you don't get my point(s) because frankly I think it/they are is a rather valid one(s) and not out of the realm of how many other women I am in communication with about reproductive health are thinking.

Heck, my RE just wrote an article on the matter for RedBook magazine.

I am not going to sit around blaming MYSELF for NOT knowing ALL that could be known about fertility at just the right time in my life. That just offers me more reasons to lash myself for faults out of my control. Like I said there are plenty of women much younger than me who have failing fertility of unknown etiology and oftentimes it is discovered when it is too late for resolution.

And if you are so disinterested in further following my thought process I don't know why you are?

Thanks for the good wishes, I wish all much success in this endeavor. It is not an easy path to be on, is it?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(no login)

Re: Um, that was actually someone else

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 10:27 AM 

We all understand your frustration and know it is unfair compared to men. Now try natural and if no luck and still want another child try options..

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SillyPuppy
(no login)

Gosh I thought I had explained it all already?

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 10:44 AM 

After my phone consult with SIRM it became apparent that while the option ofivg was not closed to me it still yielded no greater chance than IUI with or without meds or TTC naturally. My analysis from insight from the doctor was that the percent of success did not increase and therefore I would be looking at spending a lot of money to TTC #2 for a great risk of failure.

Admittedly I had a little rant about women's health care that may have seemed misplaced but frankly I think not now given the many conversations I have had on other fertility forums and gaining insight on what paths led various women to the place of "infertility".

Sorry if it was jarring or misconstrued to any of the kind posters on this forum.

Perhaps I am crazy but am I the only one not willing to take the risk with a 1% chance of success.

It doesn't seem to matter that my cd 3 #s are good compared to others, the chance of success remains the same.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
BabyDance
(no login)

Barge... to all on here lately.

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 11:54 AM 

Please keep in mind, there are people on here that are actually infertile from a young age, not secondary or age related. I am NOT one of them, mine is age related, but I try to keep sensitive to the fact that there are people on here that cannot and will not ever have a biological child. It is seemingly apparent that I will not as well (my DP is infertile, as I am becoming). I know there are others on here who will not have ONE biological child. Please keep this in mind on THIS board.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SillyPuppy
(no login)

I am very much keeping that in mind

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 12:07 PM 

That is one of the things that makes me equally angry and sad and what I feel should NOT have to happen for these women.

My wish for all is that doctors in the business of caring for women's health would create better baseline data collection of fertility for women so that those who are hopeful to have children one day don't suddenly find out when they are only 31 years old for example that they inexplicably have DOR or endo or PCOS.

Sure we can aware of our health independently of dr's care BUT norms have to be established differently for things to change.

Also can I add that having one child does not exclude one from the pain of infertility and regret.

I certainly can see how not having any biological children would be an even more difficult experience but I am learning quickly that no one group of infertile women holds a monopoly on this sadness.

Hugs to all of you.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
di_nyc
(Login di_nyc)

Re: Um, that was actually someone else

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 11:36 AM 

I wasn't following your thought process any further, just clarifying my identity. However, I'm sorry if you feel judged. This is why I rarely offer opinions like the one I did above; usually I don't think it IS supportive to share my opinions in this way, and tend to keep my responses to my own experience or to answering specific questions people post, because I find that to be the most helpful way to use these boards. However, as Jamie said, a lot of women come to these boards for information ,and I feel like it's important to make sure that to the best of our ability, the information here is correct--and then I got drawn in when I should have stopped with requesting correction on the eggs vs. embryos confusion. I regret that now. But I agree it's not an easy path to be on and my good wishes are genuinely sincere.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SillyPuppy
(no login)

Very sorry really

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 1:36 PM 

For any misinformation that might have been derived from my lack of clarity and I most certainly appreciate your effort to point it out because I also would not want to be responsible for a wo
a woman having any confusion due to me. So thank you happy.gif and please no hard feelings.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
di_nyc
(Login di_nyc)

Re: Very sorry really

No score for this post
March 26 2012, 1:58 PM 

No hard feelings at all!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Current Topic - Back to square one (success, or lack thereof ment)
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement