Fertility and The Vatican

Maybe more suited for NOTD but I'm pimpin in here.....


Vatican may campaign abroad against IVF - expert


June 20, 2005 1145 AM PST


The Roman Catholic church is liable to launch a global offensive against infertility treatment following its victory in an Italian referendum last week, a leading expert said on Sunday.

Italians, urged from the pulpit to boycott the referendum, failed to turn out in sufficient numbers to dismantle Europe's strictest law on in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) and embryo research.

Professor Arne Sunde, chairman of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), believes the Vatican's intervention will not stop with Italy.

"Since this is obviously one of the key issues for the new Pope, he will try to say the same thing in other countries where the Catholic Church has influence," he told Reuters ahead of the start of a European fertility meeting.

"When the Vatican throws its weight and political influence, infertility (treatment) is one of the things that could be sacrificed."

The 2004 Italian law bans egg and sperm donation and embryo research and freezing. It also allows only three eggs to be fertilized at a time and all must be transferred to the womb, which increases the risk of multiple births.

Sunde believes fertility treatment is just the start. The real showdown will be over embryonic stem cells - master cells that have the potential to form into any other cell type or tissue and which have the potential to cure a range of diseases.

"What we are heading toward is the battle around stem cells. The issue is the moral status of the early embryo. That is what it is all about," he added.

NEARLY 2 MILLION IVF BABIES

The impact of the Italian law on doctors and patients, advances in stem cell research and improving fertility treatments will be major topics at the conference.

Nearly 2 million test tube babies have been born since IVF (in-vitro fertilisation) was perfected 27 years ago. An estimated one in six couples has a fertility problem and the multi-billion dollar business of catering to their needs is still growing.

"We will see a large increase in demand, purely because of advancing age in the next 10 years," said Sunde.

Despite evidence that a woman's fertility declines in her 30s, many women delay having children. When they try to conceive and fail they seek treatment.

"We are doing our best. But if your ovaries are too old we cannot change that fact," said Sunde.

Scientists are expected to present new research showing why transferring one embryo into the womb, rather than several, can improve the early health of the baby.

Single IVF babies tend to be born earlier, weigh less and are hospitalised longer than naturally conceived infants but researchers could not explain why.

"Now we have two reports that might answer the question," said Sunde.

Israeli researchers are also expected to shed new light on why some women over 45 years old can conceive naturally while others can't.

About 5,300 fertility experts and scientists are attending the four-day meeting.

 

This is another one of those deals where I think they're right, but they shouldn't get involved in the legal/political aspects of it. A lot of weird things happen when people do invitro, and it seems sort of like God's way of telling them they're messing in things that are over their heads. But if the technology is available and someone wants to do it after hopefully considering all of the ramifications, I think they should be legally allowed to do it. I think of it like abortion, I guess.

 

Just like anything else. One could argue that God gave us the ability to perform IV. Sort of like saying once someone gets appendicitis, God intended for it to abscess and die from infection.

Not arguing the point, just trying to make one, yours is valid. Oh and thanks for helping me pimp the forum

 

Could you explain what you think are the "weird things" that happen?

 

They're a lot more susceptible to odd little genetic conditions. I'm not sure if that has to do with the frequency of IV producing multiple babies or the nature of the treatment itself, but my sister in law used in vitro and had twins, and one of them has a blood disease of some sort. Nothing that should kill him or make his life abnormal, per se, but something where if he gets a cold they have to take him to the doctor regardless to check up on certain things. According to my sister in law, these types of things are common when IV/fertility types of treatments are involved. Anything people muck with is eventually going to show it's drawbacks.

And Plu, I'm a big fan of one time surgeries and stuff like that for fixing stuff that would kill someone, but I'm very leary of ongoing and pharmaceutical treatments. A one time surgery is a human intervention you get over and heal up from, but anything that alters body chemistry on an ongoing basis seems rife with potential perils and complications to me.

 

Do you have any research that backs up your claim of genetic abnormalities other than personal anecdote and word-of-mouth from your sister-in-law?

There are, however, studies suggesting that IVF babies are both smarter and taller than other babies:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...ml&sSheet=/portal/2005/06/21/ixportaltop.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159437,00.html

 

Personally, I have no resources to point you to, but my sister in law has read every freaking thing you could imagine on the subject and is full of statistics regarding this sort of thing, and she says the risk of serious birth defects goes up some percentage points when in vitro is used. Her little girl is looking like she's going to end up fairly tall, while her boy will be pretty short.

 

The majority of the "problems" that you're referring to correllate to the age of the patients (much older than the average pregnant woman) rather than to the in vitro process itself. In fact, in vitro *improves* genetic selection: undersize eggs/blastocysts are discarded and ICSI isolates sperm.

 

Do you have studies to back this up? Have you ever used in vitro?

 

Three times. And I already linked to two studies, and I don't have to "back up" the fact that the genetic material is screened before being used. It just is.