A Very Articulate Summation: I AGREE

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ American Infertility Association Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Kathy on June 08, 19100 at 08:40:43:

In Reply to: I agree posted by Madam on June 07, 19100 at 15:43:43:

: I agree. There is a second article in People Magazine this week where Cheryl claims to be using her own eggs and husband's sperm to produce twins carried by a surrogate. She also claims a "new technique" was used.These statements are not only offensive but potentially dangerous to women who want to have their own biological children. Two years ago, at age 39 when I began ttc I got pg immediately. I thought I was fertile because I had always had perfect cycles. I read about all of the older celeb moms and figured I still had time. I did not even know what a miscarriage was until I began to have them! I had never heard of DE and was only vaguely aware of IVF and "test tube babies". I am not from a remote corner of the world, I am from NYC and have lived here my entire life. But before I got involved with my own infertility I was about as educated as the rest of the world. Had I picked up this weeks People Magazine I probably would have thought I still had plenty of time and could have the same "technique" as Cheryl Tiegs if I needed to. This is where the danger lies.
: If an IVF pregnancy really did occur with 52 year old eggs, that would be the real story all over the media, not that it happened to a celeb. The doctor responsible for this miracle would be hounded down for interviews and women all over the world would be stampeeding for appointments. It would be in the medical journals and I would guess every RE would know that it happened and would want to know HOW it happened. Cheryl's RE is no where to be found nor has the alleged new technique been described.
: Women need to be aware that eggs age and there is no turning back. Yes, we all may know of someone in the mid/late forties who conceived but most likely not by IVF. IVF is a rigorous procedure and older eggs are very fragile, that's why any legitimate RE cannot work with them. Having biological children in the mid/late 40's is the exception, not the rule.
: I am happy for Cheryl Tiegs that she will have these children. Making a decision to become a parent by any means is wonderful. But she came forward with her story and the public deserves the truth.
: Personally, I am planning to write to People Magazine.


: : We owe it to ourselves and the rest of the public to disspell the myth that women can have their own genetic children via invitro fertilization procedures at advanced ages. It is extremely rare for women to be successful with their own eggs after age 42. Donor egg using cytoplasmic transfer has not produced a live birth yet and it is still in it's experimantal stages. So far the programs that are experimenting with this newer technology have not tried it on eggs over 44 years old. We must get the message out to the media. I am personally tired of getting well meaning cals from friends and family asking why I can't do what Cheryl Tiegs did. We all know the answer is that Cheryl didn't do it either. Lisa Scott
I agree with you both. If you want to come out in the newspaper at least be honest and do not mislead people. I work in healthcare and a lot of people believe these stories. The reporter who wrote the story is also responsible for contributing to this fallacy. People magazine needs to use good judgement and not publish something vague like "new techniques". This means absolutely nothing and only serves to mislead people and gives false hope to those who are trying to conceive in the later years.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup