Pessimism in assisted reproduction

Each year, when the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) publishes its annual report, a worrying aspect of assisted reproduction is raised in the media. Last year it was the high proportion of multiple pregnancies resulting from IVF treatment. This year, it is the association between the male infertility treatment, ICSI, and genetic abnormalities.

This kind of discussion is, of course, welcome. New technologies - along with their benefits and their drawbacks - need to be open to the public and, more importantly, patient scrutiny. But there is an important balance to be struck. In order that prospective patients, policy makers and the public at large have a clear picture of new technologies and their implications, it is important that their advantages and disadvantages are presented in a fair and balanced way. Unfortunately, because of the unfashionable nature of new technologies (especially biotechnologies), the balance of pessimism and optimism often swings in favour of the former rather than the latter.

Some of this might explain why an interesting study published in the New England Journal of Medicine has received very little attention in the media. The paper in question reported on trials at McGill University and the Royal Victoria Hospital, both in Montreal, Canada, which attempted pregnancies in women whose eggs had been matured outside of the body. Although the study is small, the results are encouraging and bode well for a sea change in IVF treatment. If the egg maturation procedure proves successful, it will mean that women undergoing IVF will no longer need to be subjected to expensive and demanding drug cycles in order to retrieve a good number of eggs for fertilisation. In truth, it could mean a veritable revolution in assisted reproduction. Now wouldn't that make great news?