Drug helps women preserve fertility after chemotherapy

For some young women, one of the most crushing side effects of breast cancer treatment is early menopause, which ends their chances of becoming pregnant. A new study shows that these women have a better chance of preserving their future fertility if they temporarily turn off their ovaries during chemotherapy. The ovary glands produce estrogen and typically release one egg a month during women's fertile years. Early menopause can cause a number of medical complications, including an increased risk of osteoporosis and bone fractures. The procedure involves injections of an existing hormone-suppressing drug called goserelin, which lowers estrogen levels, preventing women from getting regular menstrual cycles, according to the study of 218 women presented Friday at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Chicago. Both groups of women in the study, who were ages 18 to 49, received the same chemo regimen. Two years later, women who had been randomly selected to take the medication saw a number of benefits, compared with women who didn't take the drug. * Women who took the drug were 64% less likely to have their ovaries fail, which occurs when women miss their periods for six months or more. About 22% of women who got standard chemo experienced ovarian failure, compared with 8% of those who also took goserelin. * Women who received goserelin were twice as likely to have become pregnant, according to the study, funded by the National Institutes of Health. About 21% of women who took goserelin became pregnant and 15% delivered a baby. In comparison, 11% of those who did not take goserelin became pregnant and 7% of them had a baby. About the same number of women in each group had tried to conceive. * Women who took goserelin were also 50% more likely to be alive four years later than women who didn't receive goserelin. "Premenopausal women beginning chemotherapy for early breast cancer should consider this new option," said lead author Halle Moore, an oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, in a statement. It's possible that turning off the ovaries protects them from the effects of chemo, which fights cancer by targeting cells that are growing and dividing, says Clifford Hudis, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, who was not involved in the new research. While authors of the new study focused on breast cancer patients, the technique would likely benefit women being treated for other kinds of cancer, he says. The study included only women whose breast cancers are fueled by hormones. Nearly 11,000 women under age 40 are diagnosed with invasive breast cancer each year, according to the National Cancer Institute. Traditionally, women looking to preserve their chances of becoming pregnant after chemo have had to undergo invasive treatments, such as harvesting and storing ovarian tissue or embryos. Banking embryos isn't an option for all women, however, such as those without partners. Although a handful of earlier studies had suggested goserelin might be beneficial, cancer specialists haven't recommended it to women. This trial may lead many doctors to recommend it more widely, says Patricia Ganz, a breast cancer specialist at UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center who wasn't involved in the study. Article: www.usatoday.com 30th May 2014

Telling your child about your donation - We welcome your feedback

If you are a sperm or egg donor, or considering becoming a donor, you may be thinking about how to share your decision with your own children or any you might have in the future. This leaflet gives you some ideas on when and how you might share your story… The 'National Donation Strategy Group' have created a draft leaflet and would welcome feedback from Pride Angel members. Deciding to become a donor shows that you are someone who is generous and altruistic. Your donation is a wonderful gift, enabling others to have the potential to become parents. If you donated in a UK clinic after the removal of anonymity in 2005, you may have considered the importance of any children born from your donation being able to access your identifying information should they wish, when they become adults. If you donated before anonymity was removed you may have thought about becoming an identifiable donor by re-registering. Contact the HFEA for more information about this. The leaflet covers information and questions about: Why tell your child about your donations? When to tell your child? How to tell your child? Potential questions your child might ask you? The leaflet also contains links for you to find out further information Read the full draft leaflet here Article: 28th May 2014 www.prideangel.com

Do genes matter? Daughter of a donor discusses

On Thursday, I went to an event entitled Do Genes Matter? Families and Donor Conception. Organised by the PET (Progress Educational Trust) it promised to look at what genetics means for our understanding of family in light of donor conception. On materials promoting the event, the questions to be covered were laid out as follows: • What does it mean to have a child through donor conception? • What is donor conception like for the non-genetic parent? • How do grandparents feel about having a grandchild who is conceived with the help of an egg, sperm or embryo donor? • What is the role of the internet in finding donors or connecting with half-siblings? • How many parents can a child have? However, in my eyes, the vital – and missing – question that needed to be asked was: • What do genetics mean for the ‘donor’ conceived person? This was the glaring great hole in the whole event. Chaired by Walter Merricks from the Donor Conception Network, a panel of speakers included academics, fertility lawyers and campaigners. Interesting people with differing expertise and interests in ‘donor’ conception. But, were there ANY ‘donor’ conceived people themselves present on the panel? People who could speak to their OWN experience of the practice and their own feelings on genetic connections. As you may have guessed – no. Lack of representation To me, this really just sums up the entire problem with the social dialogue around ‘donor’ conception. That the voice of the ‘donor’ conceived is missing from this type of event speaks volumes. Because the rhetoric around ‘donor’ conception springs from the mouths of those wanting the answer it provides, or those promoting it as an answer, hearing from the product of this practice is not necessarily a great fit. As always, I am aware that there are many ‘donor’ conceived people who say – or at least purport – that they are uninterested in genetics and also many who are very much at peace with being conceived by a ‘donor’. I respect that perspective. But that there is a significant group of ‘donor’ conceived people who feel very much interested in genetic connections – whether they are at peace with being ‘donor’ conceived or not – should, in my view, be acknowledged in the public discourse about the practice. Is it not crucial to hear from the ‘donor’ conceived at an event about the ‘donor’ conceived? I think this is what it must have felt like for women before they had the vote – silenced, voiceless, talked over, written about and unconsidered. This may seem over the top, but I feel that for my voice to be heard here, in this type of debate, is as much part of a historical struggle as female suffrage once was. Read more... Article: www.daughterofadonor.com

Australian women unaware about their biological clock

A survey of more than 1000 women conducted on behalf of IVF Australia and affiliates of Virtus Health found 64 per cent of women did not know fertility rapidly declines after the age of 36. Six out of 10 also believed infertility in their 40’s was easily resolved with IVF. Professor Michael Chapman, fertility specialist IVF Australia said that the results show women did not have accurate information about their own reproductive health. “It’s a serious misconception that women can delay motherhood until their late 30s and rely on IVF to easily resolve their problems and conceive in their 40s, and these survey results suggest that is exactly what many women may do based on their beliefs,” Dr Chapman said. The survey also revealed one in five women incorrectly believed it only became difficult for a woman to fall pregnant naturally in her late 40’s. Dr Chapman said that 35 years of age was the turning point in a woman’s fertility. “For example, at 30, a woman has a 20 per cent chance of falling pregnant spontaneously per month, compared to less than 5 per cent chance per month when she is in her 40s,” he said.. A woman’s chance of conceiving via IVF in her 40’s is no guarantee he said. IVF success after the age of 45 is believed to be less than 1 per cent with a woman’s own eggs. “The reality is we can’t improve the quality of a woman’s eggs, and as a woman ages so do her eggs, and this impacts her chance of conceiving both spontaneously and with IVF,” Dr Chapman said. While the majority of Australian women have their first child at age 30, one in every 25 babies is now born to a mother over 40. In 2012, 12538 babies were born to 40-45 year olds. Dr Chgapman said the trend was also driven by fact women settle down later in life. “The other complicating factor is the reality that in today’s society many women don’t find their soul mate until their 30s, so we encourage women to understand their fertility to make decisions that suit their situation,” he said, adding stories like that of Halle Berry and Collette Dinnigan who both had a baby at age 47 were extremely rare. “The increase in media stories of celebrities having babies in their mid-40s has given people a false sense of security as to how age impacts their fertility,” Dr Chapman said. Article: 25th May 2014 www.dailytelegraph.com.au

Can sperm donors sign their rights away to being fathers?

California legislators are hoping to make resolving the tricky issue of parental rights as easy as filling out a form. Want to make sure a sperm donor can’t claim to be a father? Check here. And vice versa. Or at least that’s the hope of the “Modern Family Act.” But can you really check a box to sign away your rights to a child? Perhaps, but it’s probably not going to be that easy. These days, the increasing prevalence of sperm donors, egg donors and even surrogate mothers often result in thorny legal battles over who is really the parent. The bill, introduced by San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D), was inspired in part by the high-profile legal battle involving “Lost Boys” actor Jason Patric, who helped a former girlfriend have a child through artificial insemination, using his sperm. The problems is: Patric claims to have developed a father-like relationship with the boy, and he wants parental rights to the child. Last week, a California appeals court upheld his ability to claim those rights. The bad news for people like Patric’s former girlfriend, Danielle Schreiber, is that California’s new proposed law might not actually have changed the outcome of this case, according to Georgetown Law Professor Jeffrey Shulman. “The bottom line is that a written agreement still may not work if the sperm donor is encouraged to form a parent-like relationship with the child,” Shulman said. “There are constitutional law issues, federal constitutional law issues and a line of cases that grant biological fathers right to their children if they have acted like fathers.” Carlos Alcala, a spokesman for Ammiano, says that the bill isn’t intended to resolve all parental rights questions, but it might prevent some painful legal battles in many cases. Article: 20th May 2014 www.washingtonpost.com Read more about being a known sperm donor at www.prideangel.com

19 children and hoping to make it 20 with fertility treatment

Parents of 19; Michelle and Jim Bob Duggar, are hoping to have more children. They visit a fertility doctor to find out whether it's safe and possible for Michelle to get pregnant again, as shown in this preview clip, exclusive to TODAY.com, from their TLC reality series "19 Kids & Counting." "We would love more children if God saw fit to give us more, I just want to make sure that I am ready to catch a baby if that would happen," Michelle Duggar says as she goes to see Dr. Paul Wendel, an OB-GYN in Little Rock, Arkansas, who specializes in high-risk pregnancies. The Duggars' youngest, Josie, was born three and a half months prematurely after Michelle had a life-threatening bout of preeclampsia. She's now a healthy 4-year-old. In 2011, the Duggars announced that Michelle was pregnant with their 20th child, but Michelle suffered a miscarriage that was discovered during a routine ultrasound at 19 weeks. Michelle is now 47, and the risk of birth defects and complications rises with age, as Dr. Wendel notes. "We do see occasionally pregnancies in women who are 47, 48, 49, even 50 but they are very unusual," he says. In interviews with TODAY.com, Michelle has said that the miscarriage was "devastating" but that she would absolutely be open to having more children. The Duggars eschew birth control, instead leaving the number of children they have "up to God." "If I am in that season of life where we're not able to have any more, then I'm fine, I 'm happy with that," Michelle says in the TLC clip. "But if there are things physically I need to know, that I need to do, healthwise just to be ready to catch a baby if God saw fit to give us one." "19 Kids & Counting" airs Tuesdays at 9/8 Central on TLC. Article: 20th May 2014 www.today.com

Pride Angel Journey - Six weeks

Six weeks. Six weeks old. Six weeks since she slip-slopped out into the lukewarm pool. Six weeks of feeding and pacing and shushing and swaying. The visitors had been and gone, Sal was back at work after paternity leave and annual leave, and I was eager to get out and do some baby stuff and meet some mums. There was 'Mummy and Baby Pilates', 'Baby Rhyme Time', 'Stay and Play' sessions and 'Baby Massage'. So each morning, at the allotted time - usually about 10am - I'd try and break into the feedy/sleepy/pooey cycle and bundle little Luna and myself into the car. Sometimes we'd make it there in one go. Sometimes after three or four minutes in the car, hunger would set in, and we'd pull up for a bit of milky. Sometimes we'd arrive on time. Sometimes... So we'd arrive, Luna snug in the sling, and peering inquisitively over the edge and me, eager to socialise and exercise and generally do something other than rock and feed and change. And things would get started. Stretching or singing or massaging. And after approximately ten minutes, Luna would be tired. Not just tired. Exhausted. In fact too tired to sleep even. Well, she might just be able to sleep, if I were to wander around a very quiet place with her in the sling for an hour or two. I'd look around at the other babies. The happy babies playing and giggling. The sleepy babies...well sleeping peacefully in their car seats. And I'd scoop up baby and baggage and we'd head home. One day we'd do some baby stuff and meet some mums. But for now, at six weeks, we'd stay at home and stick with feeding and sleeping and pooing. Article: by Lindsey, West Yorkshire 18th May 2014

7 Fertility Myths Revealed

There are many things couples trying to have a baby can do to boost their chances of pregnancy. But there is also a lot of misinformation out there about fertility, so experts say people should be careful about which advice they heed. Here are seven common misconceptions about getting pregnant: It takes a long time to get pregnant after stopping birth control pills. Many women think that, after they stop taking birth control pills, it will take them six to 12 months to get back to regular menstrual cycles, and that during this time, their chances of pregnancy are reduced. But studies show this is not the case, said Dr. Jani Jensen, an obstetrician/gynecologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. In a study of 200 women who took birth control pills for at least a year, 40 percent had a period or became pregnant just one month after they stopped taking the pill. And by three months post-pill, nearly 99 percent had a period or became pregnant, Jensen said. Jensen recommended that women who haven't had a spontaneous period within three months of stopping birth control pills be evaluated to see if there's a problem affecting their ability to produce eggs. Couples who want to have a baby should always try for a year before seeking fertility help. Doctors in the United States generally define infertility as not conceiving after one year of unprotected sex, but some couples should not wait an entire year to get evaluated if they don't become pregnant. Studies show that many couples become pregnant within a few months of trying: Among couples without fertility problems, 60 percent will be pregnant within three months, and 75 percent within six months. Doctors recommend that women age 35 and older try for no longer than six months before seeking a fertility evaluation, Jensen said. Women younger than 35 should still try for a year, unless they have a condition that could make it difficult to become pregnant, such as a menstrual cycle longer than 35 days, Jensen said. In the latter case, they shouldn't wait a full year to seek an evaluation. Women who monitor their body temperature to boost their conception chances should wait until their temperature goes up before having intercourse. Monitoring body temperature is one way women can track their fertility over the course of the month and boost the chances of conception. But women shouldn't wait until after their temperatures rise to have intercourse because this temperature rise (about 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit, or 0.6 degrees Celsius) happens after an egg is released, Jensen said. "If you wait to have intercourse to that point, your chance of success is now reduced by more than half," Jensen said. Women have the best chance of becoming pregnant if they have intercourse on the day before ovulation, because sperm can live in the female reproductive track for several days, Jensen said. "What the data seem to suggest is that if there's sperm really ready and waiting at the time the egg is released that that has the best chance of success," Jensen said. If a man has had a child in the past, he can't be the reason that a couple is infertile. Some couples think that if they are having trouble getting pregnant, it can't be a problem with the man if he's fathered a child before. But there are many reasons why this is not necessarily true, Jensen said. "The fact that you had fathered a pregnancy in the past doesn't mean that you have a guarantee for the future," Jensen said. Many things could have changed in the years since the man first fathered a child. For example, the man could have gained weight or developed thyroid disease, both of which can affect fertility, Jensen said. There's also a remote possibility that the man wasn't really the father of the child, Jensen said. Couples should have intercourse every day to increase the chances of pregnancy. In the days leading up to ovulation, women have a window of time when they can become pregnant. But couples don't need to have intercourse every day during this period — every other day is just as good, Jensen said. For most women, the "fertility window" is days 10 to 20 of their cycle (counting day one as the first day of menstrual bleeding), Jensen said. So having intercourse every other day in this window is a general recommendation to increase pregnancy chances, Jensen said. Certain coital positions can increase the chance of pregnancy. The idea that coital position affects pregnancy chances, or the gender of a baby, is a myth, Jensen said. "Doing things like lying down with your feet in the air doesn't increase the chance of pregnancy at all," Jensen said. Expensive vitamins help with fertility. Some expensive vitamin products are marketed as a way to improve fertility, but the evidence to support this claim is weak, Jensen said. "I strongly urge patients not to take expensive vitamins," Jensen said. Article: 13th May 2014 www.huffingtonpost.com Read more about boosting fertility at www.prideangel.com

Woman in Florida US delivers triplets at age 47

Sharon Lewis was already a mother of two when she found out she was pregnant again. This time it was with triplets — at the age of 47, and without fertility treatments. "Now the tears rolled because it was unexpected," she said Tuesday, moments before she was to take her three new children home, just in time for Mother's Day. Lewis, a school cafeteria monitor with a 25-year-old daughter and 14-year-old son, said she was not looking to get pregnant again at her age. "But I was good. Once I grasped it, I was OK." Dylan, Denere and Denard slept while Lewis and her doctors addressed the news media at Holtz Children's Hospital at the University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Medical Center. Each of the triplets weighed about 2 lbs. when born March 18. Since then, they have all been cared for at the hospital's neonatal intensive care unit. Lewis developed high blood pressure during her pregnancy, so her doctors decided to deliver the triplets early, at 30 weeks. They said it was rare for a woman her age not only to get pregnant but also to have multiple births spontaneously, without hormone or fertility treatments. "It was a miracle she got pregnant. It was a miracle she got three. And all of them are healthy and normal and she is fine," said Dr. Salih Y. Yasin, an obstetrician who specializes in high-risk pregnancies and delivering multiples, as he held a sleeping Denere in his arms. "Getting pregnant is 1 percent, but to be twins it's probably 1 percent of that. Triplets is 1 percent of 1 percent of that." Lewis said she was looking forward to bonding with her babies at home. "I felt that it was nobody but God that blessed my womb at 47. I do believe he brought me to it, he'll bring me through it," she said with a wide smile. Article: 7th May 2014 www.foxnews.com

Fertility treatments could 'threaten humantity' Lord Winston warns

IVF pioneer Lord Winston has warned that a growing market for fertility treatments could "threaten our humanity", including if the rich were able to pay for so-called "designer babies". The fertility expert who developed key advancements in IVF treatment told fellow academics at a conference "we have been carried away" by breakthroughs in reproduction. The Daily Mail reported him as saying that enthusiasm to develop fertility techniques and desperate patients has become a "toxic mix". During his speech at the University of Kent said: "One of the problems with our work is that we have been carried away with massive enthusiasms in reproduction. "That mixture of enthusiasm and patient desperation is actually a very toxic and heady mixture. It is worthwhile standing back a little from the technologies that we employ. "One of the issues of the market is that rich people may well be able to afford, in due course, the kind of enhancement to their genetics that other poor people may not be able to afford." The newspaper said he added that a growing market for fertility treatments and pressure to enhance human qualities could mean we "end up with a society where some people may actually have something that might threaten our humanity". However, he said that the "the age of eugenics" could die out as issues such as the shortage of resources, water, food and the threat of climate change become more important. Phillippa Taylor of the Christian Medical Fellowship welcomed Lord Winston's words. He told the newspaper: "If Lord Winston is saying this, I hope that people take notice. He is someone who is an expert in the area but also someone who sees the bigger picture." But Dr Allan Pacey, chairman of the British Fertility Society, said parents are not interested in enhancing their babies' genes. "The law prohibits it, even if it was technically possible," he said. "Most infertile couples are desperate for a baby, rather than a specific type of baby, and I don't see that changing." Article: 5th May 2014 www.guardian.co.uk Read more about home artificial insemination at www.prideangel.com