Catholic Exchange

More Health Risks Found in IVF Babies

Written by

Veronica Diego

in

A study of 3,980 articles in medical and scientific journals between 1980 and 2005 has shown significantly higher risks of long-term medical problems for children conceived through artificial procreation such as in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, a method in which a selected sperm is injected into the ovum.

Dr. Alastair Sutcliffe, of the Institute of Child Health at University College London and Dr. Michael Ludwig, of the Centre for Reproductive Medicine and Gynecologic Endocrinology in Hamburg, examined the data and have concluded that babies conceived through artificial means should be monitored well into adulthood.

The study showed the risk of miscarriage is between 20% and 34% higher than naturally conceived children. It showed 55%increase in the risk of pre-eclampsia, or hypertension in pregnancy; an increased risk of stillbirth at 155%; low birth weight at 70% to 77% and very low birth weight at 170% to 200%.

Major malformations and cerebral palsy are also significantly more likely with artificially conceived children.

Dr Sutcliffe commented, "In-vitro fertilization has been done for nearly 30 years; in developed countries at least 1% of births are from ARTs [assisted reproduction techniques]. These children now represent a substantial portion of the population but little is known about their health."

The study coincides with numerous others showing that IVF and related fertility technologies produce significantly higher rates of serious health problems in children.

Most recently, a study published in the June 21, 2007 issue of Human Reproduction showed that children conceived through IVF visit hospitals significantly more times (1.76 vs. 1.07 times) than naturally conceived children.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    This doesn't surprise me at all.  This is what happens when doctors interfere with the natural process of conception and "play God".  My neighbor's son, who was conceived via IVF, has a very rare form of bone cancer, and I have to wonder whether there's a connection.

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    You can be sure that the doctors making a fortune from ART will both fight tooth and nail to keep anyone from accepting that there's a causative link between ART and increased health risks, AND to start handing waivers to all patients before treatment which indemnify and absolve the doctor should such risks be realized.

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    God loves you .

    Hmmm – how much further medical care comes out of faulty (as in careless, indifferent . . .) proximate medical care?

    I wonder . . . if my physicians begin handing me waivers if I shouldn’t just ‘pre-introduce’ them to my attorney. Such a precautionary measure (mutual, in this case, given their waiver) on my part would be a sort of ‘pro-active pre-intensification’ (read: reduction of carelessness and indifference) of their interest in getting it all to come out right.

    Remember, I love you, too

    Reminding that we are all on the same side – His,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    The law of sowing and reaping once again applies.

    What is it Mark Shea says summarizes human history?

    Step one: "What could it hurt?"

    Step Two: "How were we supposed to know?"

    Thank God for His Church who has steadfastly guided us in the Truth on these matters throughout the confusion sown by the crowds following each latest development.

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Dearest P.S.: It will also get you dismissed from their practice.  Sorry.

  6. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    While I abhor IVF, I don't see anything scientific in this article that truly shows IVF to be more dangerous for babies because of the procedure itself.

    For instance, the higher risk of eclampsia may be a result of older pregnant mothers.  I don't know if the studies were controlled for age and miscarriage history, etc….

    Also,  at least 1-7 natural pregnancies end in miscarriage. Once the IVF blastocyst has implanted successfully, does it have a higher miscarriage rate?  Further, IVF prenancies are very closely monitored and all problems are picked up, versus natural pregnancies which procede unknown many times for a period of weeks.

    In addition, the article states that IVF babies show up in the hospital more often.  Could that be explained by the fact that they cost their parents thousands of dollars to get here and may be only children?

    Further, the article says that people conceived using IVF should be monitored well into adulthood, yet, not one example is given about health conditions of adults.

    I think this kind of info is used to fuel an emotional response to reproductive technology.  It is not helpful in moving the cause of ending these evil processes forward.  (I know the "wastage" and "selective reduction" and genetic testing facts regarding IVF and similar fertility procedures).  The whole lucrative business is managed by "Dr Death" himself.  However, the couples seeking IVF very often have no faith or any understanding of the issues other than their own pain of infertility.  This article serves to frighten and stigmatize these parents without providing for their legitimate pastoral needs.

    Thanks for keeping IVF before us, however.

Leave a Reply

More posts