Hello Doctor - is there anything wrong with the mike? The sound was a little off on this video compared to others. Thank you and keep up your work - I am so glad I found your chanel!!
Hi Natalie. I am 42 and had my 1st egg retrieval today. I had 9 eggs retrieved. Of those, 2 eggs were M2, 3 eggs were M1 and 4 were Geminal vesicle (GV), too immature. My doctor said that the 3 that were M1 status could still mature within 24 hours and then be fertilized. My question is, how often does this happen, and if fertilized, what are the embryo quality. I was coming out of annestia and didn't think to ask. I plan to, but I like more than one opinion. We plan to do a second cycle of retrieval.
Life begins when a human has all its vital parts built and viable, and is able to live outside of another person's body. Don't you think? I find it hard to understand what the problem is...
I have a great deal of compassion for women and couples who want to have babies and are unable to on their own. The blessing of children born through IVF is undeniable and those lives are precious. The (good) desires of adults, however, should not be placed above the dignity and ethical treatment of the embryos created through IVF. There is little disagreement among biologists and embryologists that the union of egg and sperm creates new life. A whole, unique, unrepeatable human being comes into existence. Of all the beneficial aspects of IVF that this video describes, it does not change the reality that the current practice standard as you describe it is lethal. Creating as many embryos as possible and preforming preimplantation testing (which risks the health of the embryo in the process) an already created baby to determine a health screening (not a diagnosis) leads to so many embryos being destroyed or left frozen indefinitely. This video provides a lot of information for the current practice but provides little information about other life-affirming options. All of the eggs you describe extracting on egg retrieval can be collected and then those eggs can be frozen and fertilized one or two at a time. Any resulting embryos (not tested for safest practice) can be transferred and given the dignity of a chance to continue growing, developing, living. The current practice values efficiency, economic advancement, and success rates over the lives of the patients it is responsible for once created.
Why not just fertilize a few eggs at a time and defrost individually. This would avoid all the unwanted leftover frozen embryos that die or stay in limbo and the ethical dilemma that couples are faced with when they get extra embryos. Don’t we have that technology now. Why don’t we use it
I think this video misses the point… rather than looking at the ruling and the reasoning, Natalie is presenting the positives of IVF. Which I believe there are many. But it does not get to the heart of the ruling and reasoning. The ruling was that embryos have a right to life because life begins at conception. This was applying the 1872 Alabama law where parents could sue for the wrongful death of a minor, and essentially extends it to the wrongful death of their embryo too after this ruling. This entire video is heartbreaking because-while valuable to listen to the science behind this (I’m a physiologist/ medical researcher and love this stuff) in discussing the whittling down of numbers from the total eggs gathered to the one implanted embryo, essentially she is acknowledging that those with genetic disorders are lesser humans with no right to life. A BRCA gene doesn’t guarantee breast cancer, but even if so, does that deem a life with the BRCA gene less than another? Life has already been created at that point. So essentially, the question is if the life should be killed early or allowed a chance to experience the world.
I think the case of BRCA gene is different than chromosomal abnormalities that will eventually leads to miscarriage, in science no trisomy or monosomy (except for few) are compatible with life. So what the point of exposing the women to hormones and transfer abnormal embryo that will stop developing at some point and cause financial, physical and emotional damage to the mother. Thanks
I couldn't agree with you more and when we chose to do IVF we specifically said NO TESTING and took on the responsibility that no matter how many embryos we got, every single one of them was going to get a chance. For me personally, I believe that life starts at conception and every life deserves a chance. Period.
As a medical researcher you surely know conception creates ~potential~ life and not viable life. An embryo by itself will never develop into a viable individual, virtually the same as an egg or sperm by themselves
The heart of the ruling was intended to make it possible to prosecute women for miscarriages. It has nothing to do with protecting life and everything to do with control and political power. As someone who was raised pro-life, you're giving WAY too much credit to these radical pro-life folks. Don't believe me? Read up on Project 2025. Edit: I'm sure most people who actually deal with BRCA or cystic fibrosis would love to not have it. Tell me you don't have fatal genetic conditions that run in your family without telling me.
@@CC-cb8luGood luck paying medical bills for a medically complex child who lives a pain-filled life. If you'd actually experienced that reality, though, you'd feel differently.
Who should decide where life begins? You? Me? The state? Doctors? God…? If this was a truly moral debate, ivf should not be done to begin with, as natural selection would be the godly destiny if so. If ivf is going to be performed at all, health of mother and embryo should be prioritized as it has been.
![ILLSLICK - KILLSHOT REMIX [FULL VERSION]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RIK8RrqIAzE/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for this. I had my miracle twins from IVF. I am eternally grateful.
Hello Doctor - is there anything wrong with the mike? The sound was a little off on this video compared to others. Thank you and keep up your work - I am so glad I found your chanel!!
Love those color scrubs!!
Thank you for this. Such a good explanation for those who may not understand.
Glad it was helpful!
Great video.
Thank you for this informative video!❤
Hi Natalie. I am 42 and had my 1st egg retrieval today. I had 9 eggs retrieved. Of those, 2 eggs were M2, 3 eggs were M1 and 4 were Geminal vesicle (GV), too immature. My doctor said that the 3 that were M1 status could still mature within 24 hours and then be fertilized. My question is, how often does this happen, and if fertilized, what are the embryo quality. I was coming out of annestia and didn't think to ask. I plan to, but I like more than one opinion. We plan to do a second cycle of retrieval.
Can I take 5mg folic acid every other day??? As I'm nursing mother and trying to conceive.... Is it high dose 5mg???
Can you please make a video about blighted ovums?
This is a very informative video about IVF, but it doesn't address the real issue w/ the Alabama ruling which is "When does life begin?".
Life begins when a human has all its vital parts built and viable, and is able to live outside of another person's body. Don't you think? I find it hard to understand what the problem is...
Please for a video about fibroid please 😊need some info about it and if someone has it can u still get pregnant?
I have a great deal of compassion for women and couples who want to have babies and are unable to on their own. The blessing of children born through IVF is undeniable and those lives are precious. The (good) desires of adults, however, should not be placed above the dignity and ethical treatment of the embryos created through IVF. There is little disagreement among biologists and embryologists that the union of egg and sperm creates new life. A whole, unique, unrepeatable human being comes into existence. Of all the beneficial aspects of IVF that this video describes, it does not change the reality that the current practice standard as you describe it is lethal. Creating as many embryos as possible and preforming preimplantation testing (which risks the health of the embryo in the process) an already created baby to determine a health screening (not a diagnosis) leads to so many embryos being destroyed or left frozen indefinitely. This video provides a lot of information for the current practice but provides little information about other life-affirming options. All of the eggs you describe extracting on egg retrieval can be collected and then those eggs can be frozen and fertilized one or two at a time. Any resulting embryos (not tested for safest practice) can be transferred and given the dignity of a chance to continue growing, developing, living. The current practice values efficiency, economic advancement, and success rates over the lives of the patients it is responsible for once created.
Why not just fertilize a few eggs at a time and defrost individually. This would avoid all the unwanted leftover frozen embryos that die or stay in limbo and the ethical dilemma that couples are faced with when they get extra embryos. Don’t we have that technology now. Why don’t we use it
Was I not my parents child when I was conceived?
?
I think this video misses the point… rather than looking at the ruling and the reasoning, Natalie is presenting the positives of IVF. Which I believe there are many. But it does not get to the heart of the ruling and reasoning. The ruling was that embryos have a right to life because life begins at conception. This was applying the 1872 Alabama law where parents could sue for the wrongful death of a minor, and essentially extends it to the wrongful death of their embryo too after this ruling. This entire video is heartbreaking because-while valuable to listen to the science behind this (I’m a physiologist/ medical researcher and love this stuff) in discussing the whittling down of numbers from the total eggs gathered to the one implanted embryo, essentially she is acknowledging that those with genetic disorders are lesser humans with no right to life. A BRCA gene doesn’t guarantee breast cancer, but even if so, does that deem a life with the BRCA gene less than another? Life has already been created at that point. So essentially, the question is if the life should be killed early or allowed a chance to experience the world.
I think the case of BRCA gene is different than chromosomal abnormalities that will eventually leads to miscarriage, in science no trisomy or monosomy (except for few) are compatible with life. So what the point of exposing the women to hormones and transfer abnormal embryo that will stop developing at some point and cause financial, physical and emotional damage to the mother. Thanks
I couldn't agree with you more and when we chose to do IVF we specifically said NO TESTING and took on the responsibility that no matter how many embryos we got, every single one of them was going to get a chance. For me personally, I believe that life starts at conception and every life deserves a chance. Period.
As a medical researcher you surely know conception creates ~potential~ life and not viable life. An embryo by itself will never develop into a viable individual, virtually the same as an egg or sperm by themselves
The heart of the ruling was intended to make it possible to prosecute women for miscarriages. It has nothing to do with protecting life and everything to do with control and political power. As someone who was raised pro-life, you're giving WAY too much credit to these radical pro-life folks. Don't believe me? Read up on Project 2025.
Edit: I'm sure most people who actually deal with BRCA or cystic fibrosis would love to not have it. Tell me you don't have fatal genetic conditions that run in your family without telling me.
@@CC-cb8luGood luck paying medical bills for a medically complex child who lives a pain-filled life. If you'd actually experienced that reality, though, you'd feel differently.
Who should decide where life begins? You? Me? The state? Doctors? God…?
If this was a truly moral debate, ivf should not be done to begin with, as natural selection would be the godly destiny if so. If ivf is going to be performed at all, health of mother and embryo should be prioritized as it has been.
Only fans ???