In the News: IVF for under $300?!

Hello IF community!  My apologies for our limited presence the last few months!  Big thanks to Rach for keeping the feed alive! Real life can really deter best laid plans! 

Today I wanted to share information that I came across online last summer.  One of many articles out there about it can be found here.  There are new treatment methods for couples seeking IVF that cost a tiny fraction of what tradition IVF does.  The article linked above estimated $265 for the entire process, comparted to literally thousands for traditional IVF.  This is huge and an amazing prospect IF you qualify.  Couples with low sperm count or low ovarian reserve would still likely face traditional IVF. 

Studies show that this new method, which uses oral fertility drugs instead of injections and proposes the use of test tubes instead of incubators, is just as effective as traditional IVF.  Although it's not offered widely yet, it may soon be the answer to so many prayers in our community. After all, your ability to become a parent should not be limited by the amount of money you can afford to spend to become one.

Remember to contact us with any requests or questions you'd like featured here!  Help our little blog grow!

TTC Post: Clearblue Advanced Digital Pregnancy Test

This post is geared toward our TTC readers and may include information that is not helpful for some of our readers.  If you aren't in a great place right now, please feel free to skip this post.  We want our readers to take care of themselves first!

There has been a lot of buzz recently over these new Clearblue Advanced Digital Pregnancy Tests.  They recently became available in the US, although they've been around in Canada and Europe for awhile.  Basically, it's similar to a traditional digital test, but with the added feature of predicting how many weeks it has been since ovulation.  The readout will say "Pregnant" or "Not Pregnant" and if it is a positive result, it will be accompanied by either "1-2", "2-3" or "3+" (weeks, that is).  These test can be useful in pinning down ovulation date, but can be confusing in terms of estimating a due date. This is because the result does not mean a tester is (for example) 2-3 weeks pregnant, at least not in the way that a doctor would judge them.  It means it is estimated to have been that long since ovulation.  Doctor's typically date a pregnancy from the first day of your last period, so by the time a woman is 3 week past ovulation, they are most likely closer to 5 weeks pregnant, thus putting their due date approximately 35 weeks from that time.

While the POASA (that pee-on-a-stick-addict) in me is excited that these tests are available in the US now, I also know that there are limits to this information, and it isn't quite so cut-and-dry.  Since this test works by detecting the level of HCG in the urine, it can be easily skewed by things like an ectopic pregnancy (which produces higher HCG levels sooner), multiples, and the time which an egg implants.  For example, if implantation occurs fairly early, like 7 days past ovulation, the HCG levels in the blood will be higher sooner than if implantation does not occur until 12 days past ovulation.  With my second son, my HCG levels at 14 DPO (and we knew the ovulation date was accurate due to a trigger shot) was only 12, indicating that the egg had only implanted a few days prior, perhaps as late as 12 DPO. So there is some ambiguity there.

Do I think this is a good tool?  Yes!  But I caution women to read the instructions carefully and if they have concerns about their results to consult with a physician.

The article discussed in this post can be found here.

Unbaby Me

Lisa at Amateur Nester recently blogged about a new feature on Facebook.  It's called Unbaby.Me and it's operated by Google Chrome.  Basically it removes all images of babies and replaces them with random pictures of your choosing (bacon was one of Lisa's examples, which made me laugh and realize I was hungry simultaneously).  I hadn't heard of this yet, but certainly had a "Why didn't someone think of that sooner?" moment when I read her post.

Any infertile who has an account on Facebook has almost certainly had a day where the sight of a baby, any baby, sends them into utter despair.  Although the posters almost certainly didn't mean to, it feels as though they are bragging about having what we are desperately trying for.  Every image is a painful reminder of what we are going through.  This is certainly a way to cut down on that.

Many of us have had the desire to block or unfriend people who we see announce a pregnancy on FB.  A lot of us also have to endure those cringe-worthy parental-complaint posts.  Intellectually we know that they have no idea how that can make others feel, they aren't doing it to hurt anyone, they really do adore their kids, etc, but in the moment, self preservation is more important than "liking" the image of a pudgy smiling infant, or commenting on how hard it must be.

It doesn't sound like this feature will solve all the FB woes.  It doesn't appear to censor actual status updates about children or pregnancy, but it is a start.  Of course, it also might make you hate puppies and kitties and bacon, because deep inside, you'd still know what it represents.

As a member of the resolved IF community, I definitely make a conscious effort to avoid complaining about my kids in any way on FB and in life.  I still remember how I felt when I came across them.  But I do post plenty of pictures and updates about them in my feed, and reading about this app made me wonder if anyone on my friends list cringed seeing pictures I have posted.  I hope not, but on the same token, I wouldn't be in the least offended if they had them changed to pictures of a cute pug or a cookie.  And I would understand if they needed to unfriend me because of it.  I know they would never ask me to refrain from these posts, and I would want them to take care of themselves above all.

Here's a link to Lisa's post:  http://amateurnester.blogspot.com/2013/10/unbaby-me.html

Readers, what are your thoughts?  Is this a good idea?  Do these sort of pictures and posts on FB bother you?  Would you be offended if your images were changed or you were blocked for these reasons?