IUI vs IVF vs ICSI ???

[SD2001]

Very interesting thread. I was just thinking this very question myself this monring what to do for this cycle.

Welcome to the discussion Cuddlepie.

So now I am really torned whether to use IVF or ICSI...that is the question to answer.

That is really a question for you and your DH to decide.

My personal thoughts should not give measure to your decision, but in your situation where your DH has good sperm count, mobility, morphology etc, well I would go with IVF as suggested by your FS. There really does not appear to be any benefit with using ICSI in your situation.

But I was a bit surprised that clinic would go straight into ICSI without considering all factors, seems like doing a short-cut for me..

That is what I was thinking.

Some articles I just found on the internet regarding ICSI you may want to read (there are lots more as well if you go to Google and search for "ICSI effects child"):

SD

[SD2001]

Hi Kahlan,

that is the reason why to me whether it is ICSI, IVF of IUI, it is not natural selection because the sperms that would otherwise be killed are still used, those that had to take the "perilous journey" to test out their "fitness" didn't. Thus I don't think IVF allow "more natural selection" to take place than any of the other methods.... It is just giving all the sperms an equal chance of fertilising the egg (which is very different to natural selection)...

I see your point, but there is actually a difference between the three methods.

To put the different methods in order from more to less "screening" (which you could loosely associate with natural selection), they are:

In terms of "delivering sperm" via a syringe into the vagina, well there is no real difference between this and intercourse in terms of natural selection.

IUI only really gives the sperm the advantage of getting into the uterus. They still need to make it into the fallopian tubes to get to the egg, enter the egg, etc.

IVF offers a less hostile environment for the sperm then IUI, but the sperm still need to have the motility to get to the egg and be able to enter the egg, etc.

ICSI is completely different as the sperm is selected by a lab technician. The sperm need have no motility at all as it is transported to the egg by the technician. Finally, the sperm needs not have any ability to enter the egg as it is injected directly into the egg. ICSI is the equivalent of the forcing together of the selected sperm and the egg.

While no miscroscope would give you a clear genetic screen to all sperms, the bulk of the "bad sperms" do get screened out by observing their physical characteristics.

The physical characteristics of a sperm is only one part of creating a child. A good example is DNA mutations in an older male. The sperm all look fine, but most are what could be called "bad".

Even in natural conception aka natural selection, it is not foolproof against chromosome abnormality. that is the reason why 5 in 6 pregnancies (in natural conception) ends in early miscarrriage (and this has nothing to do with the mother's womb or what she did!)

The process is from a sperm and an egg to an adult. Natural selection does no stop upon fertilisation. Natural selection is the reason why 5 in 6 pregnancies end in early miscarriage. If the combination of chromosomes from the sperm and the egg are not right, then the embryo does not continue developing. Only the best embryos continue development. Close enough is not good enough in nature and this is what natural selection is all about.

Yes I have been thinking about donating our embies... though I think we have to serious discuss about it first. I have also thought about donating my eggs. But time is ticking for me and by the time we try for #2 and #3 I think I might pass the age cut off.

Studies have found that most couples do not want to donate their embryos. Most couples also do not wish their embryos to "perish". Thus the numbers of embryos in storage is growing quickly.