"The IVF revolution is money badly spent"

[Nurse27]

Hi everyone,

I just read this article on the Herald Sun Website, after being contacted by some friends. Please take the time out to read what has been published about IVF.

It implies that the babies that are conceived through IVF are flawed and that it is foolish to pursue IVF- see quote below!

"The fact is that we are paying to create a faulty gene pool, turning Darwin's theory about survival of the fittest on its head.

What other species would be so foolish as to encourage this form of un-natural selection? "

Please let the Herald Sun know what you think of Jill Singer's article.

Cheers

[Baby Dreamtime]

Just in case anyone feels the need to express their disgust at the ignorance published in this article, here is Jill Singers direct email address

jsinger@bigblue.net.au

[melbel]

You guys beat me to it...just read this disgusting article while eating lunch out down the street...what an absolute f%%%n moron she is. Oh and by the way how can she be quoting statistics about how ICSI creates inferility in male offspring when ICSI hasnt even been around long enough to have created offspring of reprodutive age...TWIT!!!!

[Muppity]

You guys beat me to it...just read this disgusting article while eating lunch out down the street...what an absolute f%%%n moron she is. Oh and by the way how can she be quoting statistics about how ICSI creates inferility in male offspring when ICSI hasnt even been around long enough to have created offspring of reprodutive age...TWIT!!!!

Couldn't agree more - unless of course there are 8 year olds out there having kids and the British tabloids haven't caught up with them yet.

I really want to write to her and let her know that DH wears glasses too - should we not have kids incase they inherit his wonky eyes! Because heaven forbit they should have to wear glasses too (which of course is a drain on the medical system)

[tk1999]

I am planning to respond to that article but I still don't think I've calmed down enough to be able to post anything and I read it at 9am this morning... I'll see how I feel in a few more hours.

[Indadhanu]

Ah, I'm gonna get shot down BUT scientifically it is defying Darwins Survival of the Fittest by enabling couples who may not have been able to have children to have children.

NOT that thats a bad thing BTW, because we are defying survival of the fittest ourselves PMSL.

But I think thats the theory.

I don't agree its creating 'flawed' children, or anything like that, and I think anyone who does is grossly misinformed but the theory behind their argument is somewhat valid.

[bon]

Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection is just that - a theory. It is not a code to live by, nor is it universally accepted as being necessarily correct either.

Sounds like she certainly has an axe to grind with the IVF "lobby"...she makes them sound like some kind of evil organisation. The trouble with limiting access to medicare funded IVF or not allowing women over a certain age to access it is that where do you draw the line? It is not fair, or equitable, to allow some people to use it and not others. And the trouble with her 'faulty gene pool' argument is that it is not just babies conceived through IVF or other fertility treatments that can have problems - there are many naturally conceived babies born every year that are premature, or have some sort of birth defect or disability, or simply require extra medical attention in their first few days/weeks/months of life. Is she suggesting we favour babies naturally conceived over those conceived with IVF? That's ridiculous of course, but it shows the flawed logic of her argument. How much further should we take it? Aborting all foetuses, naturally conceived or IVF, that show a disability or medical defect, simply because it is going to cost the government money to look after them when they are born? Completely disregarding the wishes of the parents? Of course not. How nice for her that she can "sympathise" with parents who have difficulties conceiving. Obviously she has not been in that situation herself, or even knows anyone who has, otherwise she wouldn't have written such an insenstive and poorly though out article.

ETA: like I said before I edited my post, I would not bother writing to her. She will be expecting it and it will not change her vile opinion. She doesn't deserve the attention that she no doubt is expecting due to her very calculated and "controversial" article.

[Jas]

What a load of bs! This idea of survival of the fittest and talking about stats of ivf babies I would be interested to see how these compare with stats for babies who are conceived without the help of ivf? Who says ivf babies are not as fit!!

Why don't we stop public health care for the elderly because they aren't as fit and for ppl that write stupid articles like this or why don't we just get rid of public health care and why not all goverment assistance? That way only "the fittest" will survive!