Talk:Assisted reproductive technology
|Ideal sources for Wikipedia's medical content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Assisted reproductive technology.
|WikiProject Medicine / Reproductive medicine||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
Math Error in Text
"Another way to look at costs is to determine the cost of establishing a pregnancy. Thus if a clomiphene treatment has a chance to establish a pregnancy in 8% of cycles and costs $500, it will cost ~ $6,000 to establish a pregnancy, compared to an IVF cycle (cycle fecundity 40%) with a corresponding cost of ($12,000/40%) $90,000"
The math $12,000/40% does not equal $90,000 it equals $30,000.
Maybe we should add a section dealing with the issues of disease transmission through ART. ART is currently the preferred method for reproduction for those with certain communicable diseases.
Other way of organizing
Does anybody have a better idea how to organize the manual techniques than by dependence of IVF or not? Mikael Häggström 18:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- No need to, by the way. It's good as it is. Mikael Häggström 17:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism and Error in opening paragraph
There is what looks like a chunk of the original paragraph missing. Please track it down and repair, for I don't really trust myself in fixing it i might break the article even more --126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Risk of genetic disorder overstated and not supported by references
This study is a proteomic comparison of 12 IVF, 12 ICSI, and 12 control placenta samples by 2-DE. HNRNPC is elevated in both IVF and ICSI samples. The authors speculate without evidence given in their article that this may be due to increased DNA damage. DNA damage itself may result in genetic disorders but does not usually do so. Most instances of DNA damage are corrected without such problems, when you take a UV bath at the beach for example.
We need a reference for the claim of genetic disorder risk or that point should be deleted.
low birth weight, membrane damage also not well supported
- The claim of low birth weight is not well referenced. Zhang et al. '08 do not include data regarding this point, they merely cite relevant papers themselves. A better reference is needed.
- Increased membrane damage is not supported by Zhang'08. They are speculations found in the paper which only observes increased protein levels but does not measure membrane damage directly.