The subject of this year's Progress Educational Trust annual conference, entitled 'Reality Check', was 'a realistic look at assisted reproduction'. The choice of focus was motivated by ongoing controversy surrounding so-called 'IVF add-ons'. These are defined by the HFEA as 'optional extras that you may be offered on top of your normal fertility treatment, often at an additional cost'.
Browse or search our archive of UK fertility articles and news stories.
The latest meeting organised by the Progress Educational Trust (PET) asked the question 'Does fertility treatment still need to be a medical secret?' The event in Edinburgh last week, held in partnership with the Scottish Government, took place off the Royal Mile - through a narrow alleyway in Riddle's Court, one of the many old and imposing buildings scattered throughout the city.
Happily fraud, dishonesty and forgery are seldom features of IVF treatment.
But on rare occasions (and for widely differing reasons), some patients are not wholly transparent or honest in their engagement with clinics.
Rarely a day goes by without the UK media mentioning assisted reproduction and the fertility sector. Whether it’s the latest research innovation, the growth in DNA testing and matching websites, the funding and commissioning of fertility services or reports of patients confused as to whether they should pay for expensive and unproven add-on treatments. Most of the headlines aren’t positive for the fertility sector or those who undergo treatment.
Reporting from the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology’s 2019 annual meeting in Vienna
The increasingly popular technique ICSI has no advantages over IVF in treating cases not related to male infertility, according to a new study.
A second study suggests that ICSI may not even have benefits over IVF more generally, when it comes to the birth of babies resulting from treatment.
By Shaoni Bhattacharya
Men have a biological clock too – so why is women’s fertility still such big, often unregulated, business?
It’s a truth universally acknowledged, that a woman over the age of 25 is likely to be reminded of her ticking biological clock by friends, relatives and strangers, every year, until the year in which she conceives.