If someone could only figure out how to get those pesky embryos to actually stick once they are put in place! If the embryos "look good" enough to transplant and they "should" implant, well then WHY don't they? I am posting here the link to this entire article however I didn't want you to miss the simple explanation:
"Implantation relies on a set of closely coordinated events occurring between a very early stage embryo and the lining of the womb. The embryo must initially attach to and form a contact with the lining. Then cells from the embryo begin to invade the womb lining, eventually connecting with the mother's blood vessels and forming the placenta.
'The embryo and womb lining talk to each other, molecularly speaking, which allows them to interact,' explains Professor Mardon. 'When the embryo lands on the surface of the uterus wall, it triggers a cascade of signals in both the embryo and uterus. The resulting changes allow the embryo to invade the lining.'
'This invasion process has to be tightly regulated for a placenta to form correctly and hook up with the maternal blood supply,' Professor Helen J. Mardon adds.
So what I am reading here is that the embryos can be deemed "perfect" but if the uterine lining isn't up to having a "conversation" with the embryo then all bets are off. I don't believe that this is new news...just put out there in more simplistic terms....
Sharon LaMothe
www.InfertilityAnswers.net
Understanding Embryo Implantation Offers Insight Into Infertility
Article Date: 28 Sep 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A process that governs embryo implantation in the womb in humans has been identified for the first time. The Oxford University research, published in the journal PNAS, could shed light on what goes wrong when embryos fail to implant in the lining of the womb, a leading cause of infertility.
'In many women, attachment and implantation doesn't happen and this is a major cause of infertility,' says Professor Helen J. Mardon of the Nuffield Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and St Catherine's College, University of Oxford, who led the study. 'By understanding how this process works, we may be able to inform the development of drugs to help embryos implant properly.'
Implantation relies on a set of closely coordinated events occurring between a very early stage embryo and the lining of the womb. The embryo must initially attach to and form a contact with the lining. Then cells from the embryo begin to invade the womb lining, eventually connecting with the mother's blood vessels and forming the placenta.
'The embryo and womb lining talk to each other, molecularly speaking, which allows them to interact,' explains Professor Mardon. 'When the embryo lands on the surface of the uterus wall, it triggers a cascade of signals in both the embryo and uterus. The resulting changes allow the embryo to invade the lining.'
'This invasion process has to be tightly regulated for a placenta to form correctly and hook up with the maternal blood supply,' she adds.
The Oxford team, along with Professor Anne J. Ridley at King's College, London, have now identified molecules that are responsible for controlling the invasion of human embryo cells into the womb lining. Their research, funded by the Wellcome Trust and Medical Research Council, showed two proteins belonging to a family called Rho GTPases are involved. These proteins ensure cells in a small area of the womb lining move out of the way to allow cells from the embryo to invade.
'We have shown that two proteins, called Rac1 and RhoA, control the invasion,' says Professor Mardon. 'The first stimulates cells in the womb lining to move and allow the embryo to invade and implant properly while the second inhibits this. We believe this controlled balance of the two proteins is critical for successful implantation of the embryo.'
'If the balance of the Rho GTPases is altered, the cells of the womb lining don't migrate and the embryo doesn't implant.'
The researchers had to develop a way to investigate the molecular process of human implantation in the lab. Embryos were added to a layer of cells from the womb lining in a culture dish. The research team were then able to video embryos implant themselves in the cell layer.
'Essentially what we've done is to capture a particular stage of implantation going on in a petri dish,' says Professor Mardon. 'The experiment mimics the stage in which an early-stage human embryo invades the lining of the womb, and allows us to dissect the molecular processes that control this critical stage of implantation.'
'Implantation of the human embryo requires Rac1-dependent endometrial stromal cell migration' by Seema Grewal, Janet G. Carver, Anne J. Ridley and Helen J. Mardon is to be published in PNAS. It is embargoed until 22:00 BST / 17:00 EDT on Monday 29 September 2008.
Endometrial tissue samples were obtained with informed consent in accordance with the requirements of the Central Oxford Research Ethics Committee. Embryos were donated for research with informed consent by patients attending the Oxford Fertility Unit at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford. Experiments were performed with ethical approval from the Oxfordshire Research Ethics Committee, and a research license was granted by the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority.
Oxford University's Medical Sciences Division is one of the largest biomedical research centres in Europe. It represents almost one-third of Oxford University's income and expenditure, and two-thirds of its external research income. Oxford's world-renowned global health programme is a leader in the fight against infectious diseases (such as malaria, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and avian flu) and other prevalent diseases (such as cancer, stroke, heart disease and diabetes). Key to its success is a long-standing network of dedicated Wellcome Trust-funded research units in Asia (Thailand, Laos and Vietnam) and Kenya, and work at the MRC Unit in The Gambia. Long-term studies of patients around the world are supported by basic science at Oxford and have led to many exciting developments, including potential vaccines for tuberculosis, malaria and HIV, which are in clinical trials.
http://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk
Showing posts with label embryos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label embryos. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Your urgent and immediate action on two bills introduced in the Georgia State Senate is of vital importance.
In talking with Evelina, who is in GA (and on the EDSPA Board) and very involved with fighting this (which may be voted into law by next Thursday!) This bill is about only being able to MAKE 2 or 3 embryos at a TIME....not just what you can transfer. So if you are under 40 and have 12 eggs, only 2 can be fertilized...if you are over 40 then only 3 can be fertilized! No more then that....We need to clearly get the truth of this bill a crossed to everyone because who is going to want to make just 2 or 3 embryos at a time? Who can pick and choose which eggs would be the best to fertilize AND then there would be NO EMBRYOS LEFT for freezing! (perhaps you can freeze the eggs however that is not perfected yet and the cost....well....it just wouldn't be worth it) Apparently it's the right to lifers who are pouring money into this GA bill so that there will/would be no more 'babies on ice"...
On another note, if this bill passes I hear that the ASRM will consider moving the Oct. meeting to another location.
Please forgive me for posting this but I wanted everyone to read this!
Sharon LaMothe (comments welcome!)
This was posted by Mark Perloe~
Your urgent and immediate action on two bills introduced in the Georgia State Senate is of vital importance.
The Georgia Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hold a hearing on two bills: SB 169 and SB 204 this Thursday, March 5, at 9:00 AM in Room 450 of the State Capitol. At the hearing, the committee will hear testimony on the bills. Reproductive medicine physicians from across the state, along with Resolve and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) oppose both of the bills. The hearing is open to the public and we encourages you to attend the hearing and send a letter to the Committee members before Thursday. To send a letter immediately, click here.
Senate Bill 169 would restrict doctors' ability to perform IVF in accordance with best medical standards. Here are the key provisions:
- No more than 2 or 3 eggs could ever be fertilized in a cycle; if a woman produced more eggs, they still could not be used.
- Only 2 embryos could ever be transferred to the uterus, unless the woman is age 40 or over (then a max of 3).
- No extra embryos could be cryopreserved. If they are created, they have to be transferred.
- No financial relief, such as insurance coverage, is proposed to help with the added financial burden of using less effective treatment. Patients will still have to pay out of pocket for less effective treatment.
- Bans all financial compensation for donor gametes, such as egg donor, sperm donor, or embryo donation, which would reduce the pool of available donors in Georgia.
SB 204 is an embryo adoption bill. It would subject embryo donation to all the same provisions as required by law for adoption of a child. This would subject infertility patients needing an embryo donation to go through the judicial proceedings, home visits, and other procedures required for an adoption. Such treatment is not appropriate nor is it needed for embryo donation.
If you care about open access to the best care possible, let the Committee members know before Thursday that you oppose these two bills. To send a letter or fax to the Committee, simply click here http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://secure2.convio.net%2Fres%2Fsite%2FAdvocacy%3Fcmd%3Ddisplay%26page%3DUserAction%26id%3D219 for a letter template that will be automatically sent to each of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee members. You can also call your state Senator even if they are not on the Committee and tell them you oppose these two bills. A full list of the Committee members can be found by clicking on the link below, then clicking on the Senators name for a link to their direct contact information: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.ga.gov%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsenate%2Fhealth.php
Please be respectful in all communications to the elected officials and their staff. Please remember that rude communications work against our interests.
Thank you for taking action today and showing the Georgia Senate that you care about open and available access to care for the women and men diagnosed with infertility in the state of Georgia.
To send a letter to the Committee members immediately, click here. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://secure2.convio.net%2Fres%2Fsite%2FAdvocacy%3Fcmd%3Ddisplay%26page%3DUserAction%26id%3D219
To view the full text of the bills please follow the links below:
SB 169: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.state.ga.us%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsum%2Fsb169.htm
SB 204: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.state.ga.us%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsum%2Fsb204.htm
Georgia Economic Impact
• More than $200 million in revenue and countless jobs would be lost by Georgia medical practices, psychologists, lawyers, pharmacists, as well as by those in the restaurant and lodging industry who provide services to those traveling for care.
• An expected 50-60% drop in live births associated with legislation limiting the number of oocytes fertilized or transferred would create a powerful incentive for Georgia couples to seek care outside Georgia. Alternatively, they would have to consider multiple treatment cycles to achieve the same success rate as we now see. The cost for additional treatment cycles as well as lost productivity due to time away from jobs can not be immediately calculated.
• Embryo donation is the most a cost effective option for many couples hoping to build a family. Yet this legislation would impose additional legal expenses and home studies that would create a significant cost barrier for many with limited financial resources. As a result this option would no longer be available for many couples
• The majority of higher order multiple pregnancies [triplets or more] result from ovulation induction and not IVF. This legislation will result in a marked decrease in local IVF services and a dramatic increase in the number of ovulation induction cycles with the higher risk of multiple births and the resultant costs.
• The American Society of Reproductive Medicine is planning its annual meeting in Atlanta this fall. Approximately 5,000 people are expected to attend. Passing this legislation will induce many to stay at home. The resultant revenue loss for our convention and travel industry comes at a very difficult time for our economy.
• This legislation will preclude the use of preimplantation embryo screening to prevent diseases such as cystic fibrosis, sickle cell disease, Huntington’s diease and other genetic conditions that result in an enormous financial burden to the individual and often to the state to provide ongoing medical care.
• The financial cost of defending court challenges to HBB during an economic downturn is a needless tax on government funds.
• Biotech industry seeking to relocate will likely have second thoughts about moving to Georgia with passage of this legislation.
Unanswered Questions
• Will cryopreserved embryos that already exist be subject to this law?
• Will this law be applicable to embryos that have been created in another state?
• Will this law apply if the individuals are not Georgia state residents?
• Does this law allow for inheritance rights for embryos deemed to be children?
• Are embryos entitled to social security survivor benefits?
• Will embryos be entitled to child support in the case of divorce to cover the expense of storage?
• Will women who have undergone embryo transfer be able to use the HOV lane….there is an additional “child” on board.
• What happens to embryos that were frozen more than two at a time?
• What about agencies that charge a fee to match recipients and embryo donors while not providing a medical service? Will this be considered the same as selling a baby?
• If an embryo has been frozen longer than 18 years is it still a child? How do you calculate a child's age if the embryo is 20 years old, but the child was born two years ago, how old is the child?
• Not too infrequently, a one cell embryo splits resulting in twins. As this bill describes a single cell embryo as a child do we consider these identical twins as one child or two?
• If an embryo has been frozen longer than 18 years is it still a child? How do you calculate a child's age if the embryo is 20 years old, but the child was born two years ago, are we dealing with a child or an adult?
• The bill states that its purpose is to promote the best interest of the child. As cryopreserved embryos are classified as children and only 20-30% of embryo transfers results in pregnancy, we must ask if this means all embryos should undergo cryopreservation rather than transferring them to avoid the 80% loss rate for these "children"?
--------------------
On another note, if this bill passes I hear that the ASRM will consider moving the Oct. meeting to another location.
Please forgive me for posting this but I wanted everyone to read this!
Sharon LaMothe (comments welcome!)
This was posted by Mark Perloe~
Your urgent and immediate action on two bills introduced in the Georgia State Senate is of vital importance.
The Georgia Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hold a hearing on two bills: SB 169 and SB 204 this Thursday, March 5, at 9:00 AM in Room 450 of the State Capitol. At the hearing, the committee will hear testimony on the bills. Reproductive medicine physicians from across the state, along with Resolve and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) oppose both of the bills. The hearing is open to the public and we encourages you to attend the hearing and send a letter to the Committee members before Thursday. To send a letter immediately, click here.
Senate Bill 169 would restrict doctors' ability to perform IVF in accordance with best medical standards. Here are the key provisions:
- No more than 2 or 3 eggs could ever be fertilized in a cycle; if a woman produced more eggs, they still could not be used.
- Only 2 embryos could ever be transferred to the uterus, unless the woman is age 40 or over (then a max of 3).
- No extra embryos could be cryopreserved. If they are created, they have to be transferred.
- No financial relief, such as insurance coverage, is proposed to help with the added financial burden of using less effective treatment. Patients will still have to pay out of pocket for less effective treatment.
- Bans all financial compensation for donor gametes, such as egg donor, sperm donor, or embryo donation, which would reduce the pool of available donors in Georgia.
SB 204 is an embryo adoption bill. It would subject embryo donation to all the same provisions as required by law for adoption of a child. This would subject infertility patients needing an embryo donation to go through the judicial proceedings, home visits, and other procedures required for an adoption. Such treatment is not appropriate nor is it needed for embryo donation.
If you care about open access to the best care possible, let the Committee members know before Thursday that you oppose these two bills. To send a letter or fax to the Committee, simply click here http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://secure2.convio.net%2Fres%2Fsite%2FAdvocacy%3Fcmd%3Ddisplay%26page%3DUserAction%26id%3D219 for a letter template that will be automatically sent to each of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee members. You can also call your state Senator even if they are not on the Committee and tell them you oppose these two bills. A full list of the Committee members can be found by clicking on the link below, then clicking on the Senators name for a link to their direct contact information: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.ga.gov%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsenate%2Fhealth.php
Please be respectful in all communications to the elected officials and their staff. Please remember that rude communications work against our interests.
Thank you for taking action today and showing the Georgia Senate that you care about open and available access to care for the women and men diagnosed with infertility in the state of Georgia.
To send a letter to the Committee members immediately, click here. http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://secure2.convio.net%2Fres%2Fsite%2FAdvocacy%3Fcmd%3Ddisplay%26page%3DUserAction%26id%3D219
To view the full text of the bills please follow the links below:
SB 169: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.state.ga.us%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsum%2Fsb169.htm
SB 204: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http://www.legis.state.ga.us%2Flegis%2F2009_10%2Fsum%2Fsb204.htm
Georgia Economic Impact
• More than $200 million in revenue and countless jobs would be lost by Georgia medical practices, psychologists, lawyers, pharmacists, as well as by those in the restaurant and lodging industry who provide services to those traveling for care.
• An expected 50-60% drop in live births associated with legislation limiting the number of oocytes fertilized or transferred would create a powerful incentive for Georgia couples to seek care outside Georgia. Alternatively, they would have to consider multiple treatment cycles to achieve the same success rate as we now see. The cost for additional treatment cycles as well as lost productivity due to time away from jobs can not be immediately calculated.
• Embryo donation is the most a cost effective option for many couples hoping to build a family. Yet this legislation would impose additional legal expenses and home studies that would create a significant cost barrier for many with limited financial resources. As a result this option would no longer be available for many couples
• The majority of higher order multiple pregnancies [triplets or more] result from ovulation induction and not IVF. This legislation will result in a marked decrease in local IVF services and a dramatic increase in the number of ovulation induction cycles with the higher risk of multiple births and the resultant costs.
• The American Society of Reproductive Medicine is planning its annual meeting in Atlanta this fall. Approximately 5,000 people are expected to attend. Passing this legislation will induce many to stay at home. The resultant revenue loss for our convention and travel industry comes at a very difficult time for our economy.
• This legislation will preclude the use of preimplantation embryo screening to prevent diseases such as cystic fibrosis, sickle cell disease, Huntington’s diease and other genetic conditions that result in an enormous financial burden to the individual and often to the state to provide ongoing medical care.
• The financial cost of defending court challenges to HBB during an economic downturn is a needless tax on government funds.
• Biotech industry seeking to relocate will likely have second thoughts about moving to Georgia with passage of this legislation.
Unanswered Questions
• Will cryopreserved embryos that already exist be subject to this law?
• Will this law be applicable to embryos that have been created in another state?
• Will this law apply if the individuals are not Georgia state residents?
• Does this law allow for inheritance rights for embryos deemed to be children?
• Are embryos entitled to social security survivor benefits?
• Will embryos be entitled to child support in the case of divorce to cover the expense of storage?
• Will women who have undergone embryo transfer be able to use the HOV lane….there is an additional “child” on board.
• What happens to embryos that were frozen more than two at a time?
• What about agencies that charge a fee to match recipients and embryo donors while not providing a medical service? Will this be considered the same as selling a baby?
• If an embryo has been frozen longer than 18 years is it still a child? How do you calculate a child's age if the embryo is 20 years old, but the child was born two years ago, how old is the child?
• Not too infrequently, a one cell embryo splits resulting in twins. As this bill describes a single cell embryo as a child do we consider these identical twins as one child or two?
• If an embryo has been frozen longer than 18 years is it still a child? How do you calculate a child's age if the embryo is 20 years old, but the child was born two years ago, are we dealing with a child or an adult?
• The bill states that its purpose is to promote the best interest of the child. As cryopreserved embryos are classified as children and only 20-30% of embryo transfers results in pregnancy, we must ask if this means all embryos should undergo cryopreservation rather than transferring them to avoid the 80% loss rate for these "children"?
--------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)