Names Searched Right Now:
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Egg Donation

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    683
    @lexiem

    Hmm.. Maybe? I wonder if that information is obtainable or even collected by clinics? I mean, the doctor who told me about the egg share option had my file and a photo of me. Apparently my file did not note my race, so he assumed my race from the unclear photo. I used to review medical records as part of my job, and the race of the patient was usually not included in the records. I don't know if there is a standard one way or the other.

    In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't saying that if you do this your eggs will be raised by bad people. I think a commenter above noted that most people who would be motivated enough to pursue this are going to be good parents. Since you said that you would seek out a clinic that reflected the general population, I was just saying that the clinics don't care who their clients are as long as they can pay, that they are neither trying to recruit clients to reflect racial diversity nor are they turning away non-white patients.

    I understand what you are saying about clinics in larger cities, and I would interested to know if that is true.

  2. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,598
    Race is absolutely reported to both the CDC and to SART (the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, the central clearinghouse for the US). Most recent data for *non-donor* oocytes I could find was from 2006:

    There were 190,562 nondonor cycles of ART during 2004–2006 There were 12,287 cycles (6.5%) among black, non-Hispanic women (an increase from the 4.6% reported in 1999 and 2000) and 146,406 cycles (76.8%) among white, non-Hispanic women. There were 17,529 cycles (9.2%) among Asian, non-Hispanic women, 11,897 cycles (6.2%) among Hispanic women of any race, 337 cycles (0.2%) among American Indian or Alaska Native women, and 2,105 cycles (1.1%) among women of other races.

    Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19368916

    Black women, Hispanic women and Native American women were significantly more likely to have worse prognostic factors than white & Asian women (more primary tubal infertility, higher ages). They were more likely to be treated at IVF clinics with lower success rates and they were more likely to have lower pregnancy rates and lower live birth rates than white counterparts.

    In other studies, looking at all ART versus just IVF, non-white & non-Asian women were much more likely to spend less, try fewer cycles, and have lower pregnancy & lower live birth rates. They were much less likely to pursue IVF, even in a sub-group analysis that controlled for SES & household income.

    Although I can't find a paper specifically on donor egg-IVF (maybe someone else can), it seems promising to conclude that non-white and non-Asian women would be even less likely to pursue it than IVF and ART alone (which are much less interventional and much cheaper).
    Blade, MD

    XY: Antoine Raphael
    XX: Cassia Viviane Noor

    Aurea * Emmanuelle * Endellion * Fleur * Jacinda * Lysandra * Melisande * Myrrine * Rosamond * Seraphine * Sylvana * Thea * Verity / Blaise * Cyprian * Evander * Jules * Laurence * Lionel * Malcolm * Marius * Quentin * Rainier

    كنوز الصحراء الشرقية Hayat _ Qamar _ Sahar _ Maysan _ Farah / Altair _ Fahd _ Faraj _ Khalil _ Tariq

  3. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    683
    Interesting! Thanks, Blade!

  4. #27
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,122
    Thanks Blade!!!
    ...if my husbands has no vote, then....
    Endora & Lorelei / Dexter & Gideon
    ...we are newlyweds and not trying...yet...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •