Hellobee Boards

Ooh, I hate to disagree with the reputable source, but he's a fertility specialist, not a statistician or public health expert. The original article does indeed talk about how miscarriages are increased in older populations, though the specialist says the article does not discuss that. The article also takes into account the increased risk of chromosomal issues in older women, though he states it does not.

Of course his experience is going to be very different than a population based view. What the specialist fails to note is that the damaged eggs that he extracts do not (for the most part) implant. So, it is not a fair comparison to say that 80% of eggs from a 40 year old are chromosomally abnormal and compare that to the statistic that 97% of 40 year olds have chromosomally normal babies, as most abnormal eggs will not implant or will be an early miscarriage.

I appreciate his point of view and perspective and would probably share it if I had his job, but instead I see the population as a whole and have to respectfully disagree with him

@Mrs. Jacks: Well said!

@mrsmate: I totally understand your perspective. I'm sorry you are going through that.

Please understand that my lens is also different in that I started my family at 38 with a successful NTNP pregnancy with just lightening the birth control. The news from the Atlantic article really resonated with me.

I saw another study recently that say that women who conceive naturally and carry to term in their 40's are statstically likely to live into their nineties and beyond. That also made sense to me.

All of that is to say that the view through different lenses is very enlightening. I think the best lens to view this through is probably a public health or population based health lens and see what shakes out there.