Making IVF Accessible
Experts are resisting cheap in vitro fertilization (IVF), a gentler technique priced at less than $300, as compared with the usual sixteen grand. The far less expensive version would, of course, cut into clinic profits.
Private treatment costs between $4,700 and $16,000 per cycle, and often patients need more than one cycle to conceive. But only one in five patients needing IVF in the West can do it. In the developing world—where infertility has more serious social consequences–that number is one in a hundred. Take sub-Saharan Africa, for example. A high birth rate conceals STDs, botched abortions, and pelvic infections. And the social consequences of infertility can mean divorce, polygamy, and even death. Yet at the moment IVF is only for the rich.
The alternative form uses generic drugs (clomiphene) and simple equipment, and the estimated cost includes personnel, not just meds and equipment. Because the alternative is less toxic and far less expensive, those seeking treatment could do IVF multiple times.
Clinics in Melbourne, Stockholm and Bologna have done pilot studies with 100 cycles each. They yielded a birth rate per cycle of about 12%. Standard IVF has rates two to three times that high. Yet a couple doing the less expensive form could multiply their number of tries, making rates comparable but still at a fraction of the cost. A 2007 study found that even natural-cycle IVF (without drugs) had a 43% cumulative pregnancy rate over a year—equivalent to standard IVF rates without the risks.
Standard IVF has a 50% drop-out rate and is physically and psychologically traumatic. The low-cost, low-impact approach is less traumatic and has a quicker recovery time. Thus patients would not have to wait three months or more before trying again.
A foundation is grafting low-cost facilities into existing clinics, and they are targeting India, Uganda, Indonesia, Ethiopia, and Tunisia. The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology aims to set up a similar program in Egypt, Paraguay, and in sub-Saharan Africa.
Source: www.bionews.org.uk/page_72984.asp