Age 35 Isn’t a Fertility Cliff. Why Do We Think It Is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aging, to a certain extent, is a choice. There are many unhealthy people in their 20s who think their age keeps them safe. But we can all see their obesity and alcoholism.

Madonna looks old. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, there's plenty of data that there is a fertility cliff at 35. Why would you say otherwise? Women's fertility has a very clear timing and peak.

There will always be exceptions. My own mother gave birth at 38,40,42,45. But all of her friends needed fertility help and weren't able to have more than 2.

No, there is no data that there is a "cliff" at 35. There is a decrease in fertility over your 30s, but the vast majority of women who try to get pregnant at 35 will, and there's not a cliff-like difference between late 20s and mid-30s.

[Anonymous]

I think more should be made of this. Everyone thinks its OK to wait, it's really not. Over 40 many people are using DE and not talking about it. That wouldn't have been an option for me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Age 35 isn't some light switch that makes fertility go from good to bad ... but, all things being equal, a woman is better off trying to have a baby earlier rather than later, no? Of course the realities of life -- when you find a partner, feel like you're in a stable position to support a child, feel ready, etc -- all play a huge role ... but if you're ready and able to have a kid at 34 or at 37, better to opt for 34, no?

No, not really. If I had a friend who was making this choice and just wanted to wait a few more years at 34, I'd say go for it. Only exception being if she really had her heart set on having more than one. But I think this more accurate take on fertility can also make women more at ease about giving themselves more time to go for #2.

[Anonymous]

From your own link: "Indeed, early population studies do demonstrate that certain risks, namely the risks of infertility, miscarriage, and chromosomal abnormalities, increase more significantly at age 35. (To be clear, these risks are age-dependent and increase steadily with age generally, but at some point their rate of increase increases, and that inflection point has been pinpointed by some studies at age 35.)"

So that's why. Because of the facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think more should be made of this. Everyone thinks its OK to wait, it's really not. Over 40 many people are using DE and not talking about it. That wouldn't have been an option for me.

Huh? What this shows is that it IS ok to wait. Most people who wait until their mid/late 30s do it because they haven't met the right partner yet or are dealing with some other life circumstance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more should be made of this. Everyone thinks its OK to wait, it's really not. Over 40 many people are using DE and not talking about it. That wouldn't have been an option for me.

Huh? What this shows is that it IS ok to wait. Most people who wait until their mid/late 30s do it because they haven't met the right partner yet or are dealing with some other life circumstance.

If that's the hand life dealt them, fine. I'm 35 trying to have a 3rd and have had one chemical pregnancy and one miscarriage at 35. My experience is consistent with the data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aging, to a certain extent, is a choice. There are many unhealthy people in their 20s who think their age keeps them safe. But we can all see their obesity and alcoholism.

Madonna looks old. Sorry.

Not sure what this has to do with what I said, but OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more should be made of this. Everyone thinks its OK to wait, it's really not. Over 40 many people are using DE and not talking about it. That wouldn't have been an option for me.

Huh? What this shows is that it IS ok to wait. Most people who wait until their mid/late 30s do it because they haven't met the right partner yet or are dealing with some other life circumstance.

If that's the hand life dealt them, fine. I'm 35 trying to have a 3rd and have had one chemical pregnancy and one miscarriage at 35. My experience is consistent with the data.

You've already had 2 kids and it's statistically overwhelming likely you'll have your 3rd. So it sounds like, just like the data says, your reproductive choices have and will continue to work out. If you want to beat yourself up over trying for #3 at 35 instead of 34 go ahead, but that's totally irrational.

[Anonymous]

Yes, fertility declines over time, but there is not some flip of a switch at 35. I belong to a demographic where large families are common, and I see women over 40 having babies all the time.

The difference is that the stakes are a lot higher for someone who is contemplating their first baby at 40, than for someone who is contemplating their 6th or 7th. For the former, a 20% chance of failure to conceive is probably unacceptably high. For the latter, it's usually not such a big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From your own link: "Indeed, early population studies do demonstrate that certain risks, namely the risks of infertility, miscarriage, and chromosomal abnormalities, increase more significantly at age 35. (To be clear, these risks are age-dependent and increase steadily with age generally, but at some point their rate of increase increases, and that inflection point has been pinpointed by some studies at age 35.)"

So that's why. Because of the facts.

And by 40 many women require donor eggs. And most require minimally clomid. Ask your 40 year old mom friends.

You want your own kids,safest to have them in early 30s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this would be good for women to know: "One of the largest studies found that 78 percent of women aged 35 to 40 will conceive within a year, compared with 84 percent of women aged 20 to 34."

The difference between the groups isn't the part that stands out as much as the 16% of women 20-34 who WON'T conceive in a year and the 22% ages 35-40. I honestly didn't know the number was that high.

This. There is a steep decline, and until you try you won't know if it will happen at 33, 35, 37, or 40. But it WILL happen and the longer you wait, the greater the risk that you won't be able to conceive. I've been trying for a second since I was 33 (including IUIs and IVF cycles) and I had NO idea that my fertility plummeted and had ran out of time. I thought the statistics were overblown, and for most women they won't be on the wrong side of the statistics, but only you can say if it's a gamble you're willing to take. But the one thing you shouldn't do is ignore the statistics and make decisions based on the assumption that your fertility at 35 will be the same as it was at 25.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this would be good for women to know: "One of the largest studies found that 78 percent of women aged 35 to 40 will conceive within a year, compared with 84 percent of women aged 20 to 34."

The difference between the groups isn't the part that stands out as much as the 16% of women 20-34 who WON'T conceive in a year and the 22% ages 35-40. I honestly didn't know the number was that high.

This. There is a steep decline, and until you try you won't know if it will happen at 33, 35, 37, or 40. But it WILL happen and the longer you wait, the greater the risk that you won't be able to conceive. I've been trying for a second since I was 33 (including IUIs and IVF cycles) and I had NO idea that my fertility plummeted and had ran out of time. I thought the statistics were overblown, and for most women they won't be on the wrong side of the statistics, but only you can say if it's a gamble you're willing to take. But the one thing you shouldn't do is ignore the statistics and make decisions based on the assumption that your fertility at 35 will be the same as it was at 25.

I'm sorry that it's been hard for you to conceive your second, PP. In retrospect, do you think something like an annual AMH test would have helped?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this would be good for women to know: "One of the largest studies found that 78 percent of women aged 35 to 40 will conceive within a year, compared with 84 percent of women aged 20 to 34."

The difference between the groups isn't the part that stands out as much as the 16% of women 20-34 who WON'T conceive in a year and the 22% ages 35-40. I honestly didn't know the number was that high.

This. There is a steep decline, and until you try you won't know if it will happen at 33, 35, 37, or 40. But it WILL happen and the longer you wait, the greater the risk that you won't be able to conceive. I've been trying for a second since I was 33 (including IUIs and IVF cycles) and I had NO idea that my fertility plummeted and had ran out of time. I thought the statistics were overblown, and for most women they won't be on the wrong side of the statistics, but only you can say if it's a gamble you're willing to take. But the one thing you shouldn't do is ignore the statistics and make decisions based on the assumption that your fertility at 35 will be the same as it was at 25.

Sounds like bad genes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think more should be made of this. Everyone thinks its OK to wait, it's really not. Over 40 many people are using DE and not talking about it. That wouldn't have been an option for me.

Huh? What this shows is that it IS ok to wait. Most people who wait until their mid/late 30s do it because they haven't met the right partner yet or are dealing with some other life circumstance.

If that's the hand life dealt them, fine. I'm 35 trying to have a 3rd and have had one chemical pregnancy and one miscarriage at 35. My experience is consistent with the data.

You've already had 2 kids and it's statistically overwhelming likely you'll have your 3rd. So it sounds like, just like the data says, your reproductive choices have and will continue to work out. If you want to beat yourself up over trying for #3 at 35 instead of 34 go ahead, but that's totally irrational.

You need reading comprehension PP
She’s recognizing that fertility declines in your 30’s. Risk factors for miscarriage, genetic abnormalities, etc., increase significantly around age 35 — which has been consistent with her experience. Read the article next time!