Birth Control pills and Shady Grove

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are freezing eggs does birth control decrease the number you can get?

+1 I'd like to know, too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are freezing eggs does birth control decrease the number you can get?

+1 I'd like to know, too!

Yes. If you’re over suppressed by the BCP, the ovarian stimulation drugs wont be as effective as you’ll get fewer eggs to freese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are freezing eggs does birth control decrease the number you can get?



+1 I'd like to know, too!



Yes. If you’re over suppressed by the BCP, the ovarian stimulation drugs wont be as effective as you’ll get fewer eggs to freese.


To OP - I did egg banking at Shady Grove. Big waste of time because they ignored / didn't mention all the adverse things I had going on before trying some cycles. They put me on BC even though I was DOR. I (me not the Dr. Levens) canceled two cycles because the BC pills made me have cysts. I read about the suppression aspect of BC and demanded that they run me with nothing but the fertility meds for cycle 3 and 4. I canceled three because the eggs were developing at different rates and the retrieval wouldn't get more than 5 out of 15, then the next cycle (demanding no BC again - be a bitch about it. seriously) I got 15 eggs. I was getting better and better results each cycle after dropping birth control pills. It's only now that I discovered through other providers my results COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH higher if Shady Grove mentioned my out-of-whack TSH and Vitamin D levels, fibroids and endometriosis. If your TSH and Vitamin D are not optimal you won't make good eggs. Dr. Levens knew how jacked up I was but SAID NOTHING. Just took my money and blamed things on *age*.

You got to do your own research and do not put much trust into ANY reproductive endocrinologist. Make them earn your trust first.

OBTW - Shady Grove botch my all of my embryo transfers. . . .seems pregnancy won't happen if you have multiple fibroids and uterine polyps but hey. . ."let's throw eggs in there anyway, we have a Progesterone in Oil study to do" . ..

[Anonymous]

honest question: with all these negative stories of cancelled cycles, over suppression, why are their success rates so high? aren't they the highest in the area? based on the posts here, they're not turning people away because of DOR or age, so it doesn't seem to be patient selection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:honest question: with all these negative stories of cancelled cycles, over suppression, why are their success rates so high? aren't they the highest in the area? based on the posts here, they're not turning people away because of DOR or age, so it doesn't seem to be patient selection.

Because they are probably the best place to go for most people. The large number of complaints is due to two factors— 1) they are the largest clinic in the area by far. Every clinic will generate complaints and more patients means more complaints, 2) it is a factory, which can be both good and bad (with so many patients they have a pretty good handle on what works for most people and have protocols they will not deviate from, which sucks if you want to try some new or that hasn’t been tested yet. It can also be quite impersonal and you’ll rarely talk to your doctor let alone see them).

[Anonymous]

They suck all the way around! We have Kaiser and had to use them, but eventually moved to another clinic and got wayyy better results.
When comparing stats keep in mind SGF is the biggest and they can manipulate numbers to make themselves look good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They suck all the way around! We have Kaiser and had to use them, but eventually moved to another clinic and got wayyy better results.
When comparing stats keep in mind SGF is the biggest and they can manipulate numbers to make themselves look good.

another serious question: how do you manipulate the stats to make yourself look good?

[Anonymous]

Clearly you've never taken a college level statistics class, but if you have even a rudimentary knowledge of the subject you wouldn't put any stock in them.

[Anonymous]

usually the infertility board is much kinder.

let me ask the question more specifically -- how could shady grove have manipulated its statistics to make its success rates appear higher, particularly against other clinics in the area? especially given that these things are (at least theoretically) standardized by SART?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:usually the infertility board is much kinder.

let me ask the question more specifically -- how could shady grove have manipulated its statistics to make its success rates appear higher, particularly against other clinics in the area? especially given that these things are (at least theoretically) standardized by SART?

NP, but I have some thoughts on this. Just my opinions based on my and my friends' experiences at SGF and other local clinics. First, SGF has higher standards for acceptability for procedures. For example, they require (though not sure how strict this is as a "requirement") 10m washed sperm for IUIs whereas GW looks for 3m+ sperm. They also "push" donor eggs sooner than other clinics, and have the reputation for not being good for or specializing in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), which are notoriously hard to treat cases and have lower success rates. So folks with MFI or DOR that want to stick with their own genetics go with Dominion or CCRM or GW, versus SGF. They also tend to cancel cycles more frequently instead of letting someone go to retrieval with 2-3 follicles. If you're OOP and only have limited funds to put towards treatment, it makes sense not to "waste" money on cycles with low odds. But if you have more serious fertility problems and are willing to try many cycles to have a genetic child because you have insurance coverage or are made of money, then SGF's policies are not going to be a good fit for you. All of these things impact patient care, but also have the benefit of boosting SGF's success rates because the harder clients are weeded out or have their cycles cancelled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:usually the infertility board is much kinder.

let me ask the question more specifically -- how could shady grove have manipulated its statistics to make its success rates appear higher, particularly against other clinics in the area? especially given that these things are (at least theoretically) standardized by SART?

NP, but I have some thoughts on this. Just my opinions based on my and my friends' experiences at SGF and other local clinics. First, SGF has higher standards for acceptability for procedures. For example, they require (though not sure how strict this is as a "requirement") 10m washed sperm for IUIs whereas GW looks for 3m+ sperm. They also "push" donor eggs sooner than other clinics, and have the reputation for not being good for or specializing in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), which are notoriously hard to treat cases and have lower success rates. So folks with MFI or DOR that want to stick with their own genetics go with Dominion or CCRM or GW, versus SGF. They also tend to cancel cycles more frequently instead of letting someone go to retrieval with 2-3 follicles. If you're OOP and only have limited funds to put towards treatment, it makes sense not to "waste" money on cycles with low odds. But if you have more serious fertility problems and are willing to try many cycles to have a genetic child because you have insurance coverage or are made of money, then SGF's policies are not going to be a good fit for you. All of these things impact patient care, but also have the benefit of boosting SGF's success rates because the harder clients are weeded out or have their cycles cancelled.

thank you for this.

i'm thinking, though, the cycle cancellation part wouldn't affect the stats-- SART counts "LIVE BIRTHS PER INTENDED EGG RETRIEVAL," so going to retrieval would actually _increase_ their stats, even in poor cases (as opposed to canceling and then having 0% odds of live birth).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:usually the infertility board is much kinder.

let me ask the question more specifically -- how could shady grove have manipulated its statistics to make its success rates appear higher, particularly against other clinics in the area? especially given that these things are (at least theoretically) standardized by SART?

NP, but I have some thoughts on this. Just my opinions based on my and my friends' experiences at SGF and other local clinics. First, SGF has higher standards for acceptability for procedures. For example, they require (though not sure how strict this is as a "requirement") 10m washed sperm for IUIs whereas GW looks for 3m+ sperm. They also "push" donor eggs sooner than other clinics, and have the reputation for not being good for or specializing in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), which are notoriously hard to treat cases and have lower success rates. So folks with MFI or DOR that want to stick with their own genetics go with Dominion or CCRM or GW, versus SGF. They also tend to cancel cycles more frequently instead of letting someone go to retrieval with 2-3 follicles. If you're OOP and only have limited funds to put towards treatment, it makes sense not to "waste" money on cycles with low odds. But if you have more serious fertility problems and are willing to try many cycles to have a genetic child because you have insurance coverage or are made of money, then SGF's policies are not going to be a good fit for you. All of these things impact patient care, but also have the benefit of boosting SGF's success rates because the harder clients are weeded out or have their cycles cancelled.

thank you for this.

i'm thinking, though, the cycle cancellation part wouldn't affect the stats-- SART counts "LIVE BIRTHS PER INTENDED EGG RETRIEVAL," so going to retrieval would actually _increase_ their stats, even in poor cases (as opposed to canceling and then having 0% odds of live birth).

Though, maybe that's how they manipulate stats, by not counting them as "intended" if they cancel early enough or convert to IUI or TI. If you change course mid-stims, does that count as "intended" or only if you go to retrieval and fail to retrieve any eggs?

[Anonymous]

PP cancelling an IVF cycle before egg retrieval is EXACTLY how they manipulate stats among limiting their patients to best cases. They are a business and their only purpose is making money so based on my experience they are good for young easy couples who qualify for shared risk. I actually loved my RE there and he was the one who told me to go elsewhere if I wanted a shot at conceiving with my own eggs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP cancelling an IVF cycle before egg retrieval is EXACTLY how they manipulate stats among limiting their patients to best cases. They are a business and their only purpose is making money so based on my experience they are good for young easy couples who qualify for shared risk. I actually loved my RE there and he was the one who told me to go elsewhere if I wanted a shot at conceiving with my own eggs.

i'm so sorry for your experience. sounds like you've been jerked around.

where did your SG re tell you to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:usually the infertility board is much kinder.

let me ask the question more specifically -- how could shady grove have manipulated its statistics to make its success rates appear higher, particularly against other clinics in the area? especially given that these things are (at least theoretically) standardized by SART?

NP, but I have some thoughts on this. Just my opinions based on my and my friends' experiences at SGF and other local clinics. First, SGF has higher standards for acceptability for procedures. For example, they require (though not sure how strict this is as a "requirement") 10m washed sperm for IUIs whereas GW looks for 3m+ sperm. They also "push" donor eggs sooner than other clinics, and have the reputation for not being good for or specializing in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), which are notoriously hard to treat cases and have lower success rates. So folks with MFI or DOR that want to stick with their own genetics go with Dominion or CCRM or GW, versus SGF. They also tend to cancel cycles more frequently instead of letting someone go to retrieval with 2-3 follicles. If you're OOP and only have limited funds to put towards treatment, it makes sense not to "waste" money on cycles with low odds. But if you have more serious fertility problems and are willing to try many cycles to have a genetic child because you have insurance coverage or are made of money, then SGF's policies are not going to be a good fit for you. All of these things impact patient care, but also have the benefit of boosting SGF's success rates because the harder clients are weeded out or have their cycles cancelled.

Also just note the IUI thing would not affect stats and that is actually good medicine. The odds of an IUI working with less than 10m washed is vanishingly small. I didn’t realize any of this until after I did two IUIs and GW and was consulting elsewhere. I was super pissed they took my money and let me think I had a chance when I didn’t.

It’s totally true that SGF tends donor eggs early and also turn people away and that’s probably how they manipulate their stats. But if they are willing to go forward with you, that means they think it’s going to work and at that point your interests are aligned with theirs. As far canceling ERs, I’m not sure how that manipulates stats. It’s good for most people because whether you have insurance or are going through shared risk/multi cycle a cancelled ER doesn’t count against you. So it’s far better to cancel and see if you can get a better response next time than use an ER on a crappy cycle. If it turns out 2-3 eggs is the best you can do, I personally know people who have gone to ERs with that at SGF. Of course, pretty sure SGF pushes DE on those people if that cycle didn’t work out, which sucks emotionally, but if your goal is a live birth, that is definitely the best odds for those people.