Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Infertility Support and Discussion
Reply to "Age 35 Isn’t a Fertility Cliff. Why Do We Think It Is?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I suspect insurers play a role in this complicated determination too. They want to establish a cutoff as close as possible to where it actuarially makes sense to pay for tests like cell free DNA or extra ultrasound/visits to high risk practices for large numbers of women versus the cost of the expected complications avoided for mother and child. [/quote] One of the reasons that 35 became the cutoff is that it’s the age at which the risk of having a fetus with the common trisomies (t21, t18, t13) becomes greater than/equal to the risk of miscarriage from amnio. For that reason, OBs and MFMs would offer it beginning at age 35. This was before noninvasive testing like NIPT was an option.[/quote] Yes, but as the article OP posted noted, the risk of miscarriage from amnio has decreased significantly since that calculation was done.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
