Reasons why I am pro low-stim

Reasons why I am pro low-stim

Joined: December 20th, 2010, 7:38 pm

September 15th, 2011, 6:32 pm #1

As most of your may already know, I am in the mourning the loss of my uterus phase. But I want to share my lesson with you, so that you can learn from my mistake and make a better decision.

High stim is very effective for good responders, which most of us 40+ are not. I had 4 back to back medium-to-high stim IVFs at the beginning of the year, 2 of them stacked month after month, with the rest a natural cycle in between. I researched the impact myself before going in, there is really no conclusion. My RE at Stanford advocated it citing no proof on negative effect, but when I talked to other REs, the general consensus is at least 8 weeks between high stim if not even longer.

At first I thought it was because the ovaries may be overloaded. Until I talked to my oncologist who treats my precancerous uterine condition which surfaced after the intensive IVF regimen. He told me that the E2 generated prior to retrieval is essentially unopposed estrogen dominance, and such amount of estrogen is above and beyond what our body is designed to deal with normally. Excess estrogen is what causes many cancers of the reproductive system including uterus, ovary, cervix and breast, which is why he had encountered pregnant cancer patient who underwent many rounds of IVF. Of course, everyone's estrogen receptors are a bit different, mine are more sensitive, so a bit more boost of estrogen throughout 4 cycles can bring on precancerous changes. The medical establishment will never tell you that there is a link between IVF protocols and cancer, because IVF has become such a gigantic business that they will have enough "research funds" and lobbyists to "prove" otherwise.

Which is why I am more determined to go the mini-IVF route, one or two eggs at a time, much less estrogen in follicular phase, and the combined cost of 3 cycles which yield me just as many eggs as in one cycle is even lower than one full cycle. Most importantly, it is better for my body.

I believe that if Alexis with all the money her mom can spare for her, chooses not to blast her ovaries every few months but to go for natural or low-stim every month, must have a better medical advice than me, since money is not an issue for her.

Therefore, I would caution those who are poor responders like me to be very careful about high stim, and go for regular checkup and biopsy. Just keep in mind that IVF entails health risk and you must monitor very carefully.

Quote
Like
Share

BabyDance
BabyDance

September 15th, 2011, 7:00 pm #2

It just wasn't working for me. Stuns do help mature the egg and the only time I got embryos to grow was with 600. I was so convinced lower stim was the way to go, and did 3 rounds, and got nowhere whatsoever. I feel I have to try the 450. I'm so sorry you are going through this, and thank you for the warning. I will keep it in mind.
Quote
Share

anne
anne

September 15th, 2011, 8:47 pm #3

As most of your may already know, I am in the mourning the loss of my uterus phase. But I want to share my lesson with you, so that you can learn from my mistake and make a better decision.

High stim is very effective for good responders, which most of us 40+ are not. I had 4 back to back medium-to-high stim IVFs at the beginning of the year, 2 of them stacked month after month, with the rest a natural cycle in between. I researched the impact myself before going in, there is really no conclusion. My RE at Stanford advocated it citing no proof on negative effect, but when I talked to other REs, the general consensus is at least 8 weeks between high stim if not even longer.

At first I thought it was because the ovaries may be overloaded. Until I talked to my oncologist who treats my precancerous uterine condition which surfaced after the intensive IVF regimen. He told me that the E2 generated prior to retrieval is essentially unopposed estrogen dominance, and such amount of estrogen is above and beyond what our body is designed to deal with normally. Excess estrogen is what causes many cancers of the reproductive system including uterus, ovary, cervix and breast, which is why he had encountered pregnant cancer patient who underwent many rounds of IVF. Of course, everyone's estrogen receptors are a bit different, mine are more sensitive, so a bit more boost of estrogen throughout 4 cycles can bring on precancerous changes. The medical establishment will never tell you that there is a link between IVF protocols and cancer, because IVF has become such a gigantic business that they will have enough "research funds" and lobbyists to "prove" otherwise.

Which is why I am more determined to go the mini-IVF route, one or two eggs at a time, much less estrogen in follicular phase, and the combined cost of 3 cycles which yield me just as many eggs as in one cycle is even lower than one full cycle. Most importantly, it is better for my body.

I believe that if Alexis with all the money her mom can spare for her, chooses not to blast her ovaries every few months but to go for natural or low-stim every month, must have a better medical advice than me, since money is not an issue for her.

Therefore, I would caution those who are poor responders like me to be very careful about high stim, and go for regular checkup and biopsy. Just keep in mind that IVF entails health risk and you must monitor very carefully.
i'm curious about the bio estrogen, whether that might be the more healthy thing to try.
Quote
Share

Jamie
Jamie

September 15th, 2011, 8:56 pm #4

As most of your may already know, I am in the mourning the loss of my uterus phase. But I want to share my lesson with you, so that you can learn from my mistake and make a better decision.

High stim is very effective for good responders, which most of us 40+ are not. I had 4 back to back medium-to-high stim IVFs at the beginning of the year, 2 of them stacked month after month, with the rest a natural cycle in between. I researched the impact myself before going in, there is really no conclusion. My RE at Stanford advocated it citing no proof on negative effect, but when I talked to other REs, the general consensus is at least 8 weeks between high stim if not even longer.

At first I thought it was because the ovaries may be overloaded. Until I talked to my oncologist who treats my precancerous uterine condition which surfaced after the intensive IVF regimen. He told me that the E2 generated prior to retrieval is essentially unopposed estrogen dominance, and such amount of estrogen is above and beyond what our body is designed to deal with normally. Excess estrogen is what causes many cancers of the reproductive system including uterus, ovary, cervix and breast, which is why he had encountered pregnant cancer patient who underwent many rounds of IVF. Of course, everyone's estrogen receptors are a bit different, mine are more sensitive, so a bit more boost of estrogen throughout 4 cycles can bring on precancerous changes. The medical establishment will never tell you that there is a link between IVF protocols and cancer, because IVF has become such a gigantic business that they will have enough "research funds" and lobbyists to "prove" otherwise.

Which is why I am more determined to go the mini-IVF route, one or two eggs at a time, much less estrogen in follicular phase, and the combined cost of 3 cycles which yield me just as many eggs as in one cycle is even lower than one full cycle. Most importantly, it is better for my body.

I believe that if Alexis with all the money her mom can spare for her, chooses not to blast her ovaries every few months but to go for natural or low-stim every month, must have a better medical advice than me, since money is not an issue for her.

Therefore, I would caution those who are poor responders like me to be very careful about high stim, and go for regular checkup and biopsy. Just keep in mind that IVF entails health risk and you must monitor very carefully.
It makes tremendous sense to me that high levels of estrogen caused by IVF can impact our bodies and cause cancer. No argument.

However, that high estrogen comes not from the stims themselves,but from the follicles. It's the follicles that produce the estrogen. So if a woman with 20 follicles takes high-stim meds, she may end up with 20 mature follicles and 3000-4000 units of estrogen in her body. That's 10-20 times what she would normally product each month with 1-2 mature follicles.

A poor responder by definition will only produce a few follicles, so the 150-200 units of estrogen per mature follicle she produces shouldn't be much more than what she normally produces on her own each month. A poor responder can be blasted with high stims and still won't produce more than a few follicles, thus no estrogen problem.
Quote
Share

BD
BD

September 15th, 2011, 9:23 pm #5

It just wasn't working for me. Stuns do help mature the egg and the only time I got embryos to grow was with 600. I was so convinced lower stim was the way to go, and did 3 rounds, and got nowhere whatsoever. I feel I have to try the 450. I'm so sorry you are going through this, and thank you for the warning. I will keep it in mind.
Darn Iphone autotext. "Stims" not stuns! nt.
Quote
Share

Joined: December 20th, 2010, 7:38 pm

September 15th, 2011, 9:33 pm #6

It makes tremendous sense to me that high levels of estrogen caused by IVF can impact our bodies and cause cancer. No argument.

However, that high estrogen comes not from the stims themselves,but from the follicles. It's the follicles that produce the estrogen. So if a woman with 20 follicles takes high-stim meds, she may end up with 20 mature follicles and 3000-4000 units of estrogen in her body. That's 10-20 times what she would normally product each month with 1-2 mature follicles.

A poor responder by definition will only produce a few follicles, so the 150-200 units of estrogen per mature follicle she produces shouldn't be much more than what she normally produces on her own each month. A poor responder can be blasted with high stims and still won't produce more than a few follicles, thus no estrogen problem.
than those with lots of follicles. It is a case by case situation. On average, it should be around 400 E2 per mature follicle, but I had once 4000+ E2 with just 4 follicles.
Quote
Like
Share

Emilie
Emilie

September 15th, 2011, 10:58 pm #7

As most of your may already know, I am in the mourning the loss of my uterus phase. But I want to share my lesson with you, so that you can learn from my mistake and make a better decision.

High stim is very effective for good responders, which most of us 40+ are not. I had 4 back to back medium-to-high stim IVFs at the beginning of the year, 2 of them stacked month after month, with the rest a natural cycle in between. I researched the impact myself before going in, there is really no conclusion. My RE at Stanford advocated it citing no proof on negative effect, but when I talked to other REs, the general consensus is at least 8 weeks between high stim if not even longer.

At first I thought it was because the ovaries may be overloaded. Until I talked to my oncologist who treats my precancerous uterine condition which surfaced after the intensive IVF regimen. He told me that the E2 generated prior to retrieval is essentially unopposed estrogen dominance, and such amount of estrogen is above and beyond what our body is designed to deal with normally. Excess estrogen is what causes many cancers of the reproductive system including uterus, ovary, cervix and breast, which is why he had encountered pregnant cancer patient who underwent many rounds of IVF. Of course, everyone's estrogen receptors are a bit different, mine are more sensitive, so a bit more boost of estrogen throughout 4 cycles can bring on precancerous changes. The medical establishment will never tell you that there is a link between IVF protocols and cancer, because IVF has become such a gigantic business that they will have enough "research funds" and lobbyists to "prove" otherwise.

Which is why I am more determined to go the mini-IVF route, one or two eggs at a time, much less estrogen in follicular phase, and the combined cost of 3 cycles which yield me just as many eggs as in one cycle is even lower than one full cycle. Most importantly, it is better for my body.

I believe that if Alexis with all the money her mom can spare for her, chooses not to blast her ovaries every few months but to go for natural or low-stim every month, must have a better medical advice than me, since money is not an issue for her.

Therefore, I would caution those who are poor responders like me to be very careful about high stim, and go for regular checkup and biopsy. Just keep in mind that IVF entails health risk and you must monitor very carefully.
Hi. I just did a high stim antagonist cycle & it was one of the better responses I have had, 10 mature eggs. But I don't know the outcome yet otherwise. Also I took ganirelix and I was told this keeps the estrogen down - do you guys think that this is safer? At first the RE was surprised to have such a good response because their were actually 17 eggs but 7 of them turned out to not be mature. But I was surprised too - Dr. Check had recommended low stim for me but my RE didn't really take this theory seriously.
Quote
Share

Joined: December 20th, 2010, 7:38 pm

September 15th, 2011, 11:27 pm #8

The Progesterone support in the 2ww does help combat the excess estrogen in the stim phase, but not ganirelix or other drugs. It is just a risk reward game, I am sure most women can undergo a few high stim cycles without any problems, it is just a matter of how many high stim cycles you are willing to undergo to get to that golden egg vs. other health risk.

For high responders, my take is, since they can generate a lot of eggs, the risk is worth it, because they probably only need 1-2 cycles to get the job done. It is just the poor responders who may need to go through cycle after cycle and the fact that we need to go through more cycles entail a bigger health risk.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: December 20th, 2010, 7:38 pm

September 16th, 2011, 12:04 am #9

i'm curious about the bio estrogen, whether that might be the more healthy thing to try.
long-term impact of fertility drugs, and even if they do, there may be some reasons such research may never get published.

If I could have my uterus, I would do natural cycle IVF every month. I completely believe in IVF, which takes out a lot of guessing and variables out of the equation. I am just not sure about the fertility drugs that I need to pump into my body to harvest the extra eggs.


Quote
Like
Share

Emilie
Emilie

September 16th, 2011, 1:19 am #10

The Progesterone support in the 2ww does help combat the excess estrogen in the stim phase, but not ganirelix or other drugs. It is just a risk reward game, I am sure most women can undergo a few high stim cycles without any problems, it is just a matter of how many high stim cycles you are willing to undergo to get to that golden egg vs. other health risk.

For high responders, my take is, since they can generate a lot of eggs, the risk is worth it, because they probably only need 1-2 cycles to get the job done. It is just the poor responders who may need to go through cycle after cycle and the fact that we need to go through more cycles entail a bigger health risk.
what number is worth it, do you think, to do high stims? I am already planning for next time.

By the way I am going to post above about my mother's cousin, a sort of encouraging story though no final results yet.
Quote
Share


Confirmation of reply: