The paradox of unanimity in fertility treatment
Opinions and debates are everywhere. They matter. They are the only way forward the most correct way in the fertility treatment. They matter in medicine and for each individual trying to conceive as options are many and so are the advocates. Many people are afraid of debates as we all tend to loose the sight of the topic and respect for the “other side” is rare, which is wrong and can hurt. So how do you go about an issue, a problem or a decision?
To start with, be always careful, when all agree. In Orthodox Judaism the Talmud specifies that when a jury is unanimous in its verdict, with no dissenting votes, the death penalty cannot be carried out. Henrik Ibsen stated: “The majority is always wrong.” Following the masses, just because you think that they must be right because so many people could not be wrong, is a huge mistake. Do not follow the majority because they do not want to be bothered with the facts. Think for yourself and follow your own heart, regardless of what anyone else does.
In the best companies, courts and societies, both sides of an argument are represented by strong advocates, motivated to make the best case for their own side, while the Talmud recognises that consensus is the enemy of careful deliberation and a hallmark of mob rule. Yes, it also applies to the so-called patient organisations, specially in case their activities are solely paid for by the pharmaceutical companies profiting from the preferred treatment and it does very much apply to the issues in-fertility.
You would have to be blind not to see, when looking for any fertility solution or treatment, the powerful communication of IVF centres, often hidden behind patient groups, initiatives or social network movements and chats. There are skilled and well paid media professionals powering this wheel, often the same ones promoting contraception or any other method of preventing pregnancy. Why? We trust you can answer that question yourself.
The question remains. Is and should IVF be the first and most preferred treatment in case you are trying for a child and it does not seem to work? Do we all have to agree it is or if we don’t does it mean we are against IVF? Of course not.
Starting with simple, inexpensive solutions, which benefit the most couples, is the correct way to proceed if serious medical reason for infertility has not been identified. As one Bulgarian embryologist puts it: “There are a number of therapies, clinically proven methods and procedures that can help a large proportion of people with reproductive problems, instead of undergoing the most sophisticated and expensive methods, such as IVF. My colleagues and I, we are active in the research of restoration of spermatogenesis in patients with azoospermia and isolated varicocele without other health problems. In more than 50% of patients, spermatogenesis recovers after surgery and medication. In Bulgaria, the main problem is the lack of andrologists, i.e.. no one treats the men, respectively a large part goes straight to IVF instead of being treated.”
In case the countries can offer treatment and solution to reproductive health issues to more people with less money, is it not worth discussing when, under what conditions and what kind of treatment shall be chosen? Or do we all have to agree? To what?