A recent Cochrane review of immunotherapy studies has concluded that there is no beneficial effect. The link to Cochrane (the very respected body that undertakes systematic reviews of medical treatments to promote evidence-based medicine) is at the end of the article.
News snippet about research that has discovered a genetic cause underlying molar pregnancies. I've always thought, personally, that molar pregnancies are just an additional slap in the face by God. It's not enough that you are losing your baby (to say nothing of faith and hope), but then you come to find out that there was never an actual foetus. That has to just take your breath away.
For anyone who has suffered this particular type of loss, know that there is research going on that could help.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=37209
I saw this on Thalia's blog: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/7477/1283
Speaking as one who has been sorely tempted by the voodoo magic qualities of treatment for elevated Natural Killer (NK) cells, this article came as a real eye-opener. In particular, this quote:
Understanding the function of uterine NK cells is certainly a major challenge in human reproduction. However, until more is known about their role in normal pregnancy, there is no evidence of any benefit in offering NK cell testing to women with recurrent miscarriage or infertility. Of course, women with these distressing conditions will be disappointed... The danger posed by internet sources, the popular press, and radio highlighting idiosyncratic personal practices of a few physicians should not be underestimated. This unfortunate group of women are particularly vulnerable to financial exploitation, and of being exposed to powerful treatments that have, as yet, no rational scientific basis.
We are vulnerable. I am lucky enough to have had a good eduation. I work in an industry wherein I have very easy access to cutting edge scientific research. Mr Badeggs is a scientist by training (I really ought to call him Dr Badeggs), so I have gleaned an understanding of how scientific research works and what sorts of questions one should ask oneself before subscribing wholeheartedly to whatever miracle (or, more likely, scare) story the media is currently stoking to fever pitch. And yet, my desire to have a baby that shares the genetic material of myself and Mr B frequently clouds my judgement when it comes to healthy scepticism of medical treatments on offer. I am by no means the smartest person in any room, but I have a certain edge when it comes to judging the benefits vs the cost of a treatment. And yet many times I have come close to convincing myself to throw caution to the wind. And if that is true,, what of the woman who dropped out of school at 16 to work who is considering handing over her life savings for an unproven treatment?
So the gist of this article? I think it's as follows:
If you're about to undergo treatment, ask your doctor about this article. Print it out; its's free. Don't believe it just because you want to, however tempting it is.
I enjoyed this. Well written and although there is a live birth in there, it's not the usual happy ending crap that usually gets put out when talking about recurrent miscarriage.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article342200.ece
Also this: Hormone aids conception in women with endometriosis
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060130/hl_nm/hormone_endometriosis_dc_1
I am utterly speechless:
http://www.thekansascitychannel.com/news/6447791/detail.html?rss=kc1&psp=news
At the risk of diluting the impact of my last post...
Could somene please tell me where in this article Michael Bolton says anything approaching "Yup, I'm a-getting ready to wed this here lump o' sugar". Yet the first line of the article states very decisively that Bolton was hinting at just that.
Really? Where, pray tell?
Honestly, it pisses me off how the press just fabricate things to suit their own agendas. Of course, why anyone should even give an airborne fuck about whether Michael Bolton and Nicolette Sheridan are going to test-drive holy matrimony, I don't know. (Yes, I know my position is undermined by the fact that I was reading the article. Don't judge me.)
Anyway, this is less a comment on the nuptial fortunes of La Bolton and La Sheridan than a scathing, if briefly worded, indictment of the modern press. Woodward and Bernstein would have groomed an informant who could have given us the inside track not only on the possibility of a wedding, but also the potential political and social ramifications in LaLa Land. These days reporters can't even be bothered to shore up their creative writing with the old chestnut "Friends of the couple said that..." Nope, just fling out a statement and write the article without offering even a whiff of corroboration.
Seriously, it's not a big deal when it's a story about celebrity relationships, but what am I supposed to think when I read about Bird Flu, government corruption or, God forbid, the latest scientific 'research' that suggests that sheer determination can stave off a miscarriage? I'll tell you what...it makes me believe this story.
I think Lorem will approve of this article from the Seattle Times. No requisite happy endings here (well, just the hint of one), and an informative and sensitive look at miscarriage.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2002745553_healthmiscarry18.html?syndication=rss
This was interesting, too
