Great! Thought they knew it all but as it turned out got it wrong - just like quite a few of us predicted.

km

Before you pin another ToldYaSo merit badge on your bad self, there boyscout...And... Well DUH! Despite many advances in the science since the 1978 birth of Louise Joy Brown, the field is still in it's infantile stages (pardon the pun) in terms of research and development. As in any technique undergoing continued development and improvement, there will be less than perfect results. And certainly there will be some abuses or irresponsible applications of the practice.

Methinks it's a bit premature to throw a wet blanket over an important sector of health and science just because a small slice of an enormous and growing body of data happens to align with your own POV. Me-also-thinks it's more than a bit ironic that you label others as "know-alls." (who of course, "got it wrong again"). I call that strutting with one shoe. That alone is worth the price of admission omission.

Your topic is misleading ~ I thought it would be an autobiography. You can't imagine my sense of relief.

Really? Or is that just your assumption?



A 3.5% chance of defects using IVF vs. 2.5% for "regular" births hardly indicates to me that they "got it wrong" ...

Horribly written article, btw, but that's another discussion ;-)

Ah, but if it talks your particular talk, who's counting? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Oh yes I can.

There you go again - making me smile while I have my morning tea!

You sure it's not just gas?

The two of you are a real gas!

Quick! Light a match!