A new boogeyman story about IVF children

I just admire the fecundity of contemporary scientists! A new study every month.

Indeed, why spend a lot of time and money on a full-scale investigation, if you can fabricate something completely unrepresentative, but very sensational.

UK scientists from Oxford University conducted another "significant" study and found that children, born through IVF, ostensibly, are at increased risk of developing of asthma. The study of more than 13 thousand children have shown that the corresponding risk for IVF children was 10% higher compared with children, conceived naturally.

One of the researchers, Dr Claire Carson, authoritatively declares that 15% of all the children were diagnosed with "asthma" by the age of five years, and among 104 children born with the help of fertility specialists (from 13.000 surveyed!), the percentage jumped to 24%. Basing on these results, experts made another brilliant conclusion: that the IVF technology poses a threat to the health of future children.

I’d like to precise that from 13 thousand of surveyed children, only 104  were born with the help of IVF, and this despite the fact that the study is representative only if at least 10 thousand people has been involved! To make it clearer, I translated percents in quantitative terms, and got such results: 1950 children were diagnosed with asthma, among them only 25 were born through IVF. Sorry, but this is not a study, but some entertaining arithmetic!

I'm tired of repeating that IVF children do not differ from children conceived by "antiquated" method. Dear researchers, please, take the trouble to explain what is the difference, where the fertilized egg spends the first few days of its life? There is a chromosome set of a dad and there are mother’s chromosomes, they joined together in a third, unique set of chromosomes. What is the difference, whether it happens in woman's uterus or in vitro? External factors may have only trigger influence - if the external conditions are unfavorable, the embryo simply won’t develop. Then it will be developing in a usual way. Multiple pregnancy and the age of the mother (and, as you know, over 25% of IVF pregnancies are multiple, and the average age of women, who resort to IVF is significantly higher) can really have an impact on the health of a child, but, for some reasons, you didn’t want to mention it.

But you didn’t forget to leave a «route of escape» for yourself, stressing that still it’s too early to draw any conclusions, and that in general you have nothing against IVF. So if it’s too early to draw conclusions, then why even publish these results and speculate on the fears of ordinary people? To receive another scientific degree? If only so, as such a "scientific approach" can cause nothing but laughter.