AmericanPapist Comments
Thomas, Lord knows I am opposed to IVF, but I really question those statistics. What sort of cases do they see, versus what the IVF providers see? Are they really all equivalent? I have my doubts. I have no doubt that some people who have recourse to IVF could have been successful in their efforts to conceive without IVF, by taking advantage of the NaProTechnology, but if one could compare apples to apples, I suspect that the statistical percentages would narrow. In order to clearly determine the real success/failure of the methods, one would need a double-blind study (I'm not sure how one would do this; and I am completely sure that it would be unethical to do such an experiment), but there are no such studies available to my knowledge. Once again, I am NOT arguing in favor of IVF--I accept the Church's teaching completely--the scientist in me just objects to accepting what amounts to anecdotal evidence as factual, without at least a careful and unbiased study of the data available. If anyone is aware of such a study, please advise me.
Yes the statistics are very acceptable. Normal infertility doctors are not even aware of NaPro technology treatment, so how could they even reccomend it when they don't know about it? All they are trained in is IVF and other immoral acts.
NO medical schools teach this, except for the Pope Paul VI Institute and affiliated doctors.
Also, fertility is so complex that I doubt one could do such a double -blind study. There are so many variables and there is the fertility of two to consider. One variable is nutrition. School physicians are not trained in nutrition and so are unaware of the huge factor it plays in fertility. Most OB-Gyns are trained to hinder or destroy fertility, rather than aid it. They are simply uninterested in a method which is not too profitable and which helps a couple become truly healthy.
Thomas, one small typo: You need to add in the letter 'N' for 'N'aPro at the beginning of the quote.
My wife and I are using NaPro and the Creighton model to investigate our fertility with our OB/GYN and the Pope Paul VI institute.
What LvB said is very true: Most doctors have no clue what the Creighton model is, what NFP is, and how they can help diagnose and solve fertility problems. They don't learn it, and it is not on their radar unless they become exposed to it somehow and try it.
IVF is what they learn, which as we know is not only immoral, but also doesn't work with the woman's body to cure the underlying fertility problem.
What's wrong with IVF?
Commenting by HaloScan
