>
> [from group owner ML:
> 1) AI with fresh sperm seems to be just as effective as NI. The most
> prolific donors all seem to be either exclusively AI or mostly AI.
> 2) No donor can offer a better than roughly 20-25% chance of success on
> one cycle regardless of the insemination method.
> 3) The method of insemination is up to the recipients, but our strong
> recommendation is to use AI to minimize legal, medical, and emotional
> risks.
> ]
>
While I agree with you on points 2 and 3, I have never seen any evidence to
support your first point. It seems to be often repeated as gospel and fact,
but perhaps it is only wishful thinking. I doubt that there are any
scientific studies comparing the two methods as it would be extremely
difficult to construct and administer such a study. I can come up with
possible reasons why AI might be less effective - since sperm in AI is
subjected to light, air, temperature changes, possible chemicals in the
container and syringe, liquefaction, etc.
So, while it is provable that AI conception works, and works reasonably
well, I have never seen any evidence that it is equally effective, and I
don't understand why people continue to make the assertion without
evidence.
As for the fact that AI donors are the most prolific, that may simply
result from the fact that there are far more recipients who want AI. And
the recipient is of course free to choose AI, and many will, but don't need
to be promised that it's equally effective when we really don't know that.
[from ML:
You're right that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
If I hadn't been in a hurry, I'd have quoted the group welcome
message:
"I know of no evidence that sex is more effective than AI with fresh sperm."
I've been running groups like this for several years, and the number
one complaint has always been that men try to push NI onto women that
only want AI. We accept NI-only donors, but do not want AI-only
recipients to feel pressured, and while the method of insemination is
up to recipients, we recommend AI to minimize legal, medical and
emotional risks. That would still be the recommendation even if we
thought that the success rate per cycle was 10% lower with AI, but
there just doesn't seem to be any reliable evidence to suggest that
this is the case.
I don't know of any studies comparing the effectiveness of NI with AI
using fresh sperm and it would be hard to see how such a study might
be run, but the majority of donors with ten or more donor children
seem to be AI-only or at least mostly AI. There is a 1999 study
which showed improved semen analysis figures for intercourse over
masturbation, but there didn't seem to be much of a difference for
men who didn't have fertility problems, and the link between semen
analysis and fertility isn't that clear anyway (some men are
infertile despite very good figures on their semen analysis and vice-versa).
Any further discussion on the main site please:
http://knowndonorregistry.com
]
------------------------------------
[Footer: Please join our website: http://knowndonorregistry.com
It's a lot more active than the Yahoo group, and recipients can use the search features to find the closest donors.
http://knowndonorregistry.com - the largest free site to find a free donor.
]Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreeSpermDonors/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreeSpermDonors/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
FreeSpermDonors-digest@yahoogroups.com
FreeSpermDonors-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
FreeSpermDonors-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
