How baby-making late in life evolved into subfertility and infertility, difficult conception, too long TTC

Way back, in the pre-contraceptive Pill days, the difficulty to become pregnant was not a widespread phenomenon, and mums were  younger than many are nowadays. If you want to see graphical proof of how the phenomenon came about in the previous century, review the attached paper Google evidence of increasing prevalence of subfertility. Should you not be a subfertility or infertility sufferer, and therefore not familiar with the acronym, TTC stands for Trying To Conceive.

The evolution of subfertility and infertility (as a big-time societal phenomenon) in the U.S. can be summarized based on data from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005074.html#ixzz2GBMSkUKy  [Information Please® Database, © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc.] as follows.

In 1940, births to mothers over 29 years old (30 to 49) were apparently almost as numerous as births to mums of the optimal fertility age 20-24: The ratio of 30-49 years old to the optimal-age group was 0.91 [here referred to as ratio a) =  data for 30–34 plus 35–39 plus 40–44 plus 45–49, this sum divided by data for 20–24], and the number of births in the most fertile age group of mums represented 31% of all births in the U.S.

In case you did not check out the above-linked attachment https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/google-evidence-of-increasing-prevalence-of-subfertility.pdf : The high number of 1940 births to older mothers [high ratio a)] is not so surprising in view of the growing number of books on subfertility and infertility in the 1940s, as seen in the respective Google Ngrams shown here and discussed in the attached PDF paper.

Ngram 3: infertility and contraception

In the present analysis of the historical birth rates, the age group of 25-29 is considered kind of neutral (neither optimal nor too old) whereas the 30-34 years old group is included among the too old ages for optimal fertility. This inclusion could be disputed – if we did not face the subfertility/infertility phenomenon, in which age is a significant factor. In any case, excluding the 30-34 age group from the aged-motherhood definition only delays the trend reversal – observed below in 1980 – by a decade.

I interject here a citation from the post referenced and linked at the end of this post, so that you’ll be well aware of the link between conception difficulties and advancing age, and of the adverse effect of the use of the Pill.

QUOTE: People have a hard time accepting that getting pregnant is not as easy as expected, when they finally decide to want a baby – usually way too late, and after her use of the Pill. The drug makes healthy young women in their best years to postpone family- and baby-making, it damages their cervical S-crypts thus causing difficulty to conceive and, by encouraging promiscuous sex life, it has caused an enormous increase in the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases that also lead to infertility. Not just a double whammy, a triple whammy on womankind.  Sad, sad, sad. … Advanced age of the would-be Mum works against her on account of the Mother Nature’s Probabilistic Rules and Regulations of Baby-Making… END QUOTE.

An obgyn’s article on female subfertility in the Lancet invokes “two main factors that determine subfertility: duration of childlessness and age of the woman”. It is not likely that an obgyn would be as critical of the Pill as yours truly, although there have been exceptions. No further comment on this is needed or offered in this blog post. Instead, I share that another medical article from Britain reported that “the incidence of infertility was 0.9 couples per 1000 general population. The average age of women was 31 years, and the average time attempting conception was 18 months… At 12 months, 27% of all couples in the study achieved a pregnancy spontaneously and a further 9% with treatment.”

Here are the 1940 US birth statistics data from the referenced infoplease.com source:

Year	Total	Under 15	15–19	20–24	25–29	30–34	35–39	40–44	45–49
1940	2,558,647	3,865	332,667	799,537	693,268	431,468	222,015	68,269	7,558

And this is the calculation for the present analysis of the data:

a) 729,310/799,537 = 0.912

(ratio a is the sum of births to age groups from age 30 to age 49 divided by births to age group 20 – 24)

b) 799,537/2,558,647 =  0.312

(ratio b is births to age group 20 – 24 divided by total births in 1940)

By 1950 and 1960, the trend was good because ratio a) declined from 0.91 to 0.86 and then to 0.80 while the number of optimally aged young mothers rose slightly to 32% and then to 33.5%. These pre-Pill years were good years from this perspective, and the trend continued – even after the contraceptive Pill was introduced (in the 1960s), at least initially.

In 1970, there was a drop in the total number of births from the total of 1960 (4,257,850 births) and a dramatic drop in the number of births by aged mothers [ratio a) was 0.47] – and the births by the most fertile age group were up to 38% of all births. As though the contraceptive Pill worked in this sense (but only if we do not look at the significantly increased births by underage girls, especially the under 15)… Here is the 1970 data from the above source:

Year	Total	Under 15	15–19	20–24	25–29	30–34	35–39	40–44	45–49
1970	3,731,386	11,752	644,708	1,418,874	994,904	427,806	180,244	49,952	3,146

Unfortunately, in 1980 – that’s some 20 years after the Pill was introduced – the trend started to reverse while the total births continued to drop (and underage births dropped, too): Ratio a) of the number of aged mothers’ births to the most fertile age group’s births rose to 0.58 and births by the most fertile 20-24 year old mums represented now only 34% of total US births. The bad trend toward older-age motherhood continued.

By 1990, there were even more births to aging mothers than births to the most fertile age group, with ratio a) standing at 1.15 and the number of births to mothers of the optimal age group having dropped to a mere 26%.

The bad trend continued so that in 2000 advanced-age mothers exceeded the optimal-age group with ratio a) at 1.45, and with the optimally aged mums at 25% of total births. The trend continued further so that in 2009 advanced-age mothers exceeded the optimally aged mums by a factor of 1.53 [= ratio a)] and the optimal age group’s births dropped to 24% of total births. Data for 2009 are the most recent available data.

Tamara de Lempicka Quattrocento, 1937

Is the difference between way back and now the reason for one other elevated readership statistic here on bioZhena’s Weblog? It is intriguing to see that during the months of the highest numbers of US births/deliveries (late summer and autumn, well before the year-end Holiday Season), a highly viewed post this year was the one published around the time of Mother’s Day: Why too many young and not so young ladies could NOT receive flowers on Mothers’ Day. Why so many trying-to-conceive, why so much infertility = https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2012/05/14/why-too-many-young-and-not-so-young-ladies-could-not-receive-flowers-on-mothers-day-why-so-many-trying-to-conceive-why-so-much-infertility/ Say thank you to the social and medical advances of the twentieth century – primarily those of chemical birth control, the Pill.

What do you think of all this?

P. S. The Alphabet of bioZhena (glossary/primer) is at https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/aaee-the-alphabet-of-biozhena-011207-with-tracking.pdf

End of the year, and trying to get pregnant

Now, at the end of the year, …

“…Josef Lada did far more than illustrate the Hasek’s Good Soldier Svejk novel, and his idealized paintings of carol singers and family gatherings are, for many in this country, an enduring symbol of Czech Christmas.” http://www.radio.cz/en/section/curraffrs/josef-ladas-paintings-an-enduring-symbol-of-czech-christmas/pictures/obrazy/lada-josef/vanoce.jpg

…the stat counters monitoring the visits to the posts of bioZhena’s Weblog show something that I want to share with you. Namely: The most visited blog posts at this time of the year are those addressing the issues involved in trying to conceive (the flip side of natural birth control). Those blog articles exhibit distinctly higher viewing statistics than the stats of the posts on other topics of reproductive health – whereby some of those topics exhibit a different seasonality of increased interest.

If you wish to put this in context and review the situation out there, outside of bioZhena’s Weblog, read the attached paper Google evidence of increasing prevalence of subfertility.

A couple of examples of the bioZhena’s Weblog titles most visited at this time of the year:

The fallacy of ovulation calculators, calendars and circulating-hormone detectors = https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/the-fallacy-of-ovulation-calculators-calendars-and-circulating-hormone-detectors/ Don’t let them lead you by the nose with likely this and probable that! You need to know for sure.

Critique of birth control efficacies in NFP as published by Marquette University researchers = https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/critique-of-birth-control-efficacies-in-nfp-as-published-by-marquette-university-researchers/ Comments on a report of two studies http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/nfp/cmr_winter-spring09.pdf – they report on what we will call peri-ovulation methodologies.

Some women email me, while some “like” certain Ovulona pages or bioZhena’s Weblog posts.

Citing from one such email: “I am a 41 year old nulliparous woman in good health (with a few minor issues). I have been TTC for 1 year without success and came across Ovulona by accident during a Google search for how to optimise my fertility.”  TTC stands for Trying To Conceive, a standard acronym in the community of sub-fertility sufferers. Or even infertility sufferers – those who have not conceived while trying for longer than a year. (Re: Medical definitions of sub-fertility and infertility.) Nulliparous means no children, medical adjective for women having no previous births.

You know, my dear reader, that the optimal age for conception and motherhood is 20 to 24 years, after which fertility starts declining, and it drops a lot after 35 years of age. Should this be news to you, read The perils of IVF, of ARTs, of giving birth at old maternal age . “About epigenetic evidence that should make you think twice+ before you contemplate In Vitro Fertilization and think that having a baby can wait. The bottom line? Be a young mother!”

And from another reader’s email: “Please let me know if there is any way to buy an Ovulona or to use one for trial purposes.”

In response, I can only explain – apologetically, suppressing frustration – that we do not have any Ovulona units available because we have not yet manufactured the marketable product, due to lack of capital. Then, attempting a little more positive note, I remind the would-be Mums about what some experts call “focused intercourse” – that is focusing on trying to hit the fertile window. In the absence of the Ovulona, this must be done preferably with more than one of the several available methods (several, because they are unreliable, inaccurate – don’t rely on any one of them alone). And I urge you to also avoid stress…

Although the old imperfect methods (including instrumental monitoring of urine samples and/or of the BBT) give only inaccurate estimates, they should help to focus on the right time when the probability of conception exists. Outside of the fertile window you don’t have a chance to conceive.

Here is to illustrate two such imperfect methods in comparison with ours (where our Ovulona not only anticipates but also detects ovulation, which detection is all important): https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2007/12/16/cervix-uteri-and-seven-or-eight-related-things/marquette-comparison-with-lh-kit-and-peak-mucus-2/ .

In this record of a 42-years old woman, our device detected delayed ovulation on cycle day 17, while two other methods estimated ovulation from day 16 to day 18. This lack of precision and accuracy is not at all good for natural birth control and/or for trying to achieve fetal gender pre-selection (= trying to conceive specifically a boy or specifically a girl). But, with such inaccurate methods, which are available now before we bring the Ovulona into the market, you can see here that you might be fortunate and hit on at least a part of the fertile window. In this example (because of the ovulation delay), the LH-indicated days 16 and 17 were fertile days because the sperm are viable for about 3 days. Perhaps even day 18 may have been a fertile day, if the ovum (egg) lived long enough, and depending on when exactly on day 17 the detected ovulation occurred (morning or evening?). Such uncertainties will be removed by properly designed experiments with the properly designed Ovulona.

This record from a comparative study shows how the old ovulation prediction methods are unreliable, because the two used here predicted ovulation for 3 different days – but the record may also serve to illustrate for you that (and how) you may be lucky and hit at least one of the fertile days. Here, in this record, ovulation was detected – not merely anticipated – by the Ovulona prototype. It was detected on the day of the second urinary LH indication, which is here one day before the esoteric Peak mucus of NFP aficionados; they did not use the BBT in this study. None of the old techniques detects ovulation: they predict it or, in the case of the BBT, indicate that ovulation has occurred.

There are only 3 days in each menstrual cycle during which pregnancy can occur, and it will if you are fortunate. The 3 fertile days are the day of ovulation plus the two days immediately before ovulation.

I’ll now write a long sentence full of the word “trying”, with several connotations. Repeat after me (and grasp what follows): Trying to determine the 3 days of the fertile window without the Ovulona is pretty much impossible, but trying for it – or at least some of it – is better than trying completely in the dark.

That’s because the 3-day fertile window varies, it does not stay put on certain days of the menstrual cycle from one cycle to the next. Check out this earlier bioZhena post for evidence that this is so. See evidence generated by other experts years or rather decades ago – when they hoped that microcomputer-assisted basal body temperature [BBT] monitoring would solve the problem.

From a graph such as the one above, it is evident that to determine the fertile days before ovulation is more difficult than estimating the last fertile day, which is the day of ovulation. This difficulty is a well recognized fact, and it’s not a matter of whether ovulation is or is not delayed by stress of one kind or another. The stress-caused delay (or even complete suppression) of ovulation is one of the things that complicate management of reproductive life.

Now for the encouragement: Maybe, the idea of not being completely at the mercy of chance when trying to conceive a baby, might even help you to be less stressed out about it at a time when celebrating the end of the year (and looking back and looking forward – along with all that Christmas rush) leads to an increased level of stress anyway.

Josef Lada’s idyllic take on Christmas activities in the countryside and in the city, that is to say, in Czechoslovak towns of his day. There, a fish meal on Christmas Eve was and still is one of the traditions, although the country is now two (and good friends). The fishy thing was apparently based on the belief that fish scales symbolize the prospect of money next year to the eater. Maybe some of us should not have turned our nose up about this fish thing… Then the capital for the Ovulona might not have been so slow coming! Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!

Perhaps the focus idea may help you not to be stressed out about the thing which is supposed to be pleasurable and not a chore. Suppose that between now and some time in January/February (in the course of the long winter evenings, “za dlouhych zimnich veceru”) you’ll get your focusing organized. You surely will get over the holidays, too… Then, with a bit of happiness, relaxation and luck, come next October you will have the kind of happiness you wish for! And you’ll thus contribute to the birth/delivery statistics for October…

Josef Lada’s calendar illustration for October (c. 1940s)

In this picture, Josef Lada illustrated, long time ago, the characteristics of the month of October. Among them is the rut of the elk, which had given the month its name in the artist’s language. Way back, in those days – the pre-contraceptive Pill days, years and centuries – the difficulty to become pregnant was not a widespread phenomenon, and Mums were  younger than many are nowadays.

The evolution of subfertility and infertility (as a big-time societal phenomenon) in the U.S. is summarized based on data from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005074.html#ixzz2GBMSkUKy  [Information Please® Database, © 2007 Pearson Education, Inc.] in the next post.

Saint Nicholas Day, his legend, and our modern day’s prematurity, EDD calculation, gestational age, problem with LMP

Could high prevalence of prematurity be a consequence of motherhood not being the top job held by society in high esteem? A modern paradox.

December 5 is the eve of St. Nicholas Day, the patron Saint of many people, cities and countries – including the largest one [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas#Deeds_and_miracles_attributed_to_Saint_Nicholas ]. St. Nicholas is remembered and celebrated in similar ways in some countries, rewarding well-behaved children but not the misbehaving ones… Which is why St. Nicholas, known as Svaty Mikulas, visits the children at home, in certain parts of Central Europe, in the evening along with an Angel and a Devil (Cert). The Saint asks the parents about the kids’ conduct…

Josef Lada – Mikulas doma

I share with you a depiction of the tradition drawn by Josef Lada in the troubled 1930s, an idyllic tradition of an industrial people, which they keep to this day…

Besides numerous miracles, this most popular of Saints was and is reputed for gift-giving (hence the commercialized Santa Claus transformation morphing St. Nicholas  with a Western or Northern European Father Christmas later on in the month of December).

There are numerous legends about Saint Nicholas’ miracles and his deeds of help. Perhaps the most famous one is about the three daughters of an impoverished man who could not afford a proper dowry for them, dowry being an ancient habit, the original purpose of which “was to provide ‘seed money’ or property for the establishment of a new household” – and we are now talking about the 300s CE [Christian Era].

The saint Bishop of Myrna saved the girls from the fate of slavery and prostitution by secretly dropping “three purses (one for each daughter) filled with gold coins through the window opening into the man’s house”, which gift made the young girls “eligible” again. It is also said that he dropped the gift down the chimney where stockings were hanging “over the embers to dry, and that the bag of gold fell into the stocking”. That’s beside the point because we are not discussing Santa of Christmas, but rather we are remembering St. Nicolas of December 6.

Jan_Steen_Het_Sint_Nicolaasfeest,                               The Feast of St. Nicholas

In those times many, many centuries ago, the chief purpose of young women’s life was motherhood, naturally within a marriage, hence the said dowry habit. In our times, many things have changed, including, unfortunately, young women’s attitude towards motherhood. Well, not just young women’s attitude…

Motherhood must be held in high esteem to reverse the trend reflected by an outcry in tweeter-sphere that’s a part of life nowadays: “I never felt marginalized as a woman until I became a mother”. Now this is very sad. Sad for society since the opposite should be the case.

Motherhood is the most important “job” in the world, and this is not some cute old-fashioned thought. Women bear enormous responsibility for the health of the nation, of humankind. Society should pamper them. Meaning: Society should be organized based on the recognition of Mother Nature’s design, which design – with the optimal years for motherhood in the early twenties – does not go away only because nowadays we can do all kinds of things – including octuplet pregnancies at grandmotherly age.

One consequence of the referenced changes is the currently common delays in getting married, and especially delays in bringing children into the world, starting a family. In other words, the unfortunate consequence is motherhood in later years of life than Nature intended. And then there are other consequences. Among them, prematurity.

Lou Beach, Preggers

@DrJenGunter not too long ago tweeted on prematurity, the most common cause of infant morbidity and mortality in the U.S.: “I just wrote a book on prematurity. Personal and professional experience”. See The Preemie Primer: A Complete Guide for Parents of Premature Babies–from Birth through the Toddler Years and Beyond [Paperback], Jennifer Gunter MD (Author) at http://www.amazon.com/Preemie-Primer-Complete-Premature-Babies/dp/0738213934/

Here is a citation [from http://www.preemieprimer.com/ ]:

My son Victor has dystonic cerebral palsy. He weighed 843 g at birth and had a grade 2 IVH. The bleed resolved in the NICU without hydrocephalus.

He is seven years old now. He is very stiff and is so shaky on a bicycle that we have given up trying for now. He couldn’t stand on one foot until he was 5. It took a very long time for him to get the hang of swimming and at the age of seven he is by no means a fish, but I feel if he were to fall in a pool he could keep his head above water. His digestive tract is very affected, but we have figured out ways to minimize these issues. It took countless hours of OT and thousands of hours of him practicing, but his writing is beautiful and God know where he gets his spelling ability from. He hopscotches like a pro. He is reading a grade level ahead. All without a CT scan or an MRI.

Based on his exam and his problem areas I am sure his cerebellum is a mess. In fact, I wonder if I would have pushed him so hard if I had seen a brain scan before we left the NICU?

“What we know about prematurity” is reviewed by the March of Dimes Campaign at http://www.marchofdimes.com/Mission/prematurity_indepth.html .

“Today more than 1,400 babies in the United States (1 in 8 [= 12.5%]) will be born prematurely. Many will be too small and too sick to go home. Instead, they face weeks or even months in the newborn intensive care unit (NICU). These babies face an increased risk of serious medical complications and death; however, most, eventually, will go home. … In fact, the rate of premature birth increased by more than 20 percent between 1990 and 2006. … The rate fell to 12.3 percent in 2008 from 12.7 in 2007, a small but statistically significant decrease.

Why women deliver early? In nearly 40 percent of premature births, the cause is unknown. However, researchers have made some progress in learning the causes of prematurity. Studies suggest that there may be four main routes leading to spontaneous premature labor.”

Štyrský, Marriage

Do refer to the referenced article for more about the four main causes:

1. Infections and/or inflammation.
2. Maternal or fetal stress.
3. Bleeding.
4. Stretching.

And then there is this: These four routes are not the only things to consider. Other factors, such as multiple pregnancy, inductions and cesarean sections, can also play a role. (Mostly man-made factors, we note. I say “mostly” because some multiple pregnancies happen also to women who did not get pregnant through the Artificial Reproductive Technologies… )

Prematurity is bad for infant, parents, and public health. We at bioZhena propose to contribute to the reduction of its prevalence, by making the FOLLICULOGENESIS IN VIVO™ [FIV™] technology available for routine use by women and their physicians. As a particular example, in relation to the referenced other factors, we propose to make it possible to compute the Expected Date of Delivery (EDD) based on the expectant mothers’ folliculogenesis data.

The idea is to get away from the gestation calculation popularized about 200 years ago in 1812 by a Dr. Naegele, for whom the 40 weeks or 10 lunar months rule of obstetrics is named. This rule of 280-day gestation assumes that the mother ovulates on day 14 of a 28 day menstrual cycle, which the readers of bioZhena’s Weblog know that it is an unrealistic assumption.

America in 1812, the time of Dr. Naegele’s 200 years of fame

Napoleon & carabiniers_in_front_of_Moscow_1812

Allegedly*, it was Dr. Hermanni Boerhaave, in his time a highly respected academic physician, botanist and chemist, who read in the Bible that pregnancy should last 10 lunar months. He is said to have formulated – in the 1700s – a way of calculating the expected date of delivery (EDD).

Thus, expectant mothers get EDD today based on the myth of the baroque-era Boerhaave … Yet, already Aristotle taught that “the human fetus is expelled … at any period of pregnancy …; moreover, when the birth takes place in the eighth month, it is possible for the infant to live.”

The gist of the bioZhena hypothesis is this: The EDD can be projected quite well from ultrasonic measurements of the unborn baby’s head and body size, but for a more convenient, affordable and consequently more practical solution, we propose to seek a correlation between the Ovulona FIV™ attributes such as cycle length and the EDD/EDC. Importantly, this will be done by using the date of insemination, which will be easily – electronically – recorded by the user of the Ovulona™ as an integral part of the routine.

Trying to be fair or considerate to the women’s healthcare classics, I report an obgyn.net paper at http://www.obgyn.net/fetal-monitoring/fetal-monitoring.asp?page=cotm/9807/cotm_9807 . It is titled “’Back to the Future’ for Hermaani Boerhaave, or, ‘A rational way to generate ultrasound scan charts for estimating the date of delivery’” by Dr David J R Hutchon, Consultant Obstetrician, Memorial Hospital, Darlington, England. This is about the ultrasound approach, and he comments that: QUOTE “the approach mimics, in modern terms, the method originally formulated by Boerhaave. … If Boerhaave had had an ultrasound scanner, his paper might have read something like, ‘It is proved by numerous observations that 99 out of 100 births occur 22 weeks (at 18 weeks gestation) after the biparietal diameter of the fetus is 40mm’ (Fig 1).”

Besides his Figure 1, I also share Mr Hutchon’s (a British medical doctor, when Consultant, becomes Mr again) Fig. 2, “Regression analysis showing line fit plot. The number of days between scan and delivery has been converted to conventional gestation by subtracting from 280. The lower and upper dotted lines represent delivery at 42 and 37 weeks respectively.” QUOTE UNQUOTE.

Gestation age vs. crown rump length by DJR Hutchon

Gestation vs. biparietal diameter by Hutchon

Biparietal diameter is the (outer – inner) measurement of the fetal skull echo. Crown-rump length (CRL) is the measurement of the length of human embryos and fetuses from the top of the head (crown) to the bottom of the buttocks (rump). In humans, the fetal stage of prenatal development starts at the beginning of the 11th week in gestational age, which is the 9th week after fertilization. These are the Wikipedia reported definitions. The two weeks between 9 and 11 assume the “regular” length of the menstrual cycle, which is a theoretical assumption that could very likely be incorrect in practice, in the given woman and in the given last cycle of hers (because regularity is a myth, too). Well, look at the scatter in the data points, it’s telling.

In addition to the convenience, affordability and practicality of the bioZhena approach, do not overlook the feature that the data will be personal to the given woman, and the measurement will not refer to LMP. It will not rely on the woman’s recollection of her last menstrual period (instead, it will refer to the last electronically recorded intercourse); and it will not subject the baby to unnecessary ultrasound radiation.

For more on the topic, try under Gestation in the Alphabet of bioZhena https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/aaee-the-alphabet-of-biozhena.pdf (or https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/the-alphabet-of-biozhena/ ). See also the discussion under Parturition, where we express the expectation that parturition management will be revolutionized by the introduction of the Ovulona into obstetric and gynecological practice.

Anderle – Pasek 06

Summary Definitions [quoted from http://www.righthealth.com/topic/Fetal_Age ]:

Gestation is the period of time between conception and birth, during which the fetus grows and develops inside the mother’s womb.

Gestational age is the time measured from the first day of the woman’s last menstrual cycle [LMP] to the current date. It is measured in weeks. A normal pregnancy can range from 38 to 42 weeks.

Infants born before 37 weeks are considered premature. Infants born after 42 weeks are considered postmature. (Note: 42 x 7 = 294).

Especially with the challenged menstrual cycles that are particularly irregular in length, referencing the LMP in the reckoning can easily introduce a significant error. Perhaps that is why the above summary definition of normalcy is 38 to 42 weeks but prematurity is “before 37 weeks”? (A week here, a week there…) Read also the earlier post https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2008/01/11/about-the-edd-andor-edc-issue-and-a-request-for-input-from-readers/ .

Tomáš Císarovský – Kukátko

280 may have been in the Bible, but it ain’t necessarily right. We’ll see whether 266 is, and whether it is a worldwide constant, which is doubtful. If for no other reason, global constancy is doubtful because it was reported from India that “Mean gestational age at the onset of labour for women native to the area of study was 272 days (standard deviation 9 days). Pregnancies beyond a duration of 280 days showed significantly increased perinatal morbidity.” (Referencing the above righthealth.com definitions, we see 294 – 280 = 14. A week here, a couple of weeks there…)

Well, 272 – 14 = 258. Not 266, and that number is of interest because per Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence, ”a gestation period of thirty-eight weeks (266 days) is calculated for women who are pregnant by a procedure such as in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination that allows them to know their exact date of conception” (article Gestation Period and Gestational Age).

And then you have the oprah.com article, which asks, “Will the labor start naturally on time, or will the baby be so late that induction or Caesarean section is necessary?”: http://www.oprah.com/relationships/Is-Pregnancy-Really-40-Weeks-Long . While debating the validity of the word “necessary” is not the point here, the author there refers to data from studies that concluded greater than 280 days due dates (288 days in one study), of which one study was in Sweden.

A hypothesis can be that hot climates may lead to lower gestation periods than cold climates. This would be a hypothesis based on two data points and a common sense for “the babies taking longer when it’s cold outside”… We’ll want to compare, say, data from Inuits and Lapps on the one hand with data from equatorial Africa and Philippines and/or Indonesia on the other. Logically, we’ll control for factors known or suspected as being involved, such as those four main causes listed above – and age, parity and other factors already explored by people such as Mittendorf in the 1980s.

Kupka – Creation de l homme

The idea is that routine use of the Ovulona will provide for an equivalent of the above-referenced 38-week (266 days) calculation, which is available to the women receiving IVF or artificial insemination. The data will be personal and the geography of the birth will be noted (as well as ethnicity), with data sooner or later coming from all corners of the world.

Capturing and working with the fertilization date should, by and of itself, be an improvement over the current way of EDD/EDC assessment. An improvement over the paradox of modern obstetrics and gynecology handling the most important aspect of reproduction by means of some biblical myth, and having become more and more interventionist probably at least in part because of that myth. Reference a recent tweet: Maternity Care In America Rife With Systematic Failures l Being #Pregnant http://su.pr/2j91wY “most people don’t know normal birth”. This refers to the medical staff.

That these thoughts are sensible, and that the chief problem is the LMP, is supported by ultrasound studies such as “Gestational age and induction of labour for prolonged pregnancy” by Jason Gardosi, Tracey Vanner, and Andy Francis (Perinatal Research, Audit and Monitoring, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK) in British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, July 1997, Vol. 104, pp. 792-797 – [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb12022.x/pdf].

Citing from this study of more than 24.5 thousand pregnancies: “Menstrual dates [LMP data] systematically overestimated gestational age at term when compared with scan dates… suggesting that most pregnancies which are considered ‘prolonged’ according to menstrual dates are in fact mis-dated. The median gestational age for induced labours was 286 days by last menstrual period but only 280 days by scan, and most (71.5%) inductions done post-term (> 294 days) according to menstrual dates were not post-term if scan dates alone are used to calculate the gestational age.“

This study was a retrospective analysis of computer files of 24,675 pregnancies delivered in a teaching hospital between 1988 and 1995.

Here is their graphical summary of distribution of deliveries as a function of gestational ages by ultrasound scan dates.

Deliveries vs. gestational ages by ultrasound scan dates

Their most explicit statement in support of our conviction and plan is this citation: “Even if the date of the last menstrual period is recalled with accuracy, delay in ovulation can result in over-estimation of the true gestational age, which results in an apparent prolongation of pregnancy.” The authors also cite a 1972 paper in American Journal of Obstetric and Gynecology in support of the just cited statement.

The Gardosi et al. paper concluded: Regardless of obstetric and maternal views of the advantages and disadvantages of routine induction policies, our results suggest that most post-date inductions are unwarranted on the basis of gestational age. The incidence of prolonged pregnancies can be considerably reduced by establishing dates by ultrasound alone.

Needless to say, a similar graph for deliveries in India would show the spontaneous labor peak earlier (272 days by one study in tropical Manipal) while a Scandinavian graph would be shifted in the opposite direction; both were referenced above.

I’ll be darned if the introduction of the Ovulona into the gestation arena should not bring some order and peace (as opposed to the mess and anxieties of today). As I wrote in the conclusion of the related January 11, 2008 article: It is perfectly realistic a vision that, in future, an expectant mother’s EDD and/or EDC will be assessed based on her folliculogenesis (FIV™) data.

The EDD/EDC will be computed automatically and provided by her own Ovulona Smart Sensor™. And no Saint Nicholas miraculous assistance will be required by the future users – although we will not write here the same for bioZhena.

———

* I write “allegedly” because I spent many an hour looking for evidence of truth in this allegation, only to find the Dutch man an impressive medico-scientific mind and an impressive likeable character – but no evidence of the biblical dogma ascribed to him. As I write this note, I am going once more through the tedious but interesting Dr. Boerhaave’s “Academical lectures on the theory of physic” of AD 1744. The man’s fame and authority was such that “a Chinese mandarin, seeking advice, addressed his letter to ‘Boerhaave – Europe’, and it was delivered”. See http://books.google.com/books?id=QTUVAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Hermanni+Boerhaave+1744&source=bl&ots=NCeCN4gLdd&sig=SoUA_WS6iSkh2A8WpBX7S4o54Uw&hl=en&ei=ebP-TP2WBIX2tgO12-mvCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

Instant detection of pregnancy and of Early Pregnancy Loss, EPL – the adversary of Trying To Conceive, TTC – especially after age 25

Early Pregnancy Loss is also known as #stillbirth or #miscarriage, or Early Embryonic Mortality (EEM), and the Ovulona™ is a tool of evidence-based personalized medicine.

After the optimum fertility age of the early twenties, achieving motherhood gets more difficult. It becomes even more essential than before to know your three fertile days, during which – and only during which – conception can occur.

The simple basic principle is: Fertility status detection must be easy and reliable. PLUS early pregnancy detection is really important, and it should be built-in, an integral part of the conception-aiding tool.

Why? Because:

1) early in pregnancy the conceived baby would be harmed by some of the medications taken by the woman, e.g. by a psychiatric medication with teratogenic effect (harmful to the fetus, causing a congenital disorder);

and 2) because of the annual 600,000 miscarriages – per CDC statistics – out of the 6 million US births, which means that at least some 10% of pregnancies are lost to early pregnancy loss (EPL), miscarriage, stillbirth.

Many EPLs go unnoticed. The EPL is a part of the TTC [Trying To Conceive] or subfertility/infertility problem. Our Ovulona monitor of FOLLICULOGENESIS IN VIVO™ is the prospective solution for managing the problem.

The Ovulona™ detects the 3 fertile days for conception, and it will also automatically detect pregnancy immediately upon conception. Similar to early pregnancy loss — its detection is the inverse of pregnancy detection, which both involve the follicular waves. Like this:

Follicular waves disappear = pregnancy detected

versus

waves reappear in early pregnancy =  early pregnancy loss detected.

Furthermore, the cyclic profile data captured by the Ovulona can be used by your healthcare provider to assess what is going on, and provide more effective help.

DIFFICULT USE OF EXISTING OPKs [Ovulation Prediction Kits] is shown in the following tweet by a @WannaBeMom: “1st month using opk. Do the lines usually start light and then get darker day by day or do they ever go back & forth b4 ovulation?”

Our electronic device will take the WannaBeMoms into a different world of baby-making.

Honey is Sweeter than Blood by Salavador Dali, 1941

For a woman in her 30s who has had a miscarriage or even two or three, “any delay in attempting conception could further decrease the chances of a healthy baby”, says CNN reporting on a medical study, http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/05/miscarriage.try.again.asap/ .

“Study: Women who conceive within six months of miscarriage reduce risk of another.”

November 2016 review and meta-analysis (data on more than a million women): “With an Inter Pregnancy Interval of less than 6 months, the overall risk of further miscarriage and preterm delivery  were significantly reduced.”

These are fundamental principles.

And another principle, not brought up by the CNN or by the study itself, is that a tool for monitoring the early stage of pregnancy for EPL is most desirable. We’d say, mandatory. The Ovulona device monitors (or tracks the process of) folliculogenesis in vivo, which includes the follicular waves that occur after ovulation. The waves disappear upon conception because the reproductive system does not go into another menstrual cycle – it’s pregnant.

In case of EPL, Early Pregnancy Loss (miscarriage), the waves will come back. Early Pregnancy Loss, or Early Embryonic Mortality, is quite a common sad experience of many of us.

The essential point made here is that the woman’s and her physician’s decisions should be guided by the folliculogenesis cyclic profile (and/or its distortion due to distress of any kind). The woman and her doctor should not make decisions or pass recommendations working in the dark, and the data, on which any decision should be based, must be personal to the given patient.

That’s what the Ovulona from bioZhena is for. Personalized medicine. Evidence based medicine.

Automatic pregnancy detection is inherent in the Folliculogenesis In Vivo™ cyclic profile (follicular waves disappear).

This is a screen shot of one of my narrated slides about “what’s going on here” – view (and hear) the slide at https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/single-slide-unprecedented-wealth-of-info-narrated.pps.

Note specifically that: The follicular waves, which occur after ovulation [when the body prepares for the next menstrual cycle], cannot remain in place after fertilization succeeds and conception takes place [because the post-ovulation regime change is even more profound]. That is the principle of instant detection of pregnancy. As opposed to the waiting for the HPT [Home Pregnancy Test] result.

HCG or Human Chorionic Gonadotropin laboratory signature of the biomarker – detected in a pregnant woman’s urine about 2 weeks into her pregnancy by a HPT home-use urine test – as a color change (into which color the HPT reduces the illustrated complex lab signature)

Should the conceptus [product of conception, early embryo] be lost to EEM, Early Embryonic Mortality (miscarriage), the follicular waves come back to be seen by the Ovulona. That’s the principle of early detection of the miscarriage, and of detecting the return of the non-pregnant condition.

Trying to conceive again should be based on the personal FIV™ [FOLLICULOGENESIS IN VIVO] cyclic profile data generated by the woman trying to have a baby. This is a principle of evidence-based medicine. Personalized medicine.

The Ovulona is intended to help people such as those writing in a forum as follows:

My partner and i started trying for a baby in jan And Concieved in the first month. Unfortunately in march at 8 weeks I had a miscarriage. We have been trying since with no luck. Could something be wrong. Please help this is really getting me down. http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/interactive/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=57881&f=5

We got pregnant the first cycle with both my ds and dd. I am most likely moving to cycle #11 with this baby. We did conceive on the second cycle of trying with baby #3 but we miscarried a week later. Nothing since then. I’m not sure why this time is taking so much longer. http://www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?p=16029816

Can anyone advise? My daughter has been trying to get pregnant for several years. Her husband is fine. My daughter has now been asked to go for a scan which scared the life out of me (you automatically think something is horribly wrong). Can someone tell me what the scan is about – what sort of scan is it? http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/interactive/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=31528&f=5

The information contained in the folliculogenesis cyclic profile, as illustrated in the slide captured above, is meaningful and can help the healthcare provider to answer questions such as these.

Major studies decades ago revealed variability of menstrual cycles

But people are still naïve about the basic cause of the difficulty to achieve pregnancy

Sex education at school, its quality or otherwise, is likely to have much to do with fertility problems later in life. Many women (men, too, of course) can use the  keyboard with all their fingers (as well as their thumbs!) but have poor understanding of the basic functioning of their reproductive system.

colonial-classroom.jpg

That ignorance is well known, and is underlying the fertility problems. You should see the pregnancy doctors’ tweets – replying to some incredible questions, and then the talk of various mysteries!

A shining example is this tale of “mysterious conception”. For the whole story see the Alphabet of bioZhena under M, “Mysterious conceptions (OR THE NONEXISTENCE THEREOF)” on page 34 or thereabout, from which I cite:

QUOTE:  It appears that we must dwell on this topic, because of stories and notions propagated in various pertinent circles. This writing has been prompted by page 176 in the excellent 1999 book “Woman” by Nathalie Angier, where the Pulitzer laureate relates the story of the mysterious conception of her only child. Mysterious, because it occurred, she believes and makes her readers believe, outside of ovulation and of the fertile window.

The reason for this entry in the Alphabet of bioZhena is that there is NO SUCH THING AS MYSTERIOUS CONCEPTIONS, there is only lack of information, or ignorance of the facts. We might say, intellectual misconceptions lead to “mysteries” in terms of conception, of babies conceived supposedly when conception was biologically impossible, and vice versa, some women have difficulties conceiving for the same fundamental reason. We shall use Ms. Angier’s case to make this point. UNQUOTE.

To drive the point home, here is an excerpt from John J. McCarthy, Jr. and H.E. Rockette, “Prediction of ovulation with basal body temperature”, Journal of Reproductive Medicine, Volume 31 (No.8), Supplement, 742 – 747, 1986.

Referencing particularly large studies from 1967 and 1977, these BBT experts had this to say all those years ago (and never mind their “prediction” in the cited title whereas the BBT is well known to be no predictor):

QUOTE:  Cycle regularity is often assumed by both women and their physicians. The suggestion, that the BBT graph of the previous cycle can be used to identify the day of ovulation in the current cycle, requires nearly absolute cycle regularity. [However, note this:] The data collected by 1,085 women, who provided at least 6 or more charts each, were studied for cycle length variability. … The cycle length range was more than five days for 56% of the women who submitted 6 graphs, and for 75% of those with 12 graphs. … Absolute regularity was not demonstrated in as few as six cycles. Even when the cycle length that deviated the most was eliminated, less than 1% (8 of 1,085 women) had no variation in cycle length. When the number of cycles was extended to 12, no woman had variability of less than two days in cycle length. END OF QUOTE.

In real life, you realize, no cycle can be eliminated from the experience, and every day matters. Two days are very likely to make the difference between conception and the lack of it. And/or cause an unwanted pregnancy, for that matter.

Middendorf  – On the ball

The above findings are therefore the basis on which we can say quite categorically that nobody is as regular as a metronome (and nobody conceives in an anovulatory cycle), that there is no such thing as absolute regularity, whether 28 days or otherwise.

If you are in the sub-fertile category of people finding it difficult to become pregnant, you are likely to have cycle variability of more than 5 days over those months of your fruitless efforts that define your category. More likely than being one of the 0.74% of the population with no variation in cycle length, which under ideal conditions may also mean no variation in the time of ovulation. Persistent monitoring is well advised.

Why people cannot achieve pregnancy

In many cases – if not most – it is NOT because of clinical infertility.

Basic cause of “apparent” infertility

This article is about the basic cause of most disappointed efforts at achieving pregnancy. The basic cause of the disappointment is that intercourse is had at a wrong time. That is, not during the kairos time of your menstrual cycle, the right time, during which – and only during which – fertilization can occur and result in conception (that may lead to successful pregnancy).

Note that we are not talking here about the relatively few cases of real clinical infertility that are caused by certain organic problems such as, say, blocked fallopian tubes or similar.

We are referring here to what is termed by experts (medically classified) as reduced fertility or sub-fertility. This refers to the predicament of people who cannot achieve pregnancy for too long. We would say that even this terminology is misleading but it is well established in OBGYN medicine, so let’s work with it.

Of course, “cannot achieve pregnancy for too long” is medically expressed more quantitatively by postulating the number of months during which the attempts to conceive a baby turn out to be fruitless, disappointing. (Do we need to add that, as a consequence, what is supposed to be a significant physio-pleasure then often becomes a chore, with the stress only exacerbating the painful disappointment and the actual problem?) Yes, stress enhances the problem.

For many years, the number of months during which unprotected intercourse does not result in pregnancy (and is classified as sub-fertility/reduced fertility) was defined as up to 12 months. For 12 months of fruitless attempts to get pregnant you were sub-fertile, suffering reduced fertility. Only after a year, you became a case of clinical infertility.

More recently, as the prevalence of these problems increases, some medical authorities have extended this period of “advised patience” to as long as 2 years. Only after this extended period of advised patience in trying to conceive would the woman and/or couple be put into the clinically infertile category.

The basic cause of most failed efforts to become pregnant is simply wrong timing, wrong time within the menstrual cycle when the unprotected intercourse occurs with the intent to conceive a baby. This wrong time has much to do to with the continued belief, carried over from earlier times, that most menstrual cycles are “regular”. This is one of the myths. The exact opposite is true.

You can see evidence of that in data from 10 women attending a Natural Family Planning clinic. Differences from -5 to +3 days were recorded in this small sample, and these were differences between ovulation days in just two successive menstrual cycles (where cycle lengths ranged from 23 to 35 days). The variability becomes more extensive when more cycles are reviewed.

In fact, there is no such thing as cycle regularity. It is therefore essential to perform persistent monitoring, as the phrase goes nowadays, to determine the right time for a conceptive intercourse.

It was found decades ago that most women experience changes of even more than five days in the length of their consecutive menstrual cycles, and therefore also changes in the day of ovulation from one menstrual cycle to the next.

This fact of life is basic to the predicament of finding it difficult to achieve pregnancy – because you can get pregnant ONLY during the very narrow fertile window of 3 days; that is the day of ovulation plus the 2 days just before ovulation.

To read more about this, go to  https://biozhena.wordpress.com/the-fertile-window-is-3-days-wide-not-6-which-6-day-belief-originated-in-a-flawed-1995-study/. 

Fact:

Less than 1% of women would be found with no variation at all even for short sequences of only a few menstrual cycles, and absolutely no-one would be regular in twelve cycles. [Ref.: John J. McCarthy, Jr. and H.E. Rockette, “Prediction of ovulation with basal body temperature”, Journal of Reproductive Medicine 31 (No.8), Supplement, 742 – 747, 1986; also – and particularly – see refs. therein to the largest studies, i.e., to R.F. Vollman, “The menstrual cycle”, 1977, and A.E. Troelar et al., “Variation of the human menstrual cycle through reproductive life”, 1967.]

The research involved thousands of BBT [Basal Body Temperature] records obtained from correspondingly high number of women. The research was carried out when the hope was that the then new technology of the micro-computerized thermometer would provide the answer to the quest for a definitive tool for reproductive management. Well, it did not.

The BBT is not the answer, it cannot be. It’s not the solution because it is notoriously unreliable, whether micro-computerized or measured with an ordinary thermometer. Simply put, the BBT is affected by too many things, and it has been found to rise anywhere from 3 days before to 3 days after ovulation, despite the expected rise immediately after ovulation.

Comment:

The sympto-thermal method of NFP practice, also known as the Billings method, gets around the notorious lack of reliability of the BBT by having women perform certain anatomical observations “down there” and observations of the appearance of the fluid wiped off “down there”.

Subjective as this enhancement is, in reviewing a sufficient number of cycle records you would see that it is more likely the sympto- observations than the thermal measurements that, when lucky enough, are associated with recorded pregnancy-test positive. Basically, any of this helps the woman to stay focused, and the lack of accuracy is made up for by an as high frequency of intercourse as practical or desirable. Like shooting in the dark with an automatic weapon… (but then, if there is no target in the dark…)

I got off on this tangent, and should come back to the inherent variability of menstrual cycles and ovulation times in another post. To impress on you that this basic fact of life is particularly important when you are finding it difficult to get pregnant – probably because you are past the most fertile years, which are – or, rather, were – the early twenties of your life.

What Women Know, And What They Want To Know About Their Fertility Status

There: What Women Know

Despite the many BBT charting apps and some BBT monitors, and despite the urine analyzing (or the saliva testing) products on the market, here is a fundamental fact:

There is no device in the marketplace today that would tell you, in plain English, “today is your fertile day 1” – meaning that sex today is likely to lead to pregnancy.  And from our clinical trial results you will know that the pregnancy conceived on this first of the fertile days is likely to be a male fetus, a boy. There is no device out there that would detect (not just guess at) ovulation, which will enable you to try to conceive a girl, if that is what you wish for.

There is no such device on the market that would subsequently confirm the pregnancy within a day or two – when, after ovulation on fertile day 3, you or rather your Ovulona device for you – will no longer register the usual follicular waves. Your Ovulona device will interpret that as pregnancy detected, because that is how the biology works.

There is no device out there that would identify the only 3 days in each menstrual cycle during which – and only during which – pregnancy can result from insemination, whether natural or artificial. The commercially available fertility monitors cannot detect either delayed ovulation (which happens due to stress) or when ovulation does not occur at all. Because they do not detect ovulation, they just guess at it.

Because the currently marketed fertility monitors (ovulation predictors) cannot detect ovulation, they merely assume its occurrence due to the particular hormonal marker-predictor of their choice (usually LH, in some cases estrogen, in one case both). But no single hormone, even if it were detected with the accuracy of laboratory methods, determines the fertile window. It’s much more involved than that.

For more on this, go to The post on The Fallacy of Ovulation Calculators, Calendars and Circulating Hormone Detectors at   https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/the-fallacy-of-ovulation-calculators-calendars-and-circulating-hormone-detectors/

Here: What Women Want To Know

Only scarcity of funds keeps us from marketing a device doing all those things not available today.

Our personal self-diagnostic device, the Ovulona™, will tell the woman user in plain English (or any other language) whether today is one of the three days when she can become pregnant.

https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/ovulona-single-slide-3-day-fertile-window.jpg

How? We’ll have the woman monitor at home the process that causes menstrual cycles and is fundamental to women’s health (folliculogenesis). The use of the Ovulona device is very simple, just like a tampon, except that it is inserted for only a few seconds (about 20) to obtain the result, with an instant display of the result.

The Smart Ovulona will display the results electronically interpreted, presented in plain language such as FERTILE DAY 1 while the raw data is stored within the device for optional use by healthcare professionals.

Primary use is for personal reproductive management – that is aiding the achievement of pregnancy, and also aiding fertility-awareness based non-invasive birth control.

But there is much more, including an automatic screening for cervical cancer, management of PMS/PMDD and management of hormone therapy, to name just a few of the applications that will come with the core technology.

We show below the working of the prototyped product using the graphs of the measurement results plotted against the days of the menstrual cycle – and compared with the woman’s basal body temperature for reference. The graphs of the measurement data produce cyclic profiles descriptive of the nuances of the monitored menstrual cycles. None of the old techniques can do that.

These cyclic profiles have important characteristics:

1. The menstrual cyclic profile has numerous repeatable features. It is an electronic signature of the menstrual cycle, which is the female 5th vital sign.

2. The range of measurement values is the same in different cycles and, importantly, also in different women.

3. The profile features are interpretable, and are due to the biological process that causes the menstrual cycle phenomena (folliculogenesis).

The significance of these menstrual cycle profiles goes beyond reproductive management.

To wit: Ours is a unique and disruptive technology.

https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/biozhena-corp-single-slide-3-day-window.pps Click the link or the image for a better view – an animated slide.

Fertile window for birth control

For a better insight, visit the other posts on this blog [https://biozhena.wordpress.com/ ], and check out http://www.linkedin.com/in/vaclavkirsner.

Before you go, see this, to get some sense of what is going on here:  https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/wealth-of-information-in-menstrual-profile-signature.jpg The link opens a larger version of the slide snapshot image.

Better still, click the next link for the animated and narrated slide:  https://biozhena.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/single-slide-narrated-best-wealth-of-info-in-menstrual-cycle-profile-signature.pps

Note the planned use of the follicular waves for early pregnancy detection (the waves disappear; the right term for this is “instant pregnancy detection”), and monitoring for early pregnancy loss (in that unfortunate eventuality, the waves come back; it is advisable – by certain recent medical findings – that the couple should not delay trying to conceive again).

Refer to the following for more about said recent findings: original medical publication in BMJ http://to.ly/9WtG; BMJ editorial comment http://to.ly/9WtI; CNN.com article “Miscarriage? Try again ASAP, study suggests” http://ht.ly/2mlwb; bioZhena’s post http://to.ly/802p “Instant detection of pregnancy and of Early Pregnancy Loss, EPL – the adversary of Trying To Conceive, TTC – especially after age 25”.

———————————————————————————————————-

A party with an interest relevant to bioZhena Corporation can be provided with more confidential information upon request (email: vaclav@biozhena.com).

Visit https://www.linkedin.com/in/vaclavkirsner/ .

About the EDD and/or EDC issue, and a request for input from readers

EDD stands for Estimated Date of Delivery, while EDC stands for Estimated Date of Confinement (the time of going to hospital for the delivery, “the lying-in of a woman in childbed“).

Seasonality of Google Searches Bears Out These Thoughts And Plans

August and July, October and/or September are the months of the season of most births in the U.S. And Mums-To-Be are rather anxious about the timing of the pregnancy-to-birthing process, gestation.

Just see how, well ahead of the upcoming birth time, the interest in the search term “gestation” peaks every year in April, give or take a month. You can see it at https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=2004-12-31%202017-01-18&geo=US&q=gestation (search terms: United States, 12/31/04 – 1/18/17, All categories, Web Search). I’ll expand on the seasonality aspect below, after I share some thoughts and plans.

The bioZhena thinking, in one brief sentence, is this: Aim to replace stochastic with deterministic, which is the purpose of our eukairosic^TM diagnostic tools. Then the E in EDD and EDC will stand for EXPECTED.

‘Expected’ based on a measured data based computation, as opposed to a subjective recall based physician’s guess. Because, as I say in the very last sentence at the end of this article: Your approaching EDD and EDC are not normalized/relative like those in the statistical graph …

The medical position on the current status of obstetrics can be characterized by the following two papers.

1) Theory of obstetrics: an epidemiologic framework for justifying medically indicated early delivery

[BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2007 Mar 28;7:4. Joseph KS, Perinatal Epidemiology Research Unit, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada]

QUOTE: Modern obstetrics is faced with a serious paradox. Obstetric practice is becoming increasingly interventionist … Whereas … mortality declines exponentially with increasing gestational duration, temporal increases in medically indicated labour induction and cesarean delivery have resulted in rising rates of preterm birth and declining rates of post-term birth. … [This] provides a theoretical justification for medically indicated early delivery and reconciles the contemporary divide between obstetric theory and obstetric practice. END QUOTE.

And 2) A re-look at the duration of human pregnancy

[Singapore Med J. 2006 Dec;47(12):1044-8. Bhat RA and Kushtagi P, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, India]

QUOTE: The duration of human pregnancy is arbitrarily taken as 280 days (40 weeks). Foetuses are considered to be at high risk once pregnancy goes beyond the expected date of confinement. … Conclusion: Mean gestational age at the onset of labour for women native to the area of study was 272 days (standard deviation 9 days). Pregnancies beyond a duration of 280 days showed significantly increased perinatal morbidity. It is suggested that there is a need for determining the length of gestation and to compile gestation-wise incidence of … neonatal morbidity indicators for different populations. END QUOTE.

Related medical publications are here.

I will rely on the birthing specialist, Janelle Durham, to verbalize for you the status quo in this aspect of the homo sapiens experience – below. First,

Gestation Period, Gestational Age and Ovulona^TM

Per Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence, article Gestation Period and Gestational Age ,

” a gestation period of thirty-eight weeks (266 days) is calculated for women who are pregnant by a procedure such as in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination that allows them to know their exact date of conception.”

The Ovulona women’s healthcare and self-care device from bioZhena will provide to the woman user a very simple means to record the day of any intercourse as a part of her record of the menstrual cyclic profile. In every cycle, whether pregnancy is planned or not. This must become a part of the routine. The information will be electronically recorded along with the daily or almost-daily measurement data inherent in the use of the Ovulona.

With that menstrual cycling history data, this intercourse-timing information will be available for use by the woman’s physician(s). And in due course (contingent on funding) the cervical ring transformation of the Ovulona will remove the need for daily insertion…

Therefore, the routine use of the Ovulona (and of the internally worn Halo^TM cervical ring) will provide for an equivalent of the above-referenced 38-week (266 days) calculation available to the women receiving IVF or artificial insemination. This alone should be an improvement on the current way of EDD/EDC assessment. In this context, an investigation should be undertaken into the question of whether any inference can be drawn from the woman’s menstrual cycle history prior to the conceptive (baby-making) intercourse.

Any comments on this would be welcome, even about anecdotal or subjective or tentative observations that may be available. However non-scientific, however tentative, however uncertain an individual answer or input from you may be…

Questions

Questions such as: What evidence is available in medical literature (or maybe in unpublished records?) about the outcomes of the IVF or artificial insemination pregnancies, i.e. about their documented gestation periods? Does the 38 weeks projection work? Always? If not always, can anything be correlated with any deviation?

Has anyone looked at whether there may be an effect of geography in terms of hot vs. cold climate on gestation periods of natives? And perhaps even at whether a gestation-period difference may arise in data at a well-selected locale between winter and summer deliveries (of course only natural, not “medically indicated early deliveries”)?

The complicating effect of first versus subsequent pregnancy has already been noted, of course… That evidence exists for gestational length variability with ethnicity (or race) has been noted, too:

“122,415 nulliparous women with singleton live fetuses at the time of spontaneous labour, giving birth in the former North West Thames Health Region, London, UK. Results: The median gestational age at delivery was 39 weeks in Blacks and Asians and 40 weeks in white Europeans.” [International Journal of Epidemiology 2004, Volume 33, Number 1, pp. 107-113 ].

I am happy to observe that this outcome is not counter-intuitive (because women with ancestors in hot climates seem to tend to shorter gestational age at delivery than those who can be presumed to originate from colder climate conditions).

Pregnancy
http://doctor.ndtv.com/storypage/ndtv/id/004480/type/news/Difficult_conception_tied_to_pregnancy_complications.html
…..for the better health of Indians

Conceivably, such a preliminary info, which I am after here, is not forthcoming — and we shall have to try and gather even these preliminary data in a systematic manner when the time comes, but no question asked, nothing learned… Public or private input would be appreciated. (I wrote this request here in 2008.)

Although focused on the very serious complication in pregnancy, A Balancing Act: Ideal Delivery Timing & Chronic Hypertension by Eva Martin, MD is an example of the kind of information that we will need when setting out to start the adaptation of our technology to the challenge of assessing and managing EDD/EDC. Retweeting her piece, I tweeted in April 2017: This is why when #funded the #bioZhena #cervix monitoring will better assess EDD/EDC >abandon old Naegele rule.

Dr. Martin has a few videos online on the subject of due dates, and here is one of them (~2 minutes): How to Calculate Your Due Date After A.R.T. –  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4OCSwxTEIg  (in a nutshell: Fertilization + 266 days [38 weeks] as we already noted above, with reference to the Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence).

There in any case does seem to be some, perhaps fairly good, basis for this attempt at a preparation for an introduction of a tool for definitive assessment of EDD and EDC.

Due Dates Paper by Ms. Durham

According to the due dates paper by Janelle Durham, written for Certification with Birth Education in January, 2002 , QUOTE: “some women are aware of when they ovulate, either based on formal methods and record-keeping such as daily temperature checks, or on physical symptoms such as mild pain upon ovulation, or observation of changes in vaginal mucus. Many women know the dates when conception was possible, because they know the dates when they had intercourse during their most recent menstrual cycle.

Due dates can be calculated based on these dates, but many physicians prefer to calculate it from date of last menstrual period. They may only calculate from conception date if conception was medically managed and supervised through techniques such as artificial insemination.

Based on date of last normal menstrual period.

Due dates are typically calculated based upon the date the last menstrual period began, according to the mother’s report. Naegele’s rule assumes that ovulation occurred 14 days after LMP, which is only the case for women with 28 day cycles. Some caregivers will ask their patients for a history of menstrual cycles so that they can adjust this number, as appropriate, for cycles of different lengths or irregular cycles.

It’s also important to consider: recent use of oral contraceptives, and their possible effect on ovulation date; inaccurate memory about when the last period occurred, the possibility of interpreting post-conception ‘spotting’ as a light period, and unrecognized pregnancy losses. These issues all complicate due date prediction, and it’s estimated that nearly 25% of infants who would be classified as preterm birth on the basis of the last normal menstrual period are not preterm. (Cited in Health Canada)” END QUOTE.

At this point, let me translate the one brief sentence I wrote at the top into a less specialist language. Ms. Durham shows a statistical distribution of gestation periods applicable to any woman, and that is the approach I labeled stochastic, because of its statistical nature. I admit, the word is harking back to the days of my postgrad phys chem endeavors, which were mostly endeavours at the time. 🙂 We could also say, probabilistic – two syllables longer, though!

http://transitiontoparenthood.com/ttp/birthed/duedatespaper.htm

Janelle Durham, for Certification with Birth Education NW. January, 2002.

.

Our Goal – Your Comments

With our eurokairosic^TM diagnostic tools, we generally aim to determine the right time, and in the case at hand we propose to provide for a much less fuzzy assessment of the EDD and EDC. After all, precedent exists in the A.R.T. arena, and prerequisites, too, to some extent at least.

In a nutshell: Let’s replace the LMP/Naegele-based approach with a hard data-based technique, applied to each and by each Mom individually.

Again, your comments on and/or answers to the questions above would be useful. Public or private input would be appreciated. [Private to: vaclav@biozhena.com please.]

In any case, for more on this topic see a related post published on December 8, 2010: Saint Nicholas Day, his legend, and our modern day’s prematurity, EDD calculation, gestational age, problem with LMP. We show there data from a study of more than 24.5 thousand pregnancies demonstrating that “most (71.5%) inductions done post-term (> 294 days) according to LMP dates were not post-term if ultrasound scan dates alone are used to calculate the gestational age.”

Vision

It is perfectly reasonable a vision that, in future, an expectant mother’s EDD and/or EDC will be assessed based on her folliculogenesis in vivo (FIV™) data which will include the electronic record of every sexual intercourse. The EDD/EDC will be computed automatically and provided by her own Ovulona Smart Sensor™.

So that, for example, a woman in and native to (or perhaps with ancestry from) a hot climate region might automatically obtain her EDD of 39 weeks when she electronically registers her day of intercourse on her Ovulona. Versus 40 weeks for a white European, consistent with the knowledge base noted above and assuming its validation.

No more uncertainties as in the LMP-based estimation. The bell-shape curve of distribution (such as the Janelle Durham graph above) will be replaced by personalized specifics.

Seasonality of EDC Searches on Google

On June 1, 2015 (at about the time of the year when, statistically, most American expectant mothers are about the last trimester away from their Estimated Date of Delivery and of Confinement) I add the following illustration. It appears to suggest why in May and June each year for the last 6 years there is always a noticeable increase in the viewing statistic of this blog post that you are reading. The interest in the subject of the due dates is up.

See the image better as Single slide – Google Trends for EDC Search 2009 – 2015 e

Check the trend for yourself by moving from the screen shot image to the actual graph online via the link http://v.gd/c2MOyR i.e. http://www.google.com/trends/explore#cat=0-45&q=edc&geo=US&date=1%2F2009%2078m&cmpt=q&tz= . Once online, the Google graph shows (with cursor put on data for different months) the counts of US searches for EDC in the different months. You can change the range of the time period via the Time button, and the country of interest via the Country button. The numbers represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart. At the time of writing this, it was the number of searches in June 2014 (assigned the maximal relative value of 100).

Move the cursor along the graph to see the values for other months within the examined period. You’ll see the EDC value of 100 in June 2014; in June 2013 the US peak was at 72 counts. The worldwide trend is much like the US trend because the statistics are driven by the overwhelming majority of American searches. E.g. the May 2015 count worldwide is only higher by 7 more searches than the US value of 48; in June 2014 the worldwide count was the same 100 as the US while in June 2013 the worldwide count was 20 counts higher than the US count of 65.

That’s as of June 3, 2015. Might this change later? Well, click http://www.google.com/trends/explore#cat=0-45&q=edc&geo=US&date=1%2F2009%2082m&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B6 and see the graph as of September 12, 2015, which does show the June 2015 peak indubitably.

The worldwide count can be obtained via the Country button on the Explore bar in Google Trends (USA was selected here). The data are normalized, relative numbers – you can read up on it… It’s a Google algorithm.

And here now is a January 6, 2017 update of the Google Trends EDC results, showing that the June peak (in search activity for EDC) continues to be there; in June 2016 it stood at 88 while in June 2015 it was 89, as found by placing the cursor on the peak in the online graph (only one data point can be screen-printed as in the image here) – the URL is below the image:

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?cat=45&date=2008-12-31%202016-12-31&geo=US&q=edc

.

Dear Reader,

Your approaching EDD and EDC – if indeed their coming up is the reason why you are reading this – are not normalized or relative values like those in the statistical graph

— and good luck, all the best from bioZhena!

.

Parturition means birthing (birth) and dystocia a difficult one

And what is a parturition alarm?

For these and other entries, see the Alphabet of bioZhena at

https://biozhena.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/the-alphabet-of-biozhena/

Parturition alarm:

This is a concept that has to do with the need to know when labor or delivery is beginning, because the birthing female may be in need of help.

At the time of writing the first Alphabet draft more than five years ago, an Internet search produced only one such technology, a pressure-sensing girth, suitable for the horse breeder only, because it utilizes the fact that the horse mare lies on her side only in the process of parturition. To illustrate, we borrow a nice picture from a more recent publication found in today’s search on parturition alarm, which search still shows a preponderance of equine innovations:

In the originally noted publication, reference was made to some other method that would detect the emergence of the amniotic sac or of the foal from the vulva (vaginal orifice) but that was not a satisfactory solution. In the horse-breeding arena, about 5-6% of births require help. Various approaches to the birth alarm solution have been attempted.

These days, there are quite a few patents etc. found in the parturition alarm search. And even 5 years ago, a patent from New Mexico University should have been found because their intra-vaginal parturition alarm patent (basically for cows) was published in 1987.

In human obstetrics, where most births take place in hospitals, determining the right time of confinement would be very beneficial. bioZhena (and/or its sister company, bioPecus) will investigate our vaginal sensor technology – suitably modified – with a view to developing a parturition alarm applicable to any mammal.

Also relevant in this context is the implication of the Ovulona making available the menstrual cycle (folliculogenesis) data over many months or cycles before conception. This will enable a more accurate anticipation of the EDD, Expected Date of Delivery. You will understand this better below, under Parturition. I highly recommend that you check out Figuring Your Due Date, too – from the Midwife Archives.

Let us put it this way: Since this is the bioZhena blog (and not bioPecus, for veterinary tools), the EDD issue must be addressed first, before any parturition alarm developments. Because we are primarily concerned with the Rerum Naturare Feminina.

And it would still be of great interest to hear from an expert Latinist about the correct way of saying this in plural, the Natural Thing of Women, the Women’s Natural Thing…

This being a reference to /2007/12/16/cervix-uteri-and-seven-or-eight-related-things/ .

Parturition:

The process of giving birth; childbirth. [From Late Latin parturitio, from Latin parturitus, past participle of parturire, to be in labor.]

Parturition is illustrated at http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/esp/2001_saladin/folder_structure/re/m2/s5/ .

The illustration’s legend indicates that physicians usually calculate the gestation period (length of the pregnancy) as 280 days: 40 weeks or 10 lunar months from the last menstrual period (LMP) to the date of confinement, which is the estimated date of delivery of the infant [EDD].

Indubitably, due dates are a little-understood concept:

“Truth is, even if you know the exact date when you ovulated, you still can only estimate the baby’s unique gestational cycle to about plus or minus two weeks” [ http://www.gentlebirth.org/archives/dueDates.html ]. Why should that be? Because of the variability of your menstrual cycle lengths? (They vary even if you do not think so).

Statistically, the gestation time for human babies has a mean of 278 days and a standard deviation of 12 days, an uncomfortably large spread. The old Naegele Rule of a 40-week pregnancy was invented by a Bible-inspired botanist Harmanni Boerhaave in 1744 and later promoted by Franz Naegele in 1812. It is still believed to work fairly well as a rule of thumb for many pregnancies. However, the rule of thumb also suggests: “If your menstrual cycles are about 28 days, quite regular, and this is not your first child, your physician’s dating is probably fine. If your cycles are longer or irregular, or if this is your first child, the due date your physician has given you may be off, setting you up for all kinds of problems” (induction, interventions, C-section among them).

This is where the bioZhena technology can be expected to provide help, making it possible to reckon the EDD with recorded menstrual cycle (folliculogenesis history) data rather than merely with the LMP + 280 days. This, once properly researched, may be expected to have a significant impact on obstetric management. — Any comments?

It is ironic that, in this age of technological medicine, American women worry about their birthing process not being allowed to take its own natural course on account of an ancient method of predicting the EDD.

Ironically, the 40 week dogma – which is the gestational counterpart of the unacceptable calendar method of birth control (the so-called “Vatican roulette”) – does not reconcile the 295+ days of the 10 lunar months; and yet, at the same time, the U.S. has an unusually high perinatal death rate, resulting from high statistics of too early (preterm) labor. Quid agitur? See also under Gestation.

Dystocia or birthing difficulty:

Dystocia is difficult delivery, difficult parturition. From Latin dys-, bad, from Greek dus-, ill, hard + Greek tokos, delivery. Calf losses at birth result in a major reduction in the net calf crop. Data show that 60% of these losses are due to dystocia (defined as delayed and difficult birth) and at least 50% of these calf deaths could be prevented by timely obstetrical assistance. The USDA web site http://larrl.ars.usda.gov/physiology_history.htm is apparently no longer there but when it was it indicated that an electronic calving monitor was being developed to determine maternal and fetal stress during calving. These studies are important since they are leading the way for developing methods to reduce the $800 million calf and cow loss that occurs each year at calving in the USA’s beef herds.

In analogy with the superiority of in vivo monitoring of folliculogenesis versus tracking behavioral estrus (heat), in vivo monitoring of the progress towards parturition must be a priori a more promising approach.

The telemetric version of the BioMeter – the animal version of the Ovulona technology – will hopefully provide a tool for these efforts. Once tested on animals, human use will be a logical extension of the endeavor. (Or endeavour, should it take place in Europe! Smiley…)

Comment about the EDD and/or EDC issue, and request for input:

Again, EDD stands for Estimated Day of Delivery, while EDC stands for Estimated Day of Confinement.

Per Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence, article Gestation Period and Gestational Age [ http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_g2602/is_0002/ai_2602000272 ], ” a gestation period of thirty-eight weeks (266 days) is calculated for women who are pregnant by a procedure such as in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination that allows them to know their exact date of conception.”

The Ovulona device from bioZhena will provide to the woman user a very simple means to record the day of any intercourse. In every cycle, whether pregnancy is planned or not. This must become a part of the routine. The information will be electronically recorded along with the daily or almost-daily measurement data inherent in the use of the Ovulona. With that menstrual cycling history data, this intercourse-timing information will be available for optional use by the woman’s physician(s).

Therefore, the routine use of the Ovulona will provide for an equivalent of the above-referenced 38-week (266 days) calculation available to the women receiving IVF or artificial insemination.

This alone should be an improvement on the current way of EDD/EDC assessment.

In addition, an investigation should be undertaken into the question of whether any inference can be drawn from the woman’s menstrual cycle history prior to the conceptive intercourse. Any comments on this would be welcome, even about anecdotal or subjective or tentative observations that may be available already. However non-scientific, however tentative, however uncertain an individual answer or input from you may be…

E.g., do women with more or less regular cycles tend to exhibit a regular gestation period, and vice versa?

And, certainly, what evidence is available in medical literature (or maybe in unpublished records?) about the outcomes of the IVF and/or artificial insemination pregnancies, i.e., about their documented gestation periods? Does the 38 weeks projection work? Always? If not always, can anything be correlated with any deviation?

Do women with distinctly irregular menstrual cycles tend to have non-regular gestation periods?

The complicating effect of first versus subsequent pregnancy has already been noted, of course…

Conceivably, there is no such preliminary info available, and we shall have to try and gather even these preliminary data in a systematic manner, but – no question asked, nothing learned… Public or private input would be appreciated.

Birthday, and how it relates to the bioZhena enterprise – eukairosic™ diagnostic tools

Today is a major anniversary related to the bioZhena enterprise. Namely, a round-number (and not small) birthday of the offspring whose begetting had much, if not everything, to do with the inception of the project.

The biologically educated member of the would-be parental team insisted that medical help would have to be the very last resort, as she did not wish to be poked in and subjected to the various medical procedures available in the country of the proud Albion (that, alas, no longer ruled the waves!), where this awakening was going on. The image of what she resented getting into is telling, and it’s not even the whole story.

Awakening on the part of said couple, who till then took steps to minimize or theoretically avoid getting in the family way, owing to circumstances. As in too many instances the world over, the “awakening” was left until somewhat too late. I do not wish to talk about age specifics, but you probably know that particularly female fertility (more accurately put, fecundity or fecundability) decreases starting around or even before the Christ’s age, and so – in retrospect – it was no great surprise to find that achieving pregnancy was not as simple as expected. At the time, actually, this was a great surprise…

At the time, yours truly was not an expert in the field that deals with certain practicalities of the most important aspect of life, by which many of us mean procreation, reproduction, and its management. I am referring to some insight into the practicalities on the female side of things procreative, which insight was not there at the time – but the better half knew the basic fundamental that I now delight in referencing as eukairosic.

In a nutshell, the word refers to the right time, opportune time – exactly what we are about – the strategic or “right time; the opportune point of time at which something should be done.” A window of opportunity is kairos time.

For more about this, the Wikipedia article can be recommended, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kairos . Let’s cite: Kairos (καιρός) is an ancient Greek word meaning the “right or opportune moment,” or “God’s time” [sic; thus said – but this should say “gods’ time”]. The ancient Greeks had many gods, and two words for time, chronos and kairos. While the former refers to chronological or sequential time, the latter signifies “a time in between”, a moment of undetermined period of time in which “something” special happens. What the special something is depends on who is using the word. END QUOTE.

If you visit that article, you will probably understand why I would like to look at the possibility of adopting as our company logo QUOTE a monochrome fresco by Mantegna at Palazzo Ducale in Mantua (about 1510 C.E.) that shows a female Kairos (most probably Occasio)… UNQUOTE.

You will also appreciate that, since we are not theologians, and because “eu-“ is the Greek prefix meaning well or good or true or easy, my choice of the adjective that we want to trademark as descriptive of bioZhena’s wares is eukairosic™.

And so here, for the sake of accurate definition, is one other item from The Alphabet of bioZhena – /2007/11/28/the-alphabet-of-biozhena/

Fecundability and fecundity:

Fecundability is the probability of achieving pregnancy within one menstrual cycle – about 20% or maybe 25% in normal couples [sic; the probability depends on many factors, including age – vide infra, or see below].

Fecundity is the ability to achieve a live birth.

Fecundability is strongly influenced by the age of the partners, and it is maximal at about age 24. There is a slight decline at ages 24 – 30, and a rapid decline after age 30.

The words are derived from Latin fecundus, fecund, from the root of fetus, via Old French fecond. Fecund means fruitful in children, or prolific.

As for the eukairosic diagnostic tools, their utility goes beyond reproductive management. Due to folliculogenesis (menstrual cycling), even things such as administration of medications or certain diagnostic examinations must be performed at the right time within the menstrual cycle…

Scire quod sciendum

fecundoscitus!!! 🙂

Thus spoke the exegete and father of Barnaby and Petrushka, Vaclav Kirsner © 2007

 ‘To know what is to be known’.