What bothers me is, so many doctors and scientists saying "no" / "it doesn't happen", as opposed to "we don't know". They haven't observed it -- or, as often, been told/taught it by someone else. So, it doesn't happen -- it doesn't exist.<p>At this point, I feel outright lied to. I've made life decisions bases on such statements that proved to be patently false and not at all backed by real science.<p>And a lot more anecdote and "uninformed" practices of friends and others, that I initially avoided and regretted witnessing, based upon these "expert" opinions, has actually proven to be healthier and more productive.
Buried the lead - "...or that egg follicles split into two or more parts due to damage from the treatment. The results should be seen as a curiosity rather than a discovery until replicated and investigated further, Albertini said."
This seems to be one of many studies done that keep hinting that ovaries may continue to produce eggs. That's pretty awesome news especially for young women who have had to undergo treatments that may have killed off eggs early on. I also wonder how long they continue to be made. For instance if someone had a genetic disease that was somehow overcome with, say, genetic modification in some future time would her future eggs also carry the updated genetics?
>The findings were presented at the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology annual conference in July and are described in a journal paper that is in review.<p>WTF why is the Guardian reporting on this now? It would make more sense to report on the conference presentation, or to wait for the publication to be in general circulation. But reporting during the paper review is not timely, and if it doesn't pass peer-review you're going to be stuck with your pants down.
> <i>would raise the prospect of new treatments to allow older women to conceive</i><p>This is a bit of ethical problem. Pregnancy at older age brings many risks to mother and child.