Spoke with a Technical Director from a fertility clinic and he said that MS is extremely damaging to the sperm during the process but Gradient Selection is not harsh on the sperm.  So, what is your knowledge on this???  He suggested doing Gradient Selection and a gender diet to sway the gender versus MS.  He said that the sperm looked damaged after the MS process.  What is your take.  I know gradient selection for gender is only 65%.  He recommended if any fertility to do IVF/PGD without MS.  What are my chances of conceiving a girl that way without MS.  He said my chances of getting pregnant at my age (34) is 50%.  Now what are my chances of conceiving a girl???? 

Great question. My doctor mentioned the same thing regarding microsort, "hard on the sperm." Therefore, she recommended IVF/microsort- not PGD. If we did microsort with IUI, the chances of getting pregnant are low (due to all the processing). And I am 31 (having no difficulty getting pregnant). I really do not want to go through IVF and would love to know if the Gradient Selection is a 65% chance.

Your doc said MS is hard on the sperm and then recommended the process anyway? 

MommyTwingle:

Your doc said MS is hard on the sperm and then recommended the process anyway? 

 

He is saying not to try to use MS'd sperm with IUI, because with an IUI there is still a lot of work for the sperm to do (swim out of the uterus into the fallopian tube and find the egg and fertilize it).  With IVF there's no work for the sperm.  So the way I read it he isn't saying, "don't use MS" he's just saying "with MS, don't try IUI, go for IVF".

This doesn't agree with what Dr. P has said, he says that the sperm aren't  "worn out" from MS, the issue is just that there are so few of them after MS. (If I am remembering correctly.)

I don't think upping the odds to 65% is really worth it, unless it's pretty cheap.  I suppose if you're doing IVF/PGD, it couldn't hurt to add it, again if it's cheap.  I personally don't think there's any reason to believe that MS damages the sperm.  But as Maureen said, there are definitely way less after MS.  I think the initial paperwork they give you says there are so many million to begin with in an average sample, and only 200,000 after.  I think this is why the pregnancy odds with MS IUI might be a little lower than regular IUI.  I used MS with IVF (along with PGD), and I highly recommend it--thanks to MS, all of my embryos were female.

Gradient Selection can be added to a cycle for $500.

Its $3400 for Microsort.

For females, Microsort has the edge (88%) over Gradient Selection (75%).  However, since Microsort and Gradient Selection have roughly the SAME success rate with MALE (Y) sorts...then GS makes more sense to use than MS when desiring a son.

Can one do gradient selection with IUI? 

I sounds logic that Microsorted sperm can be tired..... but in my opinion, doctors won't recommend you to do MS IUI because then you won't do it in their office (at least right now until FDA approval).

It's like going to CVS and asking them if you should buy your precription at Walgreens.......... They will never advise you to go to a different pharmacy.

What do you think?

No process, other than MicroSort, has ever been found to effectively separate X and Y sperm.  None, period.  I am definitely interested in any process that would make gender selection cheaper and available to more people; but every study about any gradient method has found that it did not separate sperm, and people have been trying this for decades.  If someone is offering this, I would be interested to know what evidence they offer that the process is effective.  

Are there gradient selection methods that have a different "brand name" than Ericsson?  If so, is the process different in any way from Ericsson?

GS is half of what E does.  But if your going to spend the money on this you might as well do it at home for almost nothing.  Directions as to how are in the Extreme Gender swaying forum.  The only thing that truly works is PGD, after that micorsort is the next best.  After that I think Extreme at home methods are better than GS in a lab

Maureen:

No process, other than MicroSort, has ever been found to effectively separate X and Y sperm.  None, period.  I am definitely interested in any process that would make gender selection cheaper and available to more people; but every study about any gradient method has found that it did not separate sperm, and people have been trying this for decades.  If someone is offering this, I would be interested to know what evidence they offer that the process is effective.  

 

Ask Dr. Potter.  He was the one who was promoting Gradient Selection in that interview...quoted 70-75% success rate with it.  If it isn't effective why would Dr. Potter mention it as an option and quote such high stats with it???

Interesting... Is the interview online, do you have a link? 

http://www.imagineyh.com/html/features/infertility/article/article_nov00_1.php3

 

Hey Maureen, i'm just as confused as you are... i was quite surprised to read Dr. Potter even mentioning Gradient Selection in the interview...but apparently it gets better PG rates than MS/IUI. I have asked Dr. Potter many times to clarify this for the past several weeks and still no reply from him... it IS confusing and if what he says is true about gradient selection having a 70-75% success rate then it should be promoted instead of Microsort for people who want boys since the stats are the same for both methods.

 

"The problem with Microsort, in my experience, has been that the specimens are so depleted that only several hundred thousand sperm are being inseminated at a time, says Dr. Daniel A. Potter, of the Huntington Reproductive Center.  "So the pregnancy rates are very low."  The pregnancy rate is 16 percent, below the natural conception rate.

Dr. Potter employs the other method: gradient selection.  "It is based on a simple physics equation: force equals mass times acceleration." 

....gradient selection is often a more attractive option to prospective parents because it is cheaper, performed in various clinics around the country, and the rate of successful insemination is higher than Microsoft's. The reason: the gradient method is easier on the sperm.  Dr. Potter explains, "We will lose about half of the sperm when we do the procedure, but we will concentrate the sperm we do have and deposit them high up in the uterine cavity. So the pregnancy rate turns out to be as high as if the couple were having intercourse that month, that is to say about 20% per attempt."  According to Dr. Potter, gradient selection is highly effective in selecting the sex of a child.  "The success rate is about 70 to 75 percent.  It is a little higher in girls."

 

I notice at the time of this article HRC didn't offer MS.  Hm.