Your body *does* know when an egg has been fertilized

kim1730

I hate to see bad information being passed around. It's called "early pregnancy factor" - a protein your body produces hours after fertilization occurs and it will show up on a blood test. 

Pretty cool stuff to read about.  If you feel like google-ing, there's a wikipedia page and a bunch of research articles on it.  It was discovered back in the 70s.  Makes me wonder why there hasn't been more research into this since and why its not more widely known.

ksuRN09

I've never heard of this so I can't say for sure but I would venture to guess that the research hasn't proven it to be reliable. I would be interested to read the studies to see what they found.

Also,I don't know if you're aware of this but Wikipedia is not a source I would trust on this particular subject. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think anyone can go on that site and add information. Not exactly credible.

TeeJ526

ksuRN09 said:

I've never heard of this so I can't say for sure but I would venture to guess that the research hasn't proven it to be reliable. I would be interested to read the studies to see what they found. Also,I don't know if you're aware of this but Wikipedia is not a source I would trust on this particular subject. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think anyone can go on that site and add information. Not exactly credible.

Correct. Wikipedia is a public and open source resource so anyone can modify an article.  Most articles cite their sources, but there definitely some incorrect information on there. You're better off relying on medical articles and studies when it comes to your body.

TeeJ526

@dorothyzbornak97 - Very random... Loving the siggy pic!

Valie18

In defence of Wikipedia - in some areas of research it's information is very good. It may even be more up-to-date than what you will find in journals (journals take time to publish even after articles are accepted.) But... Wikipedia is not a "source" although its references are usually a good indication of where to find relevant credible information.

ksuRN09

@Joy2611 I didn't consider that aspect but you're right. It does seem like it would be unnecessary stress.

@dorothyzbornak97 When I was in college, all of our profs specifically told us Wikipedia would not be accepted as a source for our papers.

lookame3639

A lot of things could go wrong during the 2ww. Sometimes its best not to know or realize these things. Ok your body realizes the egg was fertilized it doesnt mean that fertilized egg will implant. A fertilized egg does not mean pregnant. Its not worth stressing over...

Pintobean39

My son can't use Wikipedia for any of his research on papers either. He said he even knows people that for kicks loves to go in and change stuff.

kim1730

Of course I know Wikipedia is not 100% reliable.  Just thought it may be a good quick overview as opposed to digging through the medical studies.

And no, it might not be helpful information, just interesting.  I thought it was very interesting as it was something I never heard of until recently and thought somebody else might be interested too.

Maybe its possible someday we could have a test to detect fertilization a day or two after ovulation.  But then with implantation not a sure thing, is that something we really want to know? 

Valie18

kim1730 said:

Of course I know Wikipedia is not 100% reliable.  Just thought it may be a good quick overview as opposed to digging through the medical studies.

And no, it might not be helpful information, just interesting.  I thought it was very interesting as it was something I never heard of until recently and thought somebody else might be interested too.

Maybe its possible someday we could have a test to detect fertilization a day or two after ovulation.  But then with implantation not a sure thing, is that something we really want to know? 

I find this very interesting. I am undecided.

Valie18

byegurlbye said:

Right, but YOU don't know the egg is fertilized and no doctor is going to waste time testing for this. Fertilization =/= Pregnant Gah. Please change the title of this before we get a million butthurt newbs in here telling us they felt fertilization.

Fertilization tickles right?

TeeJ526

byegurlbye said:

Right, but YOU don't know the egg is fertilized and no doctor is going to waste time testing for this. Fertilization =/= Pregnant Gah. Please change the title of this before we get a million butthurt newbs in here telling us they felt fertilization.

I can see it now... Threads that say, "I felt a cramp after O... Do you think it was because my egg was just fertilized?" 

Valie18

byegurlbye said:

show previous quotes

kim1730 said:

Of course I know Wikipedia is not 100% reliable.  Just thought it may be a good quick overview as opposed to digging through the medical studies.

And no, it might not be helpful information, just interesting.  I thought it was very interesting as it was something I never heard of until recently and thought somebody else might be interested too.

Maybe its possible someday we could have a test to detect fertilization a day or two after ovulation.  But then with implantation not a sure thing, is that something we really want to know? 

I find this very interesting. I am undecided.

If m/c rates are 1 in 4. ONE IN FOUR. Do you really want to know the frequency of fertilized eggs that don't make it?

And the quote tree will forever be effed.

I've been thinking about and I think I'd like to know that fertilization can happen for us. After that I wouldn't want to know again.

Valancyy

byegurlbye said:

Right, but YOU don't know the egg is fertilized and no doctor is going to waste time testing for this. Fertilization =/= Pregnant Gah. Please change the title of this before we get a million butthurt newbs in here telling us they felt fertilization.

This reminds me...years ago on here, probably when I was TTC#1, in 2009, there was a post about a girl who felt a "pop" when fertilization happened.  I can't remember if it was MUD, but I don't think it was.  The poster was adamant she felt a pop, and she said her mother had as well.

kim1730

Valie18 said:

show previous quotes

byegurlbye said:

kim1730 said:

Of course I know Wikipedia is not 100% reliable.  Just thought it may be a good quick overview as opposed to digging through the medical studies.

And no, it might not be helpful information, just interesting.  I thought it was very interesting as it was something I never heard of until recently and thought somebody else might be interested too.

Maybe its possible someday we could have a test to detect fertilization a day or two after ovulation.  But then with implantation not a sure thing, is that something we really want to know? 

I find this very interesting. I am undecided.

If m/c rates are 1 in 4. ONE IN FOUR. Do you really want to know the frequency of fertilized eggs that don't make it?

The flip side is - If you go through 12 months of ttc and decide to seek help, is it useful information at that point to know whether the problem is with fertilization or with implantation.

Or maybe ... you're ttc and you know right away fertilization has not occured this cycle.  You have more piece of mind around things like taking advil for a headache, or having a beer for those 2 weeks where you might have otherwise avoided those things.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

dragonfly711

ksuRN09 said:

I've never heard of this so I can't say for sure but I would venture to guess that the research hasn't proven it to be reliable. I would be interested to read the studies to see what they found. Also,I don't know if you're aware of this but Wikipedia is not a source I would trust on this particular subject. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think anyone can go on that site and add information. Not exactly credible.

Correct about Wikipedia, anyone can go on and change information on that site.  I was always told not to trust that sight or use when writing papers.

Valie18

byegurlbye said:

show previous quotes

Valie18 said:

I've been thinking about and I think I'd like to know that fertilization can happen for us. After that I wouldn't want to know again.

I can get behind it in that respect, in a fertility testing kind of way....but other than that I feel like it would just result in a new kind of loss that we all don't need. Does that make sense?

That makes total sense to me.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

TeeJ526

Joy2611 said:

For me personally, I'm not really interested in knowing if fertilization happens so I can then wonder if implantation will happen.  It seems entirely too stressful.

To add to that, even if this kind of testing was used after a year of trying, I wouldn't want to know that it is an implantation issue. Then I'd be too stressed out thinking about how many fertilized eggs were lost.

kim1730

byegurlbye said:

show previous quotes

kim1730 said:

Or maybe ... you're ttc and you know right away fertilization has not occured this cycle.  You have more piece of mind around things like taking advil for a headache, or having a beer for those 2 weeks where you might have otherwise avoided those things.

Uhhh......

That seems like a really stupid reason to burden the health care system.

ETA: I drank ALL the beers in my 2WWs

I was referring to the possibility of having an OTC test in the future, like we have hpt's today. And drinking alcohol in the 2WW is a personal choice that some may feel better about if fertilization had not occured.  Plenty of things fall into that category - just goes back to if you would prefer knowing or not knowing.

tislay84

I don't see how having the information that fertilization occurred would be helpful. Just because it fertilized doesn't mean it will implant and I can see it only adding stress to TTC.

I can see maybe knowing for fertility testing but even then I'm not sure it's something I'd want to know.

jschwind22

byegurlbye said:

show previous quotes

Valie18 said:

I've been thinking about and I think I'd like to know that fertilization can happen for us. After that I wouldn't want to know again.

I can get behind it in that respect, in a fertility testing kind of way....but other than that I feel like it would just result in a new kind of loss that we all don't need. Does that make sense?

As a couple with MFI as well as implantation problems due to high NK cells, I think it would be nice to know if an egg was actually able to be fertilized on it's own.  I'm certainly not going to go through a fresh IVF cycle without doing ICSI given our diagnosis, which takes away the need for the sperm to fertilize the egg on it's own.  But if IVF doesn't work for us and we are out of money, I could see a blood test like this being helpful.  If we knew the egg fertilized, then we could treat the NK cells for that cycle and have a fighting chance.  BUT I absolutely cannot get behind using this for impatience or deciding whether or not I can have a beer.

ETA:  OOOOORRRR, it would be nice to have been able to try that before doing IVF in the first place!  But only if we knew that his sperm could actually fertilize my egg on its own, which at this point we have no evidence of.

AllieSchur

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

kim1730

AllieSchur said:

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

Is it really considered a "miscarriage" ... If there was just fertilization, no implantation, and no hcg, there's no pregnancy.  But regardless, the rate exists and it probably extremely high - we just don't know about it.

I think a lot of what you mentioned is the reason why there hasn't been any recent research into this area

Twinkie0612

AllieSchur said:

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

Implantation issues are not the cause of most miscarriages, it's aneuploidy (wrong number of chromosomes). Every woman has a certain percentage of aneuploid eggs, that if fertilized will likely not develope into a viable pregnancy. If there were readily available testing for fertilization, there would be an insane number of women running to their doctors because they have bad eggs. As someone who has real life experience that fertilization =/= pregnancy (we lost all of our fertilized embryos before transfer), I do not think the average woman needs to know the second fertilization occurs.

AllieSchur

Twinkie0612 said:

show previous quotes

AllieSchur said:

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

Implantation issues are not the cause of most miscarriages, it's aneuploidy (wrong number of chromosomes). Every woman has a certain percentage of aneuploid eggs, that if fertilized will likely not develope into a viable pregnancy. If there were readily available testing for fertilization, there would be an insane number of women running to their doctors because they have bad eggs. As someone who has real life experience that fertilization =/= pregnancy (we lost all of our fertilized embryos before transfer), I do not think the average woman needs to know the second fertilization occurs.

Just to be clear~  I do not personally believe that fertilization without implantation is a miscarriage. Regardless of the actual definition. I was simply extrapolating out the idea, and imagining the chaos that would ensue in the medical field if people were able to confirm fertilization prior to implantation. In re-reading my comment I could see how the last line could be confusing. 

I had a early 2nd tri loss due to chromosomal issues, so I am well aware of that unfortunate dice roll. 

BankerBSN

GhostMonkey said:

show previous quotes

kim1730 said:

AllieSchur said:

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

Is it really considered a "miscarriage" ... If there was just fertilization, no implantation, and no hcg, there's no pregnancy.  But regardless, the rate exists and it probably extremely high - we just don't know about it.

I think a lot of what you mentioned is the reason why there hasn't been any recent research into this area

Sigh. Yes it has. Go to Wikipedia.

FTFY. No one wants real research round these parts.

Twinkie0612

AllieSchur said:

show previous quotes

Twinkie0612 said:

AllieSchur said:

Oh my!! I am an US tech and this makes me want to pull my hair out.  About half the time you have unprotected sex around the right time of month, egg meets sperm!! Science has solved the problems associated with fertilization, (hence IVF) what science CANNOT do is control implantation. Implantation is the red headed step child of pregnancy, it is controlled by a zillion different factors and science is fairly limited in it's ability to help the product of conception implant. A fact well recognized by all forms of non-hormonal female birth control, these allow for conception they don't however allow for implantation. Can you imagine the miscarriage rate if people were able to tell if sperm and egg met... 

Implantation issues are not the cause of most miscarriages, it's aneuploidy (wrong number of chromosomes). Every woman has a certain percentage of aneuploid eggs, that if fertilized will likely not develope into a viable pregnancy. If there were readily available testing for fertilization, there would be an insane number of women running to their doctors because they have bad eggs. As someone who has real life experience that fertilization =/= pregnancy (we lost all of our fertilized embryos before transfer), I do not think the average woman needs to know the second fertilization occurs.

Just to be clear~  I do not personally believe that fertilization without implantation is a miscarriage. Regardless of the actual definition. I was simply extrapolating out the idea, and imagining the chaos that would ensue in the medical field if people were able to confirm fertilization prior to implantation. In re-reading my comment I could see how the last line could be confusing. 

I had a early 2nd tri loss due to chromosomal issues, so I am well aware of that unfortunate dice roll. 

I'm agreeing with you on the chaos. I just don't want women to read this thread and think they that miscarriage = implantation issues. Most of the time it is chromosomal and there was nothing that could be done. I'm very sorry for your loss.

themrsJRD

I learned some new stuff in this thread... Thanks, ladies!

BankerBSN

Just for shits and giggles. Nothing like some light Sunday reading: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26843/

evabear123

I have a hard time with this. While I agree that maybe in some way it might help couples struggling with infertility (although I'm not convinced), I agree with most of the PP, that it's information that isn't particularly useful in one's TTC journey.

I was talking to my mum yesterday about these super sensitive HPTs and these doctors in Australia who regularly order a blood test for their TTC patients 7-8DPO - mum was saying 'chemical pregnancies' were pretty much unknown, people just thought their periods had come a bit later.

There is definitely a lot of over testing happening these days. Most of the time, all I see coming from it is increased heartache.