Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

lesswrong.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 145 posts

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#41

Post by conductr »

WarmWash wrote: post #29
arjie wrote: post #6

If you're curious what it's like for a couple of normies doing IVF, I wrote down our experience here to the degree I remembered: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/IVF

If I'm understanding that right, it cost $25k per run, and you did 3 runs, so $75k total? Or was it $25k for the full thing? Did insurance cover anything?

Didn't read that account but I went through it with wife. The egg collecting / embryo creating process is the expensive part, so depends on how many times you have to do that process. The re-implantation was significantly cheaper, so also depends on how many times you have to do that part but at least its less costly.

We ended up doing 1 extraction and 2 implantations. If I remember it was roughly ($15k-20k) then (~$5k * 2). This was about 8-9 years ago. We had no fertility issues and had other reasons for doing IVF, but if you do have fertility issues it's more risk the extraction and embryo process will fail and need repeating.

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#42

Post by Aurornis »

davidelettieri wrote: post #25

Having done IVF with my wife I think this is the most underrated fertility advice available today. I don't understand why governments of countries with increasing average age and low birth rate don't pay for this for all women. This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented.

> This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented

Hard disagree on that. You're coming from an angle of someone who wanted to have kids and do it in a mathematically optimal way. A lot of people see egg freezing as a way to delay having kids until they're older, which can become a disincentive to raising families when they're young and healthy enough to do it. If you want a pro-family policy, you should be spending the money on people with families and their children, not on a tool that is used to delay having children in common use.

Another huge problem with this proposal is that freezing eggs is only a small part of the cost. The cost of IVF later in life could push into six figures depending on how many rounds are needed. If we're talking about pro-family policies that can cost upwards of $50,000 to $100,000 per family, there are many more effective places to spend that like on childcare options.

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#43

Post by jliptzin »

wredcoll wrote: post #39
SoftTalker wrote: post #21

It's also the optimal age to have children. Fertility is highest, the woman is likely healthy and strong, lowest risk of complications.

Aside from the part where you have to raise them, sure.

If everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#44

Post by drakonka »

davidelettieri wrote: post #25

Having done IVF with my wife I think this is the most underrated fertility advice available today. I don't understand why governments of countries with increasing average age and low birth rate don't pay for this for all women. This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented.

Most 19 year olds probably wouldn't opt into injecting themselves twice a day for weeks and dealing with the side effects of the injections, then the subsequent extraction procedures (likely for multiple rounds) even if it was paid for. Which is reasonable, considering most women who want children will have them without IVF and don't need to go through any of that.

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#45

Post by delfinom »

stavros wrote: post #36
SoftTalker wrote: post #21

It's also the optimal age to have children. Fertility is highest, the woman is likely healthy and strong, lowest risk of complications.

It's also the optimal age to not have children! You're still figuring out your life, probably no stable partner or job, time to do some stuff you'll regret later, etc.

Biological optimal vs societal optimal.

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#46

Post by [deleted] »

Aurornis wrote: post #42
davidelettieri wrote: post #25

Having done IVF with my wife I think this is the most underrated fertility advice available today. I don't understand why governments of countries with increasing average age and low birth rate don't pay for this for all women. This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented.

> This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented Hard disagree on that. You're coming from an angle of someone who wanted to have kids and do it in a mathematically optimal way. A lot of people see egg freezing as a way to delay having kids until they're older, which can become a disincentive to raising families when they're young and healthy enough to do it. If you want a pro-family policy, you sho…

[deleted]

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#47

Post by moralestapia »

drakonka wrote: post #44
davidelettieri wrote: post #25

Having done IVF with my wife I think this is the most underrated fertility advice available today. I don't understand why governments of countries with increasing average age and low birth rate don't pay for this for all women. This is one the best pro-family policies that can be implemented.

Most 19 year olds probably wouldn't opt into injecting themselves twice a day for weeks and dealing with the side effects of the injections, then the subsequent extraction procedures (likely for multiple rounds) even if it was paid for. Which is reasonable, considering most women who want children will have them without IVF and don't need to go through any of that.

Thanks for bringing in some common sense.

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#48

Post by Aurornis »

This is an article that you need to read critically, beyond the headline.

Even a few paragraphs down they say this:

> The optimal age to freeze eggs varies depending on the source and metric, but almost all sources agree it's sometime between 19 and 26.

So there's some heavy bias inserted already into the title.

The next chart shows a peak around 19, but if you read the fine print it's not a chart about eggs at all. The subtitle says it shows:

> probability of getting pregnant for couples not on birth control

Not the quality of eggs frozen. They're saying one thing in text and showing a chart of something else. If you can't imagine why couples in their early 20s might have a higher rate of pregnancy than couples in their 50s then you might want to think a little deeper about the factors that go into that.

The writeup then goes into polygenic embryo screening, which then jumps to improving IQ by selecting embryos, which gets to their final argument which is that it's easier to collect more eggs when younger. So freezing a lot of eggs when you're younger allows for more boosting of your child's IQ through genetic screening based on a company called Herasight's data. Herasight has been widely criticized for overselling their abilities. Also, why do so many rationalist writeups end up back at a conversation about genetics and IQ?

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#49

Post by bad_haircut72 »

jliptzin wrote: post #43
wredcoll wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the part where you have to raise them, sure.

If everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats

Peoples 40s and 50s are their most productive years. We would be better off just letting people take 10 years off in their twenties - but most people would just party party party (what they do anyway)

Re: The optimal age to freeze eggs is 19

#50

Post by mfitton »

jliptzin wrote: post #43
wredcoll wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the part where you have to raise them, sure.

If everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats

And then you end up raising your grandkids instead of the kids you gave birth to. It's not something that comes without cost. And what if you don't particularly trust your parents to raise kids? I suppose you would have no idea whether you did or not, because they would not have parented you...
Post reply on HN