Elective IVF gains traction. Doctors have concerns.

5 hours ago7 min read1 comments

The landscape of human reproduction is undergoing a seismic shift, moving from a paradigm of necessity to one of optimization. In vitro fertilization, once a medical intervention reserved for couples facing infertility, has exploded across America, with the number of babies born through assisted reproductive technologies—overwhelmingly via IVF—jumping a staggering 45% from 2013 to 2022.Yet, the most provocative frontier in this expansion is the rise of elective IVF, a still-small but rapidly growing segment where individuals capable of natural conception choose the arduous IVF pathway specifically to screen embryos for a vast array of genetic predispositions. This isn't merely about avoiding chromosomal abnormalities like Down syndrome through established PGT-A tests, or even rare single-gene disorders like Tay-Sachs via PGT-M.We are now entering the era of PGT-P—preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic conditions—a technology that leverages massive adult DNA databases to generate risk scores for an embryo’s likelihood of developing everything from Alzheimer's and schizophrenia to Type 2 diabetes and arthritis. This represents a fundamental leap from diagnosing clear-cut genetic errors to predicting probabilistic futures based on complex, multi-gene interactions, a science that remains deeply contested and ethically fraught.Companies like Nucleus Genomics are at the vanguard, marketing not just the promise of 'generational health' but also the selection of non-medical traits such as height, IQ, and even male-pattern baldness, framing it as a non-invasive software solution superior to postnatal interventions like human growth hormone. However, the scientific community is deeply divided.Experts like Dr. Ruth Lathi, an OB-GYN professor at Stanford, caution that the correlations between these polygenic scores and actual disease manifestation are not yet robust enough to warrant such profound medical decisions, warning that we risk falsely ranking or discarding embryos based on unproven data.The very premise of subjecting women to weeks of hormone injections, egg retrieval surgeries, and significant emotional and financial strain—a process that can cost tens of thousands of dollars—purely for the speculative benefit of polygenic screening, is described by many clinicians as introducing immense burden 'with no proven benefit. ' Beyond the clinical uncertainties, this technology forcefully reopens the perennial debate about 'designer babies,' pushing bioethicists like J.Benjamin Hurlbut to question the foundational nature of the parent-child relationship, warning that it risks transforming a bond that should begin with unconditional love and anticipation into one predicated on evaluation and selection. As we stand at this crossroads, the conversation is no longer confined to the ethics of selection but is rapidly converging with even more disruptive technologies, with scientists simultaneously developing and debating methods to directly edit the genes of human embryos, ensuring that the revolution in reproductive biotech is only just beginning.

#IVF

#embryo screening

#PGT-P

#designer babies

#ethics

#genetic testing

#lead focus news

Stay Informed. Act Smarter.

Get weekly highlights, major headlines, and expert insights — then put your knowledge to work in our live prediction markets.