-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: !! From: Rafael Haciski MD (haciski@earthlink.net) Mon May 1 10:42:29 2000 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!" Previous message: james connerth: "Re: Fri: Re: IUFD IN U.S.A" Next in thread: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!" Reply: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!" Tell me what studies you are referring to and I will be glad to go over them point by point. My premise is not based on studies, but on theory: Known facts: There is an absolute need for progesterone - if we block the progesterone by RU-486, or simply remove the corpus luteum, the pregnancy is doomed to failure. It is quite reasonable to assume that there are naturally and spontaneously occurring situations when the progesterone drops below levels necessary for sustenance of the pregnancy, and not due to negative signal from the gestation itself. The premise simply is to prevent those situations: benefits include preventing miscarriage in those rare instances, and patient psychological well being, while the detriment is the cost and discomfort of using progesterone. Weigh those two and make a decision. Most patients choose to go with progesterone. R. Haciski. MD > From: john.robertson@obgyn.net (John Robertson MD) > Reply-To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net > Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:45:04 -0500 > To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@forum.obgyn.net> > Subject: Re: !! > > All the studies I have read show no improvement with the addition of > Progesterone. References please. John > > At Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Rafael Haciski MD wrote: >> >> And what insight gives you the knowledge that the pregnancy is "biologically >> doomed" and not caused by dropping progesterone levels/dailing corpus luteum >> function?? >> >> Why, is this not the premise behind RU-486 abortifacient? >> Is it not know that removing the corpus luteum in early pregnancy (thus >> removing the source of progesterone) leads to a spontaneous abortion? >> >> I think that such absolute dogmatism as you espouse in your note is without >> any justification. On the contrary, if there is suggestion that there may >> be a failing of the corpus luteum function, progesterone supplementation may >> eliminate it and possibly save the pregnancy. Certainly, it will not save a >> pregnancy that is failing from other cause, but the patient is well aware of >> that, and in no way deluded by false hope! >> >> -- >> Rafael Haciski, MD FACOG >> Gynecology and Infertility Associates >> Baltimore, MD >> 410-825-0020 >> web......http://www.IVF-MD.com >> e-mail..GIA@IVF-MD.com >> >>> From: Zach Newton <zbnewton@mindspring.com> >>> Reply-To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net >>> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:34:28 -0500 >>> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@forum.obgyn.net> >>> Subject: Re: OB: Recurrent Pregnancy Loss >>> >>> Garry Siegel wrote: >>> >>>> you think? >>> >>> I think that there is no scientific justification outside of IVF for the >>> common use of progesterone support for a biologically doomed conception. >>> >>> The cost of utilization resource and anguish derived from false hope >>> borne by the effected patient is factious. >>> >>> Zach Newton >>> Z. B. Newton, III, M.D. >>> Atlanta/Gyn >>> > > -- > J.G.M.Robertson MD, 109-9181 Main St. Chilliwack, B.C. V2P 4M9 > (604) 793-9988 e-mail john.robertson@obgyn.net > Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show it by his good life, > by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. James 3 vs 13, NIV > Next message: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!" Previous message: james connerth: "Re: Fri: Re: IUFD IN U.S.A" Next in thread: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!" Reply: Robert J Woolley: "Re: !!"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 04:46:29 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.