... maybe people should adopt. Going through ten gadzillion expensive medical procedures and then running a risk of having a litter of kids seems a bit extreme when there are plenty of unwanted children out there already.

the tone of this post. Do you think that newspapers shouldn't report on scientific studies linking stress and fertility issues? Don't you think that this information could be helpful to women who are undergoing IVF -- that there are maybe stress-reduction techniques that they can employ that would improve their chances of getting pregnant?

And what's with the agricultural analogies at the beginning of the piece? I find it somewhat difficult to imagine that most women who willingly undergo fertility treatments liken themselves to chickens and farm fields.

I'm with you, Carol, on not unloading a pile of psychobabble on women. The "blame the patient" mentality of some of the health "gurus" is ridiculous, and burdensome.

Suggesting that someone who has a thyroid problem, for example, because she is unable to express herself vocally, is unfortunate. (Yoohoo, paging Caroline Myss...)

That said, reproduction is a physiological process. And the endocrine system, which includes the reproductive system, also includes the adrenal glands, which produce stress hormones.

If a woman is excessively stressed -- whether physically and/or emotionally -- she is likely to produce excessive amounts of stress hormones -- we know them as adrenaline or cortisol. When the body is busy producing those stress hormones, it's diverting its limited hormonal production capabilities away from producing SEX hormones -- DHEA, and ultimately, estrogen and progesterone -- which are essential for fertility, pregnancy and gestation. The stress and sex hormones are produced via the same pathway.

I agree with you that we don't need more self-consciousness, or "it's your fault" logic heaped on women -- especially those already struggling with infertility. But "stress" -- by the medical definition -- is a very real, very potent factor in a number of conditions and illnesss. Not in a "hey, you're a hysterical woman and it's in your head" way -- but in a real, physiological, hormonal way.

Frankly, I'm glad to see doctors acknowledging this part of the equation. Doctors are already too quick to rush women off to the VERY costly (and profitable) IVF or assisted reproduction clinics, before they even establish the bread-and-butter basics, such as a woman's sufficient and balanced estrogen, progesterone, testosterone and thyroid levels, and absence of autoimmune antibodies.

When you're spending thousands of dollars a month -- and a lot of psychic capital -- to try to get pregnant, you need everything possible at your disposal to up your odds of conceiving successfully. So, if doctors know that chronic stress has a negative impact on IVF success, women DESERVE to know.

Mary Shomon

Author of Thyroid Hormone Breakthrough: Overcoming Sexual and Hormonal Problems at Every Age

I understand that there is a fair basis of social injustice towards women which adds merit to such a gut reaction, but when it comes to science- especially the ridiculously complicated biochemical conditions required for successful implantation of a zygote- some care should be taken to think first about what is being said.

In this case, IVF epidemiological data that was scientifically accrued and analysed by what I would assume is a somewhat qualified physician led to a thoroughly logical conclusion. For those without a biochemistry background lets review: the sole purpose of life- the natural motivation of all living creatures- is to survive and to reproduce, this is what women's bodies are for, ( biologically speaking). The milleniums-long process of evolution resulted in the most complex life forms on the planet, infinitely complex beings, designed through the infinitely complex natural development of evolution, for the sole purpose of ensureing the survival of their children. Advancing life removed eggs from the dangerous outside world to the safe womb, forever tying mothers to their children. Families were formed and social contracts imagined into being, societies grew around the purpose of protecting women and their children.

And yes, those societies eventually became corrupted by the evil in people, and the noble purpose of protecting women was twisted and mutilated by the arrogance, insecurity, and self-importance of men. So I understand the authors reaction to this study but you have to stop first, and gain perspective, before your knee jerks your pen into action. The most crucial, complex biochemical process of creating life- inside the most complicated life form- is going to be, suprise, complicated! Feelings and emotions control everything from heartrate and blood-oxygegn levels and diet, to the all important biochemical cocktail of hormone levels and signalling pathways that are necessary for successful impregnation.

These things are complicated, so we must rely on science, logic, and reason; to discount and decry a study that could help women achieve the dream of having a child of their own is irresponsible and discourteous. So please, sit back, take a deep breath, and gain some perspective.

Absolutely! pro-life zealots take note- if you are not willing to sustain the lives we already have with us, it is illogical, irrisponsible, and immoral, to perpetuate their legacy by forcing more unwanted pregnancies into a world incapable of caring for them. I know you want a child of your own, that is natural, but you cannot then turn around and try to impose your selective morality onto others perhaps not as fortunate as you. Out of all the women who consider abortions, do you think there are none who would love to have and raise their children? you may call them irrisponsible for getting pregnant in the first place, but does it help the situation to demand they act even more irrisponsibly, just to teach them a lesson?? How many of those women would do anything to have the massive ammounts of money some women spend on fertility medicine? How many froth-at-the-mouth right-to-lifers do I NOT see all over the media screaming protest against inaction in Darfur? Selective morality may work for some, and in this country they are welcome to it, but it is not sufficiently just to merit any serious political attention.

...But if I were, I imagine that I'd rather know that I had some positive control over the situation then feel like I was simply at the mercy of the doctors and the procedures. What's so wrong about encouraging women to talk about their feelings with friends and work towards being happy? Of all the detailed instructions women in this position are given, being stress-free and happy is one I have trouble criticizing.

I see your point about how it could be turned around, and if fertilization doesn't work, the woman could be blamed for not having an adequate emotional reaction to the process. But this also seems like common healthy sense to me -- try to relax, try to take care of yourself and be happy. Pregnant women are told this all the time.

Maybe if the study were phrased in a more (potential) mother-focused way and less as an ingredient for a successful medical procedure it wouldn't rub folks the wrong way.