WOMEN giving half their eggs away for cheaper IVF are disadvantaged (News, last week). In 25% of egg-sharing cycles the donors do not have a child, but at least 27% of the recipients do.

Now Newcastle has a licence for doing cloning research on eggs received from 15 volunteers, only four of whom will have a child, based on the (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority) HFEA’s data (News, last week), since potential children will be within the cohort donated for research.

The Declaration of Helsinki 1996 states that the interests of science should not override the interests of the individual. Why not only recruit volunteers who have completed their family? There is no conflict of interest.

I am surprised the research proposal was approved by the HFEA before the consultation process on using infertile women’s donated eggs for research was completed.

Professor Ian Craft
Director
London Fertility Centre, W1G

HIGHER BIRTH RATES: There is no evidence that women who donate eggs in egg-sharing infertility treatment schemes do any worse than those who receive them. Indeed they often produce higher birth rates than the recipients. In our own experience of 15 years, many egg-sharers are successful in the same egg collection cycle as the recipients. Our latest results involving 315 patients, between 2005-6, show pregnancy rates of 45% and 34% in sharers and recipients respectively. Results from the HFEA database and many published reports show comparable rates.

Following three public consultations by the HFEA since 1997, egg-sharing schemes are now offered by 47 licensed clinics in the UK. More than 10,000 women – donors and recipients – have received treatments since 1999 without waiting for NHS funds to become available. Between 2003-6, sharers in the UK outnumbered volunteer donors by 2:1 (3,568 against 2,078).

Instead of egg sharers being vulnerable pawns, women are protected by HFEA guidelines.

Dr Kamal Ahuja and E Simons
London Women’s Clinic, W1

Explore Letters

• Feedback