The programme was indeed focusedon the clinic we attend. They made a number of criticisms:
(1) A 26 year old woman should have been told to keep trying naturally for another year but was offered IVF.
This did not trouble us much as we know we need IVF. Another undercover patient with an identical profile was given correct advice.
(2) The “Immunological” approach that he favours was unproven.
The clinic believes that where, as with P and I, implantation difficulties exist, the answer may be that the embryo is triggering an immune response. There are no double-blind placebo tests proving this treatment.
The clinic is perfectly frank about the lack of clinical proof of effectiveness. It is a question that I raised directly with the doctor we consulted with. He gave us a speech which we heard twice repeated on the programme tonight the essential elements of which are:
(a) All new treatments are for a period unproven;
(b) It might take so long to prove your chance would be gone;
(c) It would unfair to couples desperate for a child to give them a placebo on what might be their last chance of conception; and
(d) Double-blind tests are all bollocks and you can always structure a test to prove or disprove whatever you want.
I described this approach to P after our consultation as “quackery” which is exactly what it is. My eyebrows pretty much vanished under my receding hairline when the doctor tried to discredit all clinical trials. However, the argument is effective because boiled down its says “Ok this may well be snake oil but look at our figures – can you really afford to walk away from the chance that it might work?” It is effective because it taps into the rich vein of utter desperation that brought you to their door in the first place.
I cannot complain about their honesty though. We knew what we were doing. Frankly, I’ve read enough about the placebo-effect to want to play a hand in its famous last chance saloon.
(3) Because the therapy, which involves transfusion of human antibodies, is untested and because those antibodies can reach the child, the therapy may place the embryo at risk.
The good Doctor T admitted that this did “worry” him. This did suprise us as we had no idea there was any such risk involved. We certainly had not consented to it. He went on to add, in essence,  that every treatment involves risk. The only point made to P had been that she had to be “comfortable” having human blood products transfused. She felt misled.
Again, to be scrupulously fair, we have encountered a failure to identify risks to us in other clinics so this practice is by no means unique.
(4) Before they start any immunological treatments you have a blood test that requires 18 vials of blood that are shipped to the States for analysis at a cost of £780 (about $1200).
The panel of experts that the BBC gathered to review the covertly obtained tapes opined that the test was entirely pointless. The blood was taken from “peripheral circulation” which, for the likes of you and me, means “the arm”. Apparently, there is little sensible relation between the blood in general circulation and that in the placenta. The analogy given was that it was like trying to count the number of black cabs in central London by looking at red cabs on the M25 (a large freeway that circles the outer edge of the city).
This is where I really began to growl. Our test results have just come back. It did not seem to me to be terribly likely that they were unaware of the difference in peripheral circulation and placental blood and this began to smack of fraud.
(5) Test Results misleading
The 26 year old was told that the test had shown abnormal levels and she would be best advised to have IVF whilst being treated with steroids and human antibody transfusions (at a cost of anything up to £10, 000 (about $15, 000) a cycle). A pathologist tested the blood samples and stated that they were entirely normal.
Either that was a very bad mistake or it was out and out fraud. Either way it does not encourage us to put any faith in our result: one somewhat raised level indicated a need for steriod treatment.
But at the end of the day, what about their figures? They have a 54% success rate which is by far and away the best in the country – hence Dr T being worth £38 million. Do we care how much mumbo jumbo is involved and how much cash we have to spend unnecessarily if they can deliver a baby?
The next point was little more than an insinuation: that the people with lower chances of success are shipped around the corner to a sister clinic which has substantially less stellar performance figures. Dr T felt that was unfair and that they had been the best even when there was only one clinic. Who know? But the attack on the figures kicked at the last prop and that prop fell out when it became apparent that the second clinic is unlicensed and that nevertheless, and in breach of the criminal law, he has continued to perform IVFs at that clinic. His argument was that he had many desperate patients that he could not in good conscience, turn them away. I am desperate but not so desperate that I need to pay a criminal a fortune.
Average Rating: 4.4 out of 5 based on 294 user reviews.