One of the issues that makes IVF and other forms of assisted conception so controversial is the debate that rages around its success rate.
Opponents argue that this is not great, given the financial cost and physical and emotional strains, and that it has not improved significantly over the years.
Often using out-of-date or badly presented data, bolstered with emotive horror stories, they will try to discredit a form of treatment which offers some women their only hope of achieving their life's ambition.
Supporters, on the other hand, will argue that the success rate of IVF is equivalent to that of nature - the only problem is that people do not understand how wasteful natural reproduction is in human beings.
While the figures can be convincing - an average conception rate of 20 to 25 per cent a cycle for the average couple doing it naturally, peaking at 33 per cent, and settling to five per cent a month - it is a bit of a disingenuous argument.
Natural conception is, after all, both free and usually pleasurable - which cannot be said of any of the forms of assisted conception.
Even for those people who do not find the treatment a strain there is inevitably a financial, physical or emotional limit to the number of attempts.
It's incredibly difficult when you are considering treatment to focus on success rates.
A lot of studies have found out that people tend to be very optimistic when starting out and often overestimate their chances of success.
Their optimism will stay with them throughout repeated treatment cycles, and even when they finally give up, many remain well disposed towards trying again.
One study found that more than a third of couples who had stopped IVF because it did not work for them would be prepared to try a newly developed form of assisted conception, provided the success rate was at least 20 per cent.
It is hard to imagine people volunteering for any other form of medical treatment on such a basis.
Increasingly the medical world is - realising that such optimism lays patients open to exploitation and places a heavy burden of responsibility on the professionals to refrain from taking advantage of it.
Opponents argue that this is not great, given the financial cost and physical and emotional strains, and that it has not improved significantly over the years.
Often using out-of-date or badly presented data, bolstered with emotive horror stories, they will try to discredit a form of treatment which offers some women their only hope of achieving their life's ambition.
Supporters, on the other hand, will argue that the success rate of IVF is equivalent to that of nature - the only problem is that people do not understand how wasteful natural reproduction is in human beings.
While the figures can be convincing - an average conception rate of 20 to 25 per cent a cycle for the average couple doing it naturally, peaking at 33 per cent, and settling to five per cent a month - it is a bit of a disingenuous argument.
Natural conception is, after all, both free and usually pleasurable - which cannot be said of any of the forms of assisted conception.
Even for those people who do not find the treatment a strain there is inevitably a financial, physical or emotional limit to the number of attempts.
It's incredibly difficult when you are considering treatment to focus on success rates.
A lot of studies have found out that people tend to be very optimistic when starting out and often overestimate their chances of success.
Their optimism will stay with them throughout repeated treatment cycles, and even when they finally give up, many remain well disposed towards trying again.
One study found that more than a third of couples who had stopped IVF because it did not work for them would be prepared to try a newly developed form of assisted conception, provided the success rate was at least 20 per cent.
It is hard to imagine people volunteering for any other form of medical treatment on such a basis.
Increasingly the medical world is - realising that such optimism lays patients open to exploitation and places a heavy burden of responsibility on the professionals to refrain from taking advantage of it.
SHARE
