Infertility has long been sidelined as a serious medical condition. One of the most damaging effects of this neglect has been a widespread lack of education. The resulting information vacuum has been filled with misinformation, outdated ideas, hearsay and second-hand anecdotes that too often substitute for evidence-based care. Nowhere is this more the case than with in vitro fertilization (IVF).
IVF is surrounded by myths that can mislead individuals as well as employers designing fertility benefits. Such misinformation has real consequences—it can push people toward the wrong treatment paths and lead to subpar employer benefit solutions that fail to deliver the best outcomes. We can do better. And those striving to build a family deserve better.
At Progyny, trust and education are at the core of what we do. By empowering our members with reliable clinically-validated knowledge, we help them make informed decisions and take the next step in their family-building journey—whether they require specialist care or not.
With trust and better outcomes as the goals, let’s cut through some of the noise and separate fact from fiction when it comes to IVF.
Myth #1: Most couples who seek fertility assistance are unable to conceive by any means other than IVF.
FACT: More than half of Progyny members with whom we engage never pursue IVF or other fertility treatment.
Most of us are taught how to avoid pregnancy—but few of us ever learn what it takes to conceive when we’re ready to build a family. That’s why many people struggling to conceive don’t need costly medical treatment—they need better education, coaching, and support.
At Progyny, every fertility journey starts with our preconception program which includes guidance from our Patient Care Advocates (PCAs), who provide personalized education and coaching to address individual needs. For many, this includes managing health factors like nutrition, weight, and stress or learning how to track ovulation cycles to help optimize efforts to conceive.
The result? More than half of Progyny members who engage with a PCA don’t ever need to pursue IVF or other fertility treatments. With the right knowledge and support, success often starts before stepping into a clinic.
Myth #2: For most people who are trying to get pregnant, intrauterine insemination (IUI) is as effective as IVF.
FACT: IUI is less invasive with lower up-front costs than IVF, but also generally less effective.
There’s no one-size-fits-all solution for infertility—and no single treatment path that works for “most people.” IVF and IUI, the two most common assisted reproductive approaches, each come with unique clinical justifications, success rates, risks, and costs. While IUI is less invasive and less expensive, it’s also far less effective when looking at a per treatment comparison, with IVF pregnancy rates shown to be up to 10 times higher per treatment.
Success rates and efficiency are critical, but other factors matter too. For example, IUI has higher rates of twins and higher-order multiples compared to single embryo transfer IVF. These pregnancies come with greater risks and significantly higher costs than singleton pregnancies. However, IUI may be the optimal and cost-effective first-line treatment for certain patients—for example, in the case of moderate to mild male factor infertility. Or for a woman in their early-to-mid 30s with unexplained infertility who has no significant medical history, regular cycles, and prefers fewer interventions.
What’s the best treatment path for any given patient? It’s always the one that:
- Meets the highest standard of clinical excellence.
- Is tailored to the individual’s medical history, health status, family-building goals, and personal beliefs.
- Maximizes the chance of success in a timely, safe, and cost-effective way.
Myth #3: Patients with infertility must fail IUI several times before needing IVF.
FACT: For some patients, proceeding directly to IVF is the safest and most effective path.
When separating IVF fact from fiction, it’s vital to distinguish carrier and program requirements from clinically validated best practices. Some carriers and programs may mandate that patients with unexplained infertility start with and fail lower cost treatments such as IUI before turning to IVF. But this “stepwise approach” isn’t always the best or only treatment path. In fact, there is growing recognition that such requirements may not always be in the best interest of patients and may short-circuit clinical decision-making—ultimately leading to higher costs for employers and members.
Why? With IUI, success rates decline with age and carry higher risks for multiple pregnancies. For some—especially women in their late 30s facing infertility, also dealing with male factor infertility, and/or carrying genetic mutations, proceeding directly to IVF can be more clinically sound and cost-effective.
Rigid, cost-driven benefit designs that dictate and enforce hard-and-fast requirements risk limiting clinical decision-making and increasing the likelihood of complications and avoidable costs. Whether IUI or IVF is the right first step should ultimately depend on the clinician’s informed judgment, prioritizing each patient’s unique needs.
Myth #4: IVM (in vitro maturation) is a lower-cost, more effective, and less invasive alternative to IVF.
FACT: For some patients IVM might offer a less medicated (but no less invasive) alternative to IVF. As with any infertility treatment, understanding IVM’s safety, efficacy, and value for member populations requires the expert collective knowledge of a trusted REI network
IVM (in vitro maturation) is a fertility treatment where immature eggs are harvested from the ovaries and matured in the lab. IVM protocols vary, ranging from no fertility medications to lower doses and fewer injections before egg retrieval. Unlike IVF, which uses hormonal injections to mature eggs in the body, IVM relies on lab maturation.
Recent media attention has sparked interest—and some misinformation—about IVM. Let’s set the record straight:
- Is IVM a new or experimental treatment?
While IVM has gained recent attention, it has been studied since the 1940s and hasn’t been classified as “experimental” by ASRM since 2019. However, it’s still not widely available in the US due to lower success rates, high attrition (from egg retrieval to live birth), and the need for specialized labs and expertise. - Is IVM less invasive than IVF?
Both IVF and IVM involve a minor surgical procedure to retrieve eggs. IVM may require fewer injectable medications, potentially reducing some side effects of hormonal treatments. - In which cases might IVM be an effective alternative?
Some studies indicate that IVM may benefit select patients with PCOS who haven’t succeeded with IVF or are at high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). However, advancements in IVF have significantly reduced OHSS risks with newer trigger medications. - Is IVM less expensive than IVF?
Not necessarily. Lower medication use in IVM may reduce costs, but if this yields fewer usable eggs and fewer embryos it may increase the need for repeat cycles, offsetting any up-front savings.
Empowered decisions rely on trusted guidance
The landscape of reproductive medicine is transforming at breakneck pace, with new advances making infertility treatment more personalized and effective than ever. For members and employers, however, this rapid change also makes it more difficult than ever to stay on top of trends and separate fact from fiction. As the myths dispelled above show, there is no single “right path” to parenthood. At Progyny we’re dedicated to supporting all paths to parenthood including preconception education and support, comprehensive smart cycle fertility care coverage, and individualized care through a large and actively managed network of clinicians. Whether it’s understanding the efficacy and appropriateness of IVF vs. IUI or the latest innovations and breakthroughs, the most updated knowledge and trusted guidance can be found in their collective insights.