Pride Angel

Sperm donor websites are increasing in popularity with many people searching for a sperm donor or co-parent online. Are they a health risk or a personal choice which could benefit the future of any future children?

There has been a lot of bad press recently in light of the two businessmen Nigel Woodforth and Ricky Gage, charged for not having a licence to procure gametes. The pair acted as ‘sperm brokers’ aiding in the transport and testing of sperm. They enabled anonymous donation and put women’s health at risk by organising health screening. This has brought to the attention the increased popularity of sperm donor websites which effectively connect donors and recipients looking for sperm.

Sperm donor or co-parenting websites are not required by law to be regulated, as long as they are simply bringing people together, not acting as intermediaries in the way that the two recently convicted were doing. When a site is purely a connection service a women is able to make her own choice about whether she wishes to protect her heath and legal rights by taking the donor to a regulated fertility clinic, or whether she feels that there is a level of trust sufficient for them to obtain the necessary health screening tests themselves, through a clinic, GP or GUM service. After which recipients may decide to choose home insemination as a method of conception. This later option is more applicable to co-parenting situations whereby the donor and recipient have got to know each other over a period of time and there are legal co-parenting agreements in place before proceeding.

Women wish to have choices about how they will conceive and should they not have the freedom to make those choices without regulatory constraints. The emphasis should therefore not be about removing such choices, but instead about educating individuals so that they are fully informed about any risks they are taking, enabling them to make better informed decisions, which are right for their personal circumstances and their potential child.

There has been a social and cultural shift in recent times, towards women wishing to meet a known donor. Some may say this is because of high fertility costs, or maybe the ‘shortage of donors’ or could it be that women are actually thinking of their children’s future and that they would far rather personally meet a like minded individual, who is happy to stay in touch as an ‘uncle type’ figure, rather than for their child to always long to meet an unknown donor as they grow up. There has been much research and evidence which has shown that children who know the identity of their donor and know the truth about their conception from an early age are more secure with their identity as they become adults.

The change to the anonymity law, is a good thing for donor conceived children allowing them to trace the identity of their donor at age 18, however we are still to really discover the effect this will have on the thousands of children who may be wanting to meet their biological father in the future. They may find that the donor is simply not interested in being contacted. There is also the worry that the donor may not be the kind of person the mother would wish for their child to meet, after all, she may have only received basic details such as height and eye colour, by which to choose her donor originally. There is also the real concern of genetic attraction which especially affects parents and children who have never met before adulthood. The effect of this could be potentially catastrophic.

When these effects do come to the forefront in the year 2023, 18 years after the new law was introduced in 2005, will it be decided that children where better off not really getting this information? Would it not therefore be far better for donor conceived children to have known of their donor from the beginning?

So what is the answer, surely to give people the option of finding a known donor or co-parent and for the authorities to work together with sperm donor websites to ensure that enough information is available to their users regarding health screening and the legal implications allowing the ability for them to source accessible and affordable fertility treatment?

A spokesman for the HFEA has pointed out that it is the health risks of not using a fertility clinic which concerns them most. Therefore they are advising people to only use sperm donor websites which direct their users to a licensed clinic, ensuring that complete health screening is completed and that a record of the donor’s name is kept on file.

Pride Angel the leading worldwide connection site primarily aimed at the gay and lesbian community is the only website dedicated to providing quality information regarding health screening and fertility law. Erika co-founder of Pride Angel stated ’all our profiles are continually screening to ensure users are not offering ‘natural insemination’ or requesting an ‘anonymous’ donor. Nor is payment for donations allowed to be offered or requested.’ ‘We also offer email support for users requiring help and further information.’ ‘Users should never consider using a donor who offers natural insemination, even if they offer artificial insemination as well. The health risks of such ‘promiscuous’ donors is too great’.

‘We have had so many people thank us for the service we provide, without which co-parenting arrangements would not happen and many lesbian couples and gay men would not have the chance to experience the joys of parenthood.’ says Erika

For more information regarding finding a co-parent, health screening and fertility law visit www.prideangel.com

Breastfeeding children for six months can ward off common infections during infancy, further evidence suggests.

The findings showed babies brought up exclusively on their mother's milk were significantly more healthy than those given substitute formula feeds.

But the study found the positive effects - fewer and less severe infections - were not felt by children who were only partially breastfed.

Researchers from the University of Crete monitored the health of just under 1,000 infants for a period of 12 months. They recorded any common infections they had at one, three, six, nine and 12 months, which included respiratory and urinary infections, ear infections, stomach upsets, conjunctivitis and thrush.

The infants, drawn from a total of 6,878 births in 2004 in Crete, were routinely vaccinated and had access to a high standard of healthcare.

Researchers found the longer an infant was exclusively breastfed - with no substitute formula feeds - the lower the rate of infection.

Any infections they did pick up were less severe than those experienced by their peers who were either partially breastfed or not breastfed at all.

Factors such as parental age and education, exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, ethnicity and number of siblings influenced the frequency of infections, the findings showed.

Meanwhile, researchers concluded that antibodies passed on through the mother's milk, as well as nutritional and immunological factors, accounted for some of the differences observed.

In an article which appears in the BMJ's Archives of Disease in Childhood they conclude: 'Exclusive breastfeeding helps protect infants against common infections and lessens the frequency and severity of infectious episode not only in developing countries but also in communities with adequate vaccination coverage and healthcare standards.'

Janet Fyle, Professional Policy Advisor at the Royal College of Midwives, said the findings were further evidence of the 'many benefits of breastfeeding'.

'We know that breastfeeding is the default method of infant feeding for babies; good for mothers and good for the health of the nation,' she said.

'That is why we need to continue our efforts to ensure that we maintain a high rate of breastfeeding in the UK, particularly among those women with low rates.'

But she said more needed to be done to tackle the perceived "stigma" attached to breastfeeding.

'As a nation we need to look at the issues that militate against mothers breastfeeding for longer, such as the workplace, and facilities for mothers to breastfeed when they are out and about,' she added.

'The UK needs to see breastfeeding as a normal process, and to move away from some of the outdated and negative stigma that is depressingly still attached to it, specifically breastfeeding in public.'

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), human milk is the most suitable food for newborn and young infants and exclusive breastfeeding for at least the first six months of life is recommended.

Article: 28th September 2010 www.dailymail.co.uk

Breastfeeding? looking for support, why not visit Pride Angel Forum

After much soul-searching, I have finally come out of the closet. It was pointless denying it any longer. Judging by the sniggers and knowing looks, everyone ­probably knew already. So I just came out with it: ‘I want a baby.’

I want to cradle the little mite in my arms. I want sleepless nights and ­afternoons in the park. I want to spend a small fortune every Christmas and moan about house prices in school catchment areas. In short, I’m broody.

I’ve felt this way for a few years — even before my two-year-old niece Ruby came along and melted my heart — but it’s not something I felt comfortable talking about beyond my close circle of friends.

In fact, for a long time I didn’t even admit it to myself. The sad truth is, there’s still a social taboo against men expressing their longing for parenthood.

It’s fine for us to say we’d love to have children ‘some time in the future’ and it’s perfectly acceptable, even cool, to be a doting dad once they’re born, but it’s somehow unmanly for us actively to yearn for a child of our own.

But when little Ruby was born, I found her so adorable that I had to confess to my brother that I wanted one as well. And I had to choose my words carefully when I discussed my feelings with my 32-year-old girlfriend Jennie. We’ve only been together for eight months, so it’s a bit early for a full-on baby conversation. Luckily, she didn’t scarper when I told her about my broodiness. She is keen to have kids one day, too.

Of course, being a woman — instead of a 34-year-old man — Jennie is much more up to speed with her ideas about ­motherhood. Broodiness is natural ­territory for thirty-something women. The female biological clock is brutal and unforgiving.

Unlike men, who produce new sperm every day, women are born with all the eggs they will ever have, about two million. By the age of 30, almost 90 per cent of them have been released. By 40, there are, on average, just three per cent left to play with.

The emotional consequences of missing that biological deadline have been well documented as more women risk waiting longer to find the perfect partner or climb the career ladder.

Male baby angst is less talked about. The common assumption is that men are in no rush to give up their freedom and settle down. They are nagged and cajoled, and sometimes duped, into fatherhood, rather than choosing it for themselves.

Mothers are still seen as the main ­carers in the family, but new evidence suggests that men can be just as gooey-eyed as women when it comes to babies. Researchers have found that men have exactly the same emotional reaction as women — measured by blood pressure, heart rate and skin temperature — when presented with smiling or crying babies.

Other studies have highlighted men’s positive attitudes towards fatherhood. Some 93 per cent of men questioned in one recently said their role as a father was the most important in their lives.

Meanwhile, a survey by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy in the U.S. found that young men are more likely to be ‘pleased’ by an unexpected pregnancy than young women. My own baby hunger has not led me to such extremes. It has come as a gradual awakening, not a sudden, impulsive ­craving.

I had three serious relationships during my 20s, but marriage and ­children were never on the cards. I was too busy doing all the things you’re supposed to do before ­settling down and being a grown-up — travelling, partying and enjoying the freedom of being child-free.

Like many men, I sailed through my 20s unburdened by even the faintest ticking of a biological clock. The number of new dads in their 20s has almost halved since 1974, while the number waiting until their late 30s or early 40s to start families has doubled.

It’s not difficult to see why men might be complacent, with so many examples of wrinkly dads such as Paul McCartney, a father at 61, and Rod Stewart, who is expecting his eighth child shortly after he turns 66 next March.

But there is worrying ­evidence that men should start thinking more about their own biological clocks. The latest research shows male fertility begins to dip at 30 and by the age of 45 it takes up to five times longer for a man to get his partner pregnant.

Another study found that when ­couples fail to conceive, male infertility is just as likely as female ­infertility to be the ­problem.

For men over 35, there is also an increased risk of their babies being born with Down’s syndrome or developing other conditions such as schizophrenia and autism.

Article: 27th September 2010 by Dave Mills www.dailymail.co.uk

Check your sperm count with our Fertilcount male sperm count test

The UK's fertility regulator is on a Government 'hitlist' of quangos facing abolition, according to a letter leaked this week. The letter, dated 26 August, supposedly from Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude to other ministers lists the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) among 177 quangos due to be axed.

BioNews reported two months ago that the HFEA could be split up following the publication of a Government review of health Arm's Length Bodies (ALBs). 'There isn't anything new in this news story compared to two months ago and we'd like to reassure patients that they will continue to receive regulation', a HFEA spokesperson told BioNews.

Baroness Deech, former HFEA Chair, reiterated that the leaked letter was no surprise on Friday morning's BBC Today programme. 'It was trailed and it's aroused great dismay', she said.

HFEA Chair Lisa Jardine responded to news of the leaked letter on BBC News this afternoon saying the HFEA would 'hold the line' until someone took over its functions. 'We will keep doing that work until someone else takes over. Without that you're going to have things that the government fears and the public fears - things like human admixed embryos, which have human material in as well as animal material'.

The HFEA's functions will be split three ways when it's finally 'dismantled', Lisa Jardine told the BBC. 'It is proposed that our regulatory functions will go to a beefed-up Care Quality Commission (the health and social care regulator) and there should be a new regulatory body for science research', she said.

'The work we do on regulating licensing research based on embryonic tissue - anything that's based on human tissue - might go into this new body, but that would require primary legislation so we're looking at two, three years on that. Our information might go to the big government information bank, but I think that's a red herring because our information is so sensitive - parenting of donor-conceived children and all that'.

Baroness Deech also highlighted the importance of the HFEA's role and lamented the regulator's fate: 'This is one (quango) that deals with new life, new baby life and health and very important ethical and medical matters', she said.

'It only costs £5 million and it is not taxpayers' money, most of that £5 million comes from the patients', she said. 'By the time you've made fresh arrangements for, for example, protecting the database holding all the names of anonymous fathers and treatments, you won't save anything at all'.

'And at the same time, you'll be harming the worldwide reputation of the HFEA. The HFEA's guardianship has allowed the UK to become a world leader in stem cell research'.

'A Commons and Lords Scrutiny Committee looked at this issue three years ago and concluded we had to have a HFEA', she said. 'But it attracts jealousy and misunderstanding'.

'There's a certain swashbuckling faction of doctors who don't want anyone interfering. On the extreme right-wing as well, there's a faction who don't want any work on embryos at all'.

John Parsons, a retired gynaecologist who will write a comment piece for Monday's BioNews about the HFEA's future, agreed with Baroness Deech. He told BioNews: 'I think the HFEA has been crucial in the development and acceptance of IVF in this country and it would be a terrible loss to the assisted conception sector'.

'I don't know why people have been so negative about it, but I guess doctors don't like people looking over their shoulder'.

BioNews has published several comment pieces about the demise of the HFEA in recent weeks, presenting different views about the merits of abolition and questioning whether it will happen at all.

The Cabinet Office has launched a leak inquiry following press coverage of the letter, according to a BBC News report, and says it regrets any 'uncertainty' caused to quango employees.

Article:24th September 2010 www.bionews.org.uk

Read more about the HFEA

Some are having children almost two years beyond the point they anticipated while an intended family size of at least two children has not, on average, proved a reality.

The effective baby gap was last night attributed to increasing numbers of women taking on careers, households not being able to afford large families or just not being able to find the right partner.

The average childbearing age in Britain now stands at 29.3 years, the highest level since records began in 1938, a study for the Office for National Statistics said.

Between 1991 and 2007, the research asked women how many children they intended to have and found they consistently gave a higher rate than the actual average fertility rate throughout that period.

The intended family size ranged between 2.0 and 2.16 children per woman when the actual fertility rate was around 0.3-0.4 children per woman lower until 2001, after which the gap narrowed slightly.

Women also expected, on average, to have their first child at a younger age than actually proved to be the case.

Those aged 22-25 in 1991/94 expected to give birth within 3.9 years – the actual average wait was 4.5 years.

For women aged 30-33, the anticipated two-year wait for a first child became 3.5 years on average.

Overall, the figures revealed there was a degree of uncertainty about fertility intentions for women throughout their childbearing years, including a significant minority of women who did not make firm decisions about future childbearing, the study said.

It was undertaken by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Centre for Population Change at the University of Southampton.

The report suggested the gap could be due to "change with age due to learning, altered preferences associated with the experience of childbearing, competition with other activities, retrospective rationalisation and a variety of constraints including fecundity, housing, economic factors, difficulties in partnership formation, partner preferences, as well as period influences".

Anastasia de Waal, the director of family and education for the think tank Civitas, said: "With education opportunities being much better now for women, many are going in to higher level professions and become higher status and therefore have to be careful about when they leave the workforce to have a child."

She added there was also a strong economic link either because most households now needed both people working or because families had to balance wanting a large family with how much it will cost to raise one.

Article: 23rd September 2010 www.telegraph.co.uk

Looking for a sperm donor or co-parent? visit www.prideangel.com

Take a Break have recently covered an article revealing sperm donors who offer natural insemination (or sexual intercourse) to single and lesbian women. Their investigation into unregulated sperm donors gets deeper.

Take a Break tracked them down on Britain’s top social network Facebook. The group is called ‘Help Find Suitable FREE Sperm Donors in the UK’. Also other groups called ‘Lesbian Seeking Sperm’ and an online group ‘Support Sperm Donation’.

Sperm donors revealed include:
Rod, of Liverpool
Describes himself as: Donor from near Liverpool, looking for other couples and singles to help, 6ft 3” tall, slim build, blue eyes, brown hair, clean, professional.
Requests: assisted artificial insemination (with a helping hand)

Leroy 43, Eastbourne, East Sussex.
Member of 10 Facebook sperm donation groups
Requests: natural insemination

Dave, 31, near Seattle, USA
Member of online group ‘Need a sperm donor to complete our family’
Requests: natural insemination

Derek, 36, Northampton
Member of online group ‘Lesbian Seeking Sperm’
Derek says: I am a 36 year old sperm donor based in Northamptonshire UK. If you would like to get in touch to discuss any requirements you may have or any questions please get in touch and we can decide if I am suitable to help.
Requests: natural insemination

Alan, 36, Manchester
Requests: natural insemination

Andrew, Cambridge
Member of the online group ‘Support Sperm Donation’
Andrew says: How much can I earn donating sperm? I have a lot of spare time on my hands. I think this would be an enjoyable/profitable way to prevent my boredom.
Requests: natural insemination

Giwrgos, 26, Athens, Greece
Requests: natural insemination
Giwrgos says: I only donate to people who are not able to have kids. All the rest pay a heavy fee of 2000euros. Prices normally go from 12K-50K. In some cases even 100K. It’s better to come with cash, however we will get you 100 per cent pregnant before we have to exchange anything.

Pride Angel
Pride Angel is the only connection site to continually monitor member’s profiles and acts upon all ‘report abuse’ comments, to help provide a safer site for connecting genuine sperm donors and co-parents. Sperm donors must abide by the following items within our ‘Code of Conduct’:

Donors must not offer natural insemination to recipients
Donors must not request payment for donations (other than reasonable expenses)
Donors must not donate to numerous women

Suspect a sperm donor? Report them!
Any member who suspects that any of the above sperm donors are offering their services within Pride Angel, or any other sperm donors are breaking the 'Code of Conduct' are requested to report them using the ‘Report Abuse’ button.

www.prideangel.com

Two businessmen Nigel Woodforth 43 and Ricky Gage 49 face jail after being convicted of running an illegal fertility company. They made £250,000 by acting as 'sperm brokers' and intermediaries through their online operation Fertility 1st. The pair introduced would be donors to nearly 800 women who were desperate to conceive - who were charged over £500 for the privilege.

The men were reported to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) after one of their clients complained about their unprofessional standards.

Unlike any other introductory site, Fertility 1st directly paid sperm donors and charged women for the donations. They also kept the donors details anonymous as the women and the donors did not need to meet or exchange any personal details. Instead Fertility 1st arranged for the fresh sperm to be couriered to the recipients house for home insemination.

The sperm brokers claimed to have tested the sperm donors for infections such as HIV, but there could be no assurance that the tests where actually up to date, and that the donors had not had unprotected sex in the meantime, thus putting the health of these women as risk of infections such as HIV, hepatitis and syphilis. There was also no proof that the sperm was actually from the right donor.

Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, donors using licensed clinics are not the legal fathers of any child conceived. However they are classed as parents if the centre has no licence.

Without licensed treatment, a child does not have the legal guarantee that they would be able to find out who their father is later in life, nor can they access his genetic history.

The HFEA said: "Certain internet-based businesses claim to be merely an introductory service whereby recipients and donors are put in touch with one another and thereafter make their own arrangements. The HFEA is aware that some of these businesses, however, do not allow direct contact between recipient and donor. Under the act this is an element of procurement and therefore required to be licensed."

Websites who act as purely introduction services, allowing potential donors and recipients to meet, are not required to be licensed.

Unfortunately sperm brokers such as Fertility 1st do give a bad name to online connections services, many of which do help to bring people together in a positive way, enabling co-parenting arrangements and genuine donors who wish to stay in contact with any child. For example a lesbian couple being able to co-parent with a gay couple can have such a positive effect for the child's identity.

Pride Angel, the leading parenting connection site welcomes the decision of the court regarding 'Fertility 1st'. Erika Tranfield co-founder of Pride Angel stated 'the broker service that these businessmen provided went against everything we at Pride Angel believe in'. 'We want to provide our users with the ability to find co-parents, who will be part of the child's life and do not agree with anonymous donation. We are also committed to advising our users about the health screening risks and legal implications of any co-parenting or donor arrangement.'

'In addition to this, Pride Angel has a strict 'Code of Conduct' for our users to abide by' and sperm donors agree to use HFEA regulated clinics for treatment. All our profiles our continually monitored and reviewed. No mention of natural insemination is permitted. No mention of anonymous donation is allowed, donors must not request payment for donations and recipients must not offer money to donors. We also restrict messages sent between users to prevent any donors over contacting or harassing women, unlike any other connection service'.

Pride Angel agrees that women must take care when choosing to use a online connection service to find a donor or co-parent. Once any recipient finds a genuine donor, they are advised to check their full identification, get legal advice and donor agreements in place, before going to an HFEA regulated fertility clinic for treatment.

For more information about finding a known donor or co-parent visit www.prideangel.com

Women who go through an early menopause could soon be given the chance to have children again thanks to a pioneering stem cell treatment. Scientists have come up with a way of restoring the ovaries' ability to produce eggs using cells specially developed in the lab.

The new technique offers hope for the thousands of women who go through menopause before the reach the age of 40, meaning they are unable to have children.

There is no current treatment for the condition, known as Premature Ovarian Failure, which affects 1 per cent of all women. It causes their ovaries to stop producing eggs 10 or even 30 years earlier than normal leaving them infertile, when many were hoping to have babies. But scientists in Cairo have come up with a method which they say could be developed to help restore the ovaries to their normal working order.

In a study involving rats, the researchers created a special type of stem cell known as a mesenchymal stem cell from rat embryos. They then implanted these cells into female rats who had been a chemical to induce ovarian failure.

They found that within two weeks the female rates ovaries were working normally, and within two months their hormone levels were the same as animals who did have the illness.

The researchers, who presented their findings to the World Congress on Fertility and Sterility in Munich, say the concept could be developed to treat women with the condition.

Professor Osama Azmy, who led the study, said: 'This work shows that Mesenchymal Stem Cells can restore ovarian function. The treated ovaries returned to producing eggs and hormones, and we could detect the presence of the stem cells within the newly functioning ovaries.

'What we have done is proven that we can restore apparently fully- functioning ovaries in rats. The next step is to look how these rats might reproduce, and to characterise the chromosomes of offspring following treatment.

'We have not yet reached the stage of producing offspring, and so we will need to understand if the baby rats will be genetically related to the mother, or to the donor of the stem cells.

'This is proof of concept, and there is still a long way to go before we can apply this to women. Nevertheless, this work holds out the possibility that women with premature ovarian failure might be able to bear a baby of their own.' Some women suffer from premature menopause, the other name for the condition, as early as 20.

Once their ovaries have stop producing eggs completely they cannot have children, even with the help of IVF. It is not clear what causes premature menopause to happen but it often occurs in those who were given chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatments for cancer earlier on in life.

Women who suffer from the condition are more at risk from general health problems associated with the menopause such as blood clots, osteoporosis and associated bone fractures and heart disease.

Article:15th September 2010 www.dailymail.co.uk

Read more about parenting, fertility, sperm donation and co-parenting at www.prideangel.com

Researchers have created the first artificial human ovary. The advance provides a potentially powerful new means for conducting fertility research and could also yield infertility treatments for cancer patients.

“An ovary is composed of three main cell types, and this is the first time that anyone has created a 3D tissue structure with triple cell line,” said Sandra Carson, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University in the US.

Carson said that the ovary not only provides a living laboratory for investigating fundamental questions about how healthy ovaries work, but also can act as a testbed for seeing how problems, such as exposure to toxins or other chemicals, can disrupt egg maturation and health, reports the Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

Clinically, the artificial ovary could play a role in preserving the fertility of women facing cancer treatment in the future, said Stephan Krotz, a Houston fertility doctor who is the paper’s lead author and a former fellow in Carson’s lab, said a Brown University release.

Immature eggs could be salvaged and frozen before the onset of chemotherapy or radiation, he said, and then matured outside the patient in the artificial ovary.

What makes the artificial ovary a functional tissue, rather than just a cell culture, is that it brings all three ovarian cell types into a 3D arrangement similar to a real ovary in the body.

The means for making such compositions of cells was invented in the lab of Jeffrey Morgan, associate professor of medical science and engineering, who is also a study co-author.

Article: 15th September 2010 www.thaindian.com

Read more about egg donation

A new technique for preserving sperm could offer men with low sperm counts, cancer, or viruses such as HIV the hope of fathering healthy children.

Experts found that fast-freezing sperm preserves its ability to swim towards an egg far more efficiently than the slow-freezing method currently in use.

The study, from experts in Chile and Germany, will be presented at the World Congress of Fertility and Sterility in Munich.

Current slow-freezing techniques mean the sperm only retains 30 to 40 per cent of activity. But rapid freezing - also known as vitrification - allows that figure to rise to almost 80 per cent.

Vitrification is already used to quick-freeze eggs and embryos with success, allowing spare ones to be used in IVF at a later date.

Following thawing, more eggs and embryos survive with vitrification than with older, slower cooling techniques.

In vitrification, cryopreservation agents are added to lower the water content in cells and prevent ice crystals building up.

In the latest study, plasma was separated and removed and the sperm placed in a sucrose solution before being plunged into liquid nitrogen to fast-freeze.

When sperm was rethawed in the study, it regained motility (77 per cent versus 29 per cent with slow cooling) and showed less damage.

The removal of plasma means HIV and other viruses can be removed, giving HIV positive men the chance of fathering a child without the likelihood of passing on the virus to mother or baby.

Men with a low sperm count and whose sperm is deteriorating in quality over time would also benefit from the technique.

Some men with low sperm counts fail to produce a good enough sample when it is time for IVF. The new technique could also allow several samples to be put together as one.

Lead researcher Professor Raul Sanchez, from La Frontera University in Chile, said: 'This work shows that we can preserve functional sperm via vitrification, which gives a greater chance of success for patients with low sperm counts.

'The other great advantage of this technique is that it can eliminate potential sources of infection such as Aids or hepatitis B, which are present in seminal plasma.

'It (also) has the potential to allow HIV positive men to have children without worrying about transmitting the virus.'

Ian Cooke, professor emeritus at Sheffield University and education director for the International Federation of Fertility Societies, said: 'This looks a very exciting technique as it is much faster than the conventional slow-freeze procedure.

'In addition, the prospect of use with HIV positive patients has great potential, although we'd want to confirm the absence of residual HIV in sperm samples before going ahead.'

Article: Monday 13th September 2010 www.dailymail.co.uk

Read more about our Fertilcount Male Sperm Count Test