Our Review Summary
Getting pregnant is harder than most women realize, but that doesn’t mean that if it takes time, there is something wrong that must be treated or dealt with. Furthermore, conception is a serendipitous process that isn’t fully under our control, although you wouldn’t know that from the myriad of products available. In the US, fertility treatment is a big business.
This story describes one type of supplement for fertility support that includes a wide variety of ingredients. The story quotes many of the claims made on the company’s website but injects some amount of healthy skepticism.
This relatively short story includes valuable information, such as the availability and cost of the supplements. It provides details on one study evaluating the supplement but could have commented on whether these results have been validated by other studies. It quantifies the results of that one study but is careful not to make claims that the supplements improve fertility by X or Y%, which is appropriate given how small the study was.
The story quotes more than one expert, one who works for the company and one who does not. This independent source is crucial in this story and provides much-needed perspective.
The story could have been improved by describing alternative options, other than to "see a doctor". For example, monitoring ovulation, quitting smoking and drinking, maintaining a healthy weight and managing stress and depression may help. Furthermore, the story does not mention any harms of the supplement, known or unknown. Even if the harms are not known, the story should have highlighted that. Side effects of chasteberry, an active ingredient in the supplements, can include nausea, headaches, GI disturbances, and menstrual cycle irregularities.
Criteria
Satisfactory
The story clearly states the cost of the supplements.
Satisfactory
The story quantifies the results of the one small study but is careful not to make claims that the supplements improve fertility by X or Y%
Not Satisfactory
The story does not mention any harms of the supplement, known or unknown. Even if the harms are not known, the story should have highlighted that. Side effects of chasteberry can include nausea, headaches, GI disturbances, and menstrual cycle irregularities.
Satisfactory
The story provides details on one study using the supplement. The story could have commented on whether these results have been validated by other studies.
Satisfactory
The story rightly points out that conception is a "mysterious business" in that it is not fully understood nor do we have control over it. Most women take a while to get pregnant, even up to a year is not considered abnormal. However, the story could do women who are worried about this more of a service by reminding them that variation in time to conceive is normal and they should not run out and get supplements right away.
Satisfactory
The story quotes more than one expert, one who was involved with the study and one who was not. The independent source is crucial in this story.
Not Satisfactory
The story does not describe alternative options, other than to "see a doctor". For example, monitoring ovulation, quitting smoking and drinking, maintaining a healthy weight and managing stress and depression may help.
Satisfactory
The story clearly states that the supplements are available on the company website, though it isn’t clear whether they are available elsewhere.
Satisfactory
Clearly supplements for fertility are not a new idea.
Satisfactory
The fact that an independent source has a key voice in the story shows that it did not rely solely on a news release.
Total Score: 8 of 10 Satisfactory
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like