College Stock: Penny Stock News

One of the many reasons The Dean believes $IVOB will become a favorable IVF treatment all over the world is that the company’s INVO procedure is a more cost effective procedure when compared to common forms of IVF currently used.

A recent report from HealthDay News suggests that money woes are keeping many couples from turning to IVF to have a baby. The article also reports that many couples are being forced to destroy frozen embryos because they cannot afford the costs of storage.

At an annual meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) this week, some interesting facts were presented that The Dean believes could make $IVOB even more appealing to infertile couples and investors alike.

According to the research conducted by ASRM, 58% of infertile couples said they didn’t seek IVF treatment because its cost was too high. In addition, 7% of couples that had leftover embryos in storage had them destroyed—this number was 3 times greater between October 2008 and March 2009 than in the six months prior.

As The Dean has taught the CollegeStock Community, $IVOB‘s INVO procedure doesn’t produce “leftover” embryos and therefore doesn’t require the frozen storage of embryos. The Dean believes this $IVOB‘s methods reduce the number of ethical issues associated with IVF procedures because there are no embryos left to be destroyed.

$IVOB‘s INVO procedure allows for conception to take place inside the female patient so the added costs of creating a superficial “womb-like” environment in a lab is not attached to the infertile couple’s bill. The Dean believes this is significant because a single IVF cycles could cost anywhere from $9,000 to $15,000 in the United States and, as the CollegeStock Community has been made aware, multiple cycles are often required for the successful implantation of embryos—making that price tag more like $27,000 to $45,000.

The article also highlights another benefit of $IVOB‘s INVO procedure, claiming that one study, which followed 448 infertile couples in 8 different infertility centers, showed that 27% of women choose against IVF because the egg and sperm are combined in a lab and the resulting embryo develops outside of the woman’s body before being placed back inside the woman, whereas $IVOB‘s INVOcell device allows for conception to take place more naturally—inside the woman’s body.

The ASRM suggests that because insurance doesn’t cover assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in many states, most infertile couples are forced to take on the full cost of treatment. The Dean believes that a large reason IVF is not covered by the majority of insurance companies and governments is due to its high cost—so it would appear that IVF is a double-edged sword.

But The Dean believes that time will prove this isn’t the case with $IVOB.