Doctors Predict that Sex Will be "Unnecessary" in 10 Years for Baby-Having

Yes, you read it right. 10 years from now you won't have to be in sexual relationship to have a baby. Well... you will be in a 'relationship' with a fertility clinic... Instead of a male partner woman will choose in vitro-fertilization. Of course these scientist forget about the fact that the IVF is too expensive for most people and that the actual cost of money of one cycle is up to $15.000!!! This is absolutely cost-prohibitive for a lot, if not most people.

IVF is not easy as someone might think. It is not just inserting an embryo yeah right it is not. IVF involves a LOT OF WORK. A LOT. Starting with hormonal injections, and lots of visits to the doctor, and continuing with physical, and not to mention emotional trauma. And of course, let's not forget the fear (and possibility) of failure! Yes, it can fail after spending all that money, time, and after going through stress it can fail. Actually only 17% of cycles succeed. Not a very good score, don't you think?

So, what are you supposed to do? Go and hit another round? More precise statistics: 15% to 20% of women ages 38 to 40 conceive, while above 40 years old, the stats drop to 6%. Not good odds. Draw a line do you think that 10 years from today we won't have sex for baby-making? Oh, we will. I am sure we will. The scientists believe the IVF will hit almost 100% success rate. Oh, I hope it will. The problem is their predictions are based on the research of cattle I truly hope that the IVF success rate will reach 100% - I would be more than happy if it would hit 50%, if you ask me. But I really doubt that IVF and poking with needles will replace a massage, romantic dinner, candlelit and lovemaking. What do you think?