Skip to main content

Ingram Publishing/Thinkstock

A new study by researchers from Harvard says that ovaries may be capable of producing new eggs, a discovery which, if true, overturns the long-held belief within the scientific community that a woman is born with a limited number of eggs.

"Our current views of ovarian aging are incomplete. There's much more to the story than simply the trickling away of a fixed pool of eggs," the study's lead researcher, Jonathan Tilly of Harvard's Massachusetts General Hospital, told Time magazine.

Special stem cells in ovaries are capable of generating new eggs, according to the study, published in the journal Nature Medicine.

Story continues below advertisement

"We've isolated, essentially, the female equivalent of the stem cells that we know exist in men that actively make new sperm. So having these cells now isolated, I think, opens up a lot of opportunities to consider that we simply couldn't fathom before," Dr. Tilly told Voice of America.

Indeed, fertility experts such as Allan Pacey from the University of Sheffield have said the study's findings "re-write the rule book." Dr. Pacey told the BBC that the study "opens up a number of exciting possibilities for preserving the fertility of women undergoing treatment for cancer, or just maybe for women who are suffering infertility by extracting these cells and making her new eggs in the lab."

In the study, researchers isolated the rare cells from ovaries and placed them in culture outside the body. Over a period of several months, those 100 or so cells were made in to hundreds of thousands of such cells and, as Dr. Tilly told Voice of America, "We noticed that these cells would spontaneously generate immature eggs, all on their own, in these cultures."

While the study's findings, if true, are a major change in our understanding of human fertility, independent experts have cautioned that the cells are "some way" from any potential clinical use.

Report an error
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading…

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.