Talk:Artificial insemination

message: The article is written from the standpoint that AI is a practise among humans; this is not strictly correct, as it was (and perhaps still is) used in agriculture and breeding, etc. to improve the bloodline of offspring. I would call for someone who knows a bit more about this to write a section at least within the article. Rob Church Talk | Desk 01:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree - as a medicine student I've heard artificial insemination many times, but only related to human beings. Before I read this article, I hadn't spent a thought on that the main use for it is in animals. In fact, if I hadn't seen this discussion, I would have moved everything refering to animals to an own article, and kept the main article to human beings, because it is human beings that increasingly seek for artificial insemination. The technology improves, as more and more people understand that there is help out there, and these people aren't the least interested in how to perform it on cows! However, since I don't know how many breeders vs. people seeking personal help read this page, I don't think any major split of this article should be done in the present time. Mikael Häggström 16:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: - I'll have to agree with the first two and disagree with you.  You're a medical student and I'm sure that you hear the term mostly in regards to humans. But in my part of the country, AI is used pretty much exclusively to mean AI in livestock. That's what the general population takes it to mean and how the technique is predominantly used.--64.238.49.65 (talk) 00:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Animals

message: There had been an addition, that artificial insemination of cows also would favour the body of future cows. However, the function of cows are mainly to produce milk. Therefore, I don't think the looks, or whatever the editor meant, is that essential. Thus, the edit is undid.User:Mortsggah 18:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to have expertise on the subject. Better leave that section to you. Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undid body aspect 

message: Why does it have to be a female. Males of any species, surgically engineered in the corect way are able to be artificially inseminated.- Thangfries
You have mixed up artificial insemination and in vitro fertilisation.  There are important differences between them.  In vitro fertilisation means that you take ovum from a female and sperm from a male.  You let the sperm fertilise the ovum in outside the body.  Then you place the resulting embryo in the womb of a female.  Artificial insemination only means taking sperm from a male and inject it into the womb of a female.  Then the rest comes about the natural way.  Theoretically, you could surgically place a womb inside the body of a male.  But injecting sperm into it would have no effect since males don’t produce any ovum to fertilise.  In order to make him pregnant you would have to take ovum from a female and fertilise it outside the body.  Then you could place the embryo in the surgically altered male’s womb and let it grow there.  Such a procedure would be considered in vitro fertilisation and not artificial insemination.
2008-06-18  Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.229.19.130 (talk) 12:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but males can be naturally inseminated too (just like wymyn) - why not provide artificial for them too (just like wymyn)? Isn't this prejudiced and discriminatory? Just asking. Thangfries also brought up the subject of [hormonally and] surgically altered persons too. It didn't sound to me like Thangfries was mixing anything up. --76.200.150.125 (talk) 01:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Female

message: There's a lot of repeated information in this article. In particular, I'm talking about the repeated mentioning and explanation of IUI, in sections 1, 2, and 4.2. Can somebody clean it up?Gyndanya (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated information 

message: I ask because... bestiality is illegal and "harmful" wouldn't that make A.I. illegal and harmful too?
I think people (me included) would be interested to see evidence that A.I. is harmful or is not harmful for animal.Alusky (talk) 07:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's to do with the motivation and circumstances: AI is a technical task, not one done for enjoyment or exploitation.  In the same way gynaecological examination is not sexual assault, and surgery is not grievious bodily harm.  There is some scope for squeamishness though: I remember once hearing a bull semen "harvester" on the radio saying that people rarely wanted to shake his hand after he'd told them what his job was...  Richard New Forest (talk) 14:37, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the comment, but what I want to see is 'evidence' moving the harm balance to one side or the other. Some thing like a document saying "if you are aroused from doing A.I. is harmful to the animal" or "A.I. are not harmful to animals because, this and that" or should it be common sense that A.I. is not harmful to animals?Alusky (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be surprised if anyone has bothered, but you never know what might have been used as a subject for a sociology doctorate...  Richard New Forest (talk) 09:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Artificial insemination of animals harmful? 

message: Why does 'prewashed' redirect here? -Brndtnlsn (talk) 10:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Prewashed' 

message: Wikipedia is increasingly used as an authoritative work and is often a link from other websites. There is an obvious and necessary line to draw between trying to be be a basic reference work used as a starting point, and attempting to be an over-detailed work which carries a lot of information which is not required by the average reader.
This article contains both basic and more detailed descriptions of artificial insemination. I have noted that it is often used as a link from other websites which imply that a full and detailed description is available. This is potentially dangerous because artificial insemination must be performed safely and correctly.
I have therefore added some detail to the procedural aspects which are designed to assist those seeking it. I justify this by my comments above, and also because Wikipedia carries an authority and frequently makes available information which is not available elsewhere.
I hope that there will be agreement on this point and that the additional material will prove useful to those interested or intending to attempt insemination by artificial means.
ALEXEIS (talk) 07:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detail

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand-pollination
I was searching for this article, but ended up here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.255.224.169 (talk) 17:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  add link to hand pollination? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Artificial insemination. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110107151459/http://dk.cryosinternational.com:80/clinics/questions-answers.aspx to http://dk.cryosinternational.com/clinics/questions-answers.aspx#5351
*Added  tag to http://www.ilga-europe.org/media_library/ilga_europe/publications/reports_and_other_publications/rainbow_map_2013/index
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920004757/http://www.darleyflyingstart.com:80/2006/work/july07_sun_pathak.shtml to http://www.darleyflyingstart.com/2006/work/july07_sun_pathak.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090620072355/http://www.hfea.gov.uk:80/39.html to http://www.hfea.gov.uk/39.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:43, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Artificial insemination. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121104131213/http://www.figo.org/news/female-bodies-reject-certain-sperm to http://www.figo.org/news/female-bodies-reject-certain-sperm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120724221400/http://familyscholars.org/2011/02/17/4579/ to http://familyscholars.org/2011/02/17/4579/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hfea.gov.uk/39.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:40, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Artificial insemination. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.ivf.com//success.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130828172939/http://dk.cryosinternational.com/private-customers/questions-answers.aspx to http://dk.cryosinternational.com/private-customers/questions-answers.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I would like to elaborate on the pregnancy rates that occur between the ICI and IUI techniques as there is more recent literature published on the topic. 
Additionally I would like to further edit the sections on the 4 techniques (ICI, IUI, Intrauterine tuboperitoneal insemination, and Intratubal insemination) of artificial insemination to discuss the differences and similarities. 
Jackieelsokkary (talk) 20:58, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Please make sure that your other group members assign themselves to this article, and that they will each also contribute something to it. Health policy (talk) 03:03, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foundations II 2019, Group 1a goals  

message: Multiple sources suggest that the method Intracervical Insemination isn't what the current source says: It differs from Intravaginal Insemination.
Furthermore, it is described quite short in the current source. What I want to say is: The Intracervical Insemination is in fact, Intracervical. The semen isn't placed on top of the cervix, but a bit inside of it like the term actually suggests. This helps sperm cells to pass the cervical barrier easier but allowing it to be unwashed. 
Src: http://www.dallasfertility.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Third-Party-Reproduction-Guide.pdf P. 11 
Src2: https://americanpregnancy.org/infertility/donor-insemination/
Src3: https://www.shecares.com/pregnancy/artificial-insemination-ai
Placing semen on the cervix is referred as Cervical Insemination here, but not as Intracervical insemination:
Src 4: Besselink, D. E., Farquhar, C., Kremer, J. A., Marjoribanks, J., & O’Brien, P. A. (2008). Cervical insemination versus intra-uterine insemination of donor sperm for subfertility. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000317.pub3 
Src5 is one of the early studies comparing different methods of Intracervical Insemination: One with a cap that entered the cervical canal, the other one with a straw where semen is placed into the canal.
Flierman, P. A., Hogerzeil, H. V., & Hemrika, D. J. (1997). A prospective, randomized, cross-over comparison of two methods of artificial insemination by donor on the incidence of conception: intracervical insemination by straw versus cervical cap. Human Reproduction, 12(9), 1945–1948.
To conclude, the whole section, especially the phrase "Intracervical insemination (ICI) simulates the ejaculation of semen by the penis into the vagina during intercourse." is very certainly completely  wrong.
AidenPicasso (talk) 15:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Techniques of insemination 

message: — Assignment last updated by Emiliaberk (talk) 06:40, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Gender and the Law