There is controversy as to whether maximum stimulation in IVF is better or worse than mild stimulation IVF. There have been proponents of mild stimulation IVF while there have been proponents of minimal stimulation as well as natural IVF.
The rule of nature is that whatever breaks natures default position of one egg and one embryo, thereby, increasing the choice, certainly gives a much better result. Thus, IVF where we are able to put one embryo, even after selection from three or four embryos, would give a better chance than putting back one embryo divided from one egg or one follicle. Even though natural IVF does away with stimulation of the ovaries, there is very little evidence that, convincingly, proves that even mild stimulation or moderate stimulation of IVF produces more abnormal embryos. Thus, natural IVF or very mild stimulated IVF where one follicle or two follicles are grown, seem to make more sense in cases where women have a very low ovarian reserve with maximum stimulation IVF does not make a huge difference.
Thus, looking at all the evidence at present, we believe that if the ovary has the capacity of producing five to six eggs, this should be allowed since that you give us a chance of putting back one embryo which is from a selection of three or four embryos which certainly has a much better success.
On the other hand, in cases where irrespective of how the ovary has been stimulated, or where age is present, where the ovarian reserve is significantly lower, in those cases, trying to maximally stimulate the ovaries by producing one egg, is not statistically important and it is much better to try mild stimulation or a natural IVF cycle where we can aim to answer the question of whether the follicle which has grown has one egg. There is a strong possibility, in those cycles, that even though we try and retrieve an egg, it may not be possible to produce an embryo.