Special LGBT event happening tomorrow! We hope to see you there.

6:30 – 8:00 PM
LGBT Community Center
1800 Market St., San Francisco
Call 888-834-3095 or contact us for reservations

Attend an informative educational event on Wednesday, October 7th and hear firsthand from gay and lesbian parents about their family building experience. This is an opportunity to ask you specific questions and learn about advanced family building solutions.

Topics include:

* Selecting the right donor and/or surrogate
* Emotional & psychological aspects of gays & lesbians having children
* Hearing gay and lesbian parents accounts of their personal experience

Let Pacific Fertility Center be your guide on your journey to building a healthy family.

Being a single gay dad certainly suggests that I didn’t get pregnant accidentally; my journey into parenting has been a long and deliberate one. Having my 6 month old son and daughter staring up at me all day reminds me that I really did want to do this 25 years ago, but being 50 still does not feel too late. They say it takes a village to raise a child. In my case it took a village to create a child. Thanks to a loving gestational surrogate, and longtime friends as both egg and sperm donors, my dream of parenting has come true.

A difficult pregnancy with many complications somehow made it to 36 weeks and 5 days with Ella weighing 5 lbs 12 ounces and Armstrong (Ari) weighing 5 lbs 11 ounces. Amazingly, at 6 months, they are 19 lbs each and have been sleeping 11 hours a night since week 13. For those of you who are soon to be parents, you will find that’s pretty remarkable. Having hardy and healthy babies is such a blessing. I am forever indebted to Pacific Fertility Center, and Dr. Isabelle Ryan, for their essential roles in helping me achieve parenthood and having a healthy family.

Choosing PFC was not initially an easy decision. It took accessing the CDC nationwide fertility clinic website and comparing the data from clinic to clinic to make me feel confident about picking up the phone and scheduling a first meeting. I really analyzed the data from the clinics carefully, as I was interested in high success rates achieved with high total numbers of embryo transplants.

I had also heard about specific experiences that gay men had had with other local clinics that were less than heartwarming. As an HIV-positive individual, even though I was opting to not undergo sperm-washing to utilize my own genetic material, I did want a compassionate and professional environment in which to pursue my parenting dream.

To be perfectly honest, I had been told by other parents that PFC took a “conservative” approach to achieving pregnancy. Conservative is a term that can be interpreted in many ways. For leftist liberals, like myself, it can somehow seem like a dirty word. However, I have a newfound appreciation for the term. My first surrogate was a lovely married woman with 2 children. She had been a gestational surrogate for a San Francisco couple 2 years prior. They had worked with another local fertility clinic and she got pregnant, rather quickly, with twins. She carried to week 28 and the babies were each under 3 lbs and fortunately survived. I was excited to proceed with her, as we got along splendidly and my priority was finding someone who had her own family and had previous surrogacy experience. PFC screened her and immediately determined that she had an “incompetent cervix”. I had no idea what that meant, though it seemed like the two most incongruous words to ever be placed back to back. Well, an incompetent cervix is a serious matter! I’m supposing that this was not previously diagnosed and was likely the cause of her prior preterm labor and delivery. PFC’s screening saved me a lot of heartache, money and time. I should say that 3 times in a row, to really give it the weight it deserves. I don’t think many people arrive at fertility clinics devoid of heartache, so having a clinician save you from avoidable disaster is an enormous gift.

Having now gone through a twin pregnancy, I more fully understand the roller-coaster process of which I was forewarned. Proceeding with a less than perfect surrogate would have been a tragedy. The second surrogate I found had actually conceived via PFC twice before and would have been a great surromom; but her insurance no longer covered surrogacy. I’m still in constant touch with her and she has nothing but great things to say about her experiences with PFC.

It would be easy for me to find the heart-space to simply rave about PFC. After all, I have the reward of two healthy babies to serve as living proof. For others considering parenting through assisted reproductive technology, there is so much more about my process that is crucial to know. I was insistent, from the get-go, about wanting twins. I had several discussions with Dr. Ryan about the risks that came with carrying multiples. Yes, I’d heard from many people that being a single dad with twins was going to be a “handful”, but the potential clinical complications and risks were not something I’d widely considered. I was 48 years old and didn’t want to go through the process over the course of several years and really wanted at least 2 kids.

Again, if a “conservative” approach is what I got from PFC, the counsel was so very right. My surrogate had previously carried twins and we were both confident that all would go well. We never imagined the complications that did arise during each trimester. It was a very difficult pregnancy. Even with a vaginal delivery, the recovery was tougher than I wish to describe herein. Everything I’d been told by PFC was absolutely accurate. Knowing what I know now, I would say that I, while not at all cavalier, was filled with excitement and anticipation that had me driving full speed through a string of yellow lights. Trust me; I drive now more carefully with twins on board.

Not a day goes by without my being awestruck by the wonder of my children. I have to say that, so far, this has not been a daunting experience. Maybe I have easy babies. Maybe being highly organized has provided them with the structure and consistency that I was told was essential to parental sanity. I’m not sure what it takes to be a great dad, but certainly the desire to parent was a good start towards just being a good dad. Certainly, being 50 has made me a bit more patient and knowledgeable than I might have been as a 20 or 25 year old dad. Being 50 also makes me appreciate having gotten pregnant on the first embryo transfer. At the time, every passing month was just another month of living without the children I knew I was going to have. It seemed like lost time. I heard the clock ticking; I felt the pangs of desire growing.

As crazy as it may sound, hardly a day goes by without my thinking about going back to PFC, thawing my remaining embryos and giving it another go. Through all the obstacles, PFC gave me a sense of direction, a grasp of the reality that I faced and clear information with which to proceed. Perhaps the confidence that I felt in PFC’s expertise has given me a residual optimism that makes me feel willing to try again. For the moment, Armstrong and Ella find each other in sufficient and good company; but I’d be willing to consider a special unanimous request from the two of them for another sibling. But, maybe just an old-fashioned singleton next time!

—Submitted by Gedalia (G’dali) Braverman,
Dad to Armstrong and Ella who were born November 19, 2008

Every year, several Pacific Fertility Center professionals participate in ASRM’s national meeting. They evaluate the research and share their findings with PFC and Fertility Flash.

Among those attending the conference from PFC were Dr. Philip Chenette and Dr. Isabelle Ryan and Peggy Orlin, MFT. Their reviews cover the following topics: Update #1: Ovarian Stimulation Techniques, Update #2: PGD and Aneuploidy Screening Techniques, Update #3: Egg Freezing, Update #4: Acupuncture, and Update #5: Men and ART.

Update #5 Men and ART

The Mental Health Professional Group (MHPG) course entitled Men and ART: The Missing Voice, blended medical, psychological, ethical and legal information relating to men who participate in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART).

The legal issues confronting single men and gay men considering the use of egg donors and gestational surrogates continue to be controversial. Adoption legislation in many states prohibits gays and lesbians from adopting. In a study reported in 2005 by Gurmankin, et. al, 44% of ART programs responded that they would not turn away gay couples seeking surrogacy with one partner’s sperm and 48% responded that they would turn them away. This is in contrast to the higher rate of acceptance of lesbian couples. In lesbian couples seeking treatment using donor insemination, 82% of ART programs agreed to treat versus 17% who refused to treat them.

Though often presented exclusively to women, men can also benefit from the use of stress reduction strategies and following a healthy life style which includes regular exercise, normal body weight, no smoking or recreational drug use and avoidance of environmental toxins. In addition, the effects of aging and cancer on sperm quality should not be overlooked when men seek reproduction assistance. (See articles on: Sperm Aging: Fertility Flash Feb. 2004, Sperm Fragmentation: Fertility Flash March 2005, Cancer and Infertility: Fertility Flash Oct. 2004).

The psychological component of this course was compelling. Approximately 50% of cases of infertility involve at least some degree of male infertility. Why is it that most infertility references are traditionally directed at women? By definition, Infertility is “…the inability of a woman to conceive after some months (12-24) without contraception, or the inability to carry a pregnancy to term.” (Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 1989). Ancient biblical references and popular literature focus on women’s infertility – e.g. Sarah and Hannah in the bible, Sylvia Plath’s Barren Woman, Jane Smiley’s 1000 Acres. The list is long. Google hits by gender for infertility and psychology show 542,000 for men and 700,000 for women.

The cause of this discrepancy is multifaceted. There are fewer psychological studies on men simply because men have a lower study response rate than women. A variety of successful techniques have been developed to overcome male related medical issues. Additionally, most men spend less time in treatment and experience fewer invasive procedures than women. In general, it is more socially acceptable for women to express their feelings regarding infertility. The opposite is true for men whose fertility often is a taboo topic. Furthermore, some cultures protect their men from the unacceptable stigma of infertility and even falsely describe men as having “poor” coping skills.

Despite these discrepancies, men do have feelings about infertility and may need support and assistance to better cope with the diagnosis. A study by Mason MC in 1993 found that men felt guilt, shame, anger, isolation, loss and a personal sense of failure. This is not all that different from what women feel, but each individual’s coping mechanism is unique. We all, however, find ways to protect ourselves from what we perceive as painful information.

These coping skills can be divided along gender lines. There are ways that many, but certainly not all, men commonly protect themselves from the pain related to his or his partner’s infertility diagnosis. Frequently men are able to distance themselves from the feelings. They appear to have the ability to take painful information and put it in a little box that they then file away in the back of their minds. The box stays tightly shut. Other men want to problem-solve for their partner or avoid the topic completely, throwing themselves into work or hobbies. Some men become extremely optimistic to avoid or counter their partner’s pessimism.

These are different styles- not right or wrong. For many of us, particularly women, the closed box technique does not work. The box is opened often, and feelings appear to refuse to stay tucked away. When partners have different coping styles, it’s important to both learn to tolerate and support these differences. Sometimes that is easier said than done…

Peggy Orlin, MFT

One of the first things that my partner Cindy and I discussed when we started to date was a strong desire to have children. As we talked about building a life together, we clearly imagined ourselves as parents, much to the relief of our families who were eager for grandchildren. We even started talking with Dr. Ryan about starting a family at the same time that we started planning our wedding. We had selected an anonymous sperm donor that we hoped to use for each of us, so that our children would be partially related to each other. We were very excited. We decided Cindy would begin first, as she was older, so the month after we returned from our honeymoon, we started trying.

Cindy was started on Clomid, which, although it worked relatively well, also had the unfortunate side effect of making her feel completely crazy at times. After a few months on Clomid, we decided that trying to balance pregnancy efforts with two demanding and stressful jobs with a lot of travel was enough to make anyone crazy, and we didn’t actually need the additional variable of Clomid. We moved on to injectables (gonadotropin), which although not perfect, ended up being a great deal easier on both of us. Once again, although everything looked like it was working relatively well, no pregnancy. At this point, we had been trying for almost a year with absolutely no success, and we were trying very hard not to act as frustrated and upset as we felt. It was a tough year — our friends and family were very supportive, but the monthly calls to our parents and close friends letting them know we still weren’t pregnant were getting harder and harder and the financial and emotional toll was starting to weigh on us. We decided to move on to IVF and that if IVF didn’t work I would start trying.

In the egg retrieval for IVF, we ended up with ten viable embryos of varying degrees of quality, and in consultation with Dr. Ryan we decided to be as aggressive as possible, and put all of the embryos back. Two weeks later, we learned what we had suspected, which was that none of the embryos had implanted. We took a few months off – spent several months remembering what it was like not to split your month into binary segments, not to have hypodermic needles in your kitchen cupboard and to drive down the Embarcadero without worrying we were late to an appointment.

When we felt ready, we went back to PFC. It was my turn. Everyone welcomed us back with sympathetic hugs and although we were ready to start trying again, it was a somewhat different experience – our excitement was tempered by our awareness that pregnancy simply doesn’t happen for everyone. I started out on Clomid for six months with great results – except no pregnancy. At that point, we both decided we didn’t have it in us to continue the same trajectory for the next few months with injectables. We decided to go right to IVF, which had the highest chance of success for us. We also started seriously discussing adoption, which was comforting to us as we were able to tell ourselves that we would be parents in the next year, one way or another, and that really helped.

We ran into out-of-town friends in the IVF waiting room (we knew they had been trying, but hadn’t discussed where and how in depth with them, so we had no idea they were also doing IVF at PFC) and we both agreed to hope the coincidence was a lucky sign. Three days later, we put back three embryos and froze five. After two nerve-wracking weeks in which I fluctuated between wondering if I could be pregnant and worrying it was all jet lag, we found out on January 14, 2005, that we were pregnant! It was suggested to us that since my HCG numbers tripled very quickly, we might want to think about the possibility of twins, and our five week ultrasound revealed two sacs. Those two sacs have developed into a boy and a girl, who are due this October 6, and look, thus far, completely healthy. (Even better, our friends also succeeded on their try, and their baby is also due on October 6.)

We are thrilled beyond all measure, and these babies are so loved and wanted by so many people that it is ridiculous. We have taken every possible step to ensure that Cindy is also legally recognized as their parent so our family is as legally and emotionally solid as it can possibly be. We will always wish that Cindy could have gotten pregnant and we don’t think that sense of loss will ever go away completely. On the other hand, as this experience has reminded us, you don’t always get to live the life narrative you had hoped to write and these are the children that we are blessed with. We could not have had our family without PFC and especially not without Dr. Ryan’s support and encouragement. We look very much forward to meeting our children when they arrive.

– Heidi (Names have been changed at the author’s request)

Post Script: Heidi and Cindy recently welcomed a healthy boy and girl into their family!

My partner, Shannon, and I had always wanted kids. So we went to our doctor to discuss our options for starting a family. She suggested we pick a fertility clinic to get the process started. We chose Pacific Fertility Center. We called the clinic to get started and had hundreds of questions. We spoke with Billie of the New Patient Guides. She was very friendly and more than willing to listen to all our concerns. She suggested we set up our initial consultation with a doctor. We chose Dr. Givens. We met with Dr. Givens in November and were very happy with our visit. Thankfully, we were both healthy and could start the process right away.

We decided we would go with IVF. We wanted to use my eggs for the first pregnancy, as I was nearing 40, but we wanted Shannon to be the carrier. This meant we had a lot of ‘timing’ issues to get worked out. To start with, we met with Allison, our IVF Coordinator. She was fantastic–she set up our schedules, talked to us about the different medications, and what the next steps were. We had to get both our cycles in sync, make sure I could produce enough viable eggs at the right time, get them fertilized and implanted into Shannon. WHEW! A lot to do in a short amount of time…

We met with Peggy, the Marriage and Family Therapist, to discuss what exactly the egg donor process meant. (Even though I was donating my eggs to my partner, and would be a co-parent). Peggy asked why we had chosen to go this route; how long we had been together; what were our plans as far as parenting; did I realize that the child, although mine biologically, might very well be closer to Shannon since she was the one giving birth; why did we wait so long to have children (we have been together for 12 years). It was a great re-affirmation that we were doing this for all the right reasons.

We met with Olga, one of the nurses in the clinic, for our injection class. Olga did a great job of making us feel comfortable with this less than desirable task. We started our injections – it was more difficult than we had imagined, but once we got going, it got better.

Dr. Givens started Shannon on birth control to catch her up to my cycle, and when the timing was right, she started on hormone shots. I started on fertility drugs. We moved right through the process. February arrived and it was time for my egg retrieval.

Dr. Chenette did the retrieval. He explained exactly what he would do – the eggs would be taken one by one and given to the lab for fertilization, that it would only take about 15 minutes, what the recovery would be like-very quick and little discomfort, and that in 3 days the fertilized eggs would be transferred into Shannon. I felt very much at ease with Dr. Chenette. Dr. Givens came in to tell us how many eggs had been retrieved and to make sure we were doing OK.

Dr. Chenette also did the embryo transfer. He explained what he was going to do – use a very small catheter to implant the embryo’s into Shannon’s uterus, what she would feel-very little, if anything, and what to do next. We had 6 eggs that could have been transferred to Shannon, and chose the best 4 – Dr Givens has suggested we transfer 4 embryos to give us a good chance at getting pregnant. We got to watch the transfer and it took all of about 5 minutes! Now it was just a “wait and see” period.

We went back for our pregnancy test 2 weeks after the egg transfer. It was positive!

We had our second pregnancy test 2 days after that, and it was confirmed – we were pregnant. Our next step was an ultrasound at 7 weeks. We had our last ultrasound at 9 weeks and were released to our obstetrician. Much to our dismay, we miscarried.

We are going to try again and wouldn’t think of going anywhere else. We are so happy to have worked with such professional and caring people. The staff at Pacific Fertility Center is a fantastic and knowledgeable group and we would absolutely recommend them to anyone who is looking for a fertility clinic.

– Sara and Shannon

On May 25, 2005 new FDA regulations go into effect that will drastically change certain areas of Assisted Reproductive Technology. At PFC, we feel it is important for our patients to understand the implications of these regulations and the effect they may have on their fertility care. We have created an in-house task force to not only ensure that PFC is in compliance with these new regulations, but also to provide patients with as much information as possible. While these new FDA laws will require more time and expense on the part of patients and clinics, federal law mandates that we adhere to them.

These new FDA requirements will affect the infectious disease screening of egg and sperm donors and individuals using gestational carriers. The law as currently written also will affect couples that may wish to donate their frozen embryos to another individual at some time in the future. The source of the eggs or sperm must be screened in accordance with the new rules if the eggs are retrieved or sperm collected on or after May 25, 2005 at any IVF clinic or sperm bank in the United States.

In compliance with California State laws PFC currently performs infectious disease testing on all individuals involved in IVF as well as sperm donors for intrauterine insemination (IUI). The FDA regulations apply to any situation in which eggs or sperm (or the resultant embryos) from an individual are being placed into another person with whom the source is not sexually intimate. The FDA requires screening for some diseases such as Jacob-Creutzfeldt disease and cytomegalovirus that California does not. Screening involves review of medical records, an interview, physical examination and testing.

The most difficult of the federal requirements is that testing must be performed within seven days of collecting the sperm or eggs. This means predicting the exact day that an egg retrieval or IUI will take place and relying upon sometimes slow outside reference laboratories to send test results back quickly.

The embryo transfer or IUI CANNOT OCCUR until the results are received and the donor(s) determined to be eligible. If results are not available by the day of scheduled embryo transfer, transfer may be postponed up to day 5 (blastocyst transfer) or ultimately cancelled. The embryos would be frozen for transfer at a later date. IUI’s with donor sperm would have to be cancelled if results are not available.

In an effort to minimize the likelihood that a retrieval or IUI will be cancelled and to maintain compliance with FDA and California regulations, PFC will continue to perform infectious disease testing on ALL IVF patients, egg donors and sperm sources (IVF & IUI) prior to cycle commencement. Individuals subject to FDA screening will complete the infectious disease questionnaire and physical examination. Within seven days of the anticipated egg retrieval or IUI, a second set of infectious disease tests will be done. Sperm sources will be requested to freeze a sperm sample within seven days of the initial screening as backup in case the second set of tests are not available on the day of retrieval or IUI. For couples wishing to maintain the option of donating their embryos in the future, the egg and sperm sources will need to be retested six or more months after the egg retrieval.

PFC staff are working to identify outside reference laboratories that meet the FDA criteria and that will provide quick turn around time at reasonable cost to our patients. Your clinical coordinator in conjunction with the PFC FDA Task Force will address any concerns you may have on this issue.

– PFC FDA Task Force

Law Tries to Keep Up with ART: A spate of judicial decisions here in California has family law attorneys paying close attention to a handful of unique conflicts, or “gray zones” made in some way possible by Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART). As the definition of “family” expands more broadly, thanks to ART, new laws are actually being forged. Couples that don’t fit the rubric of a traditional family (heterosexual man + woman = marriage) are being asked to make sure they have all of their legal ducks in a row.

A few California cases are summarized here, including at least one that may reach the state Supreme Court.

Lesbian Parents and Child Support: This complex case involves two lesbian partners, not registered as domestic partners, who jointly agreed to have children using the same sperm donor. Both women conceived, one year apart, and one of the infants was born with Down syndrome, prompting one of the women to remain at home as the care-giver. Two years later, the two women separated and the primary caregiver began receiving monthly child support payments from the woman who worked. When the child support provider halted payments after 18 months, county social workers attempted to tap her wages, a standard to which a biological father would have been held.

Although a Superior court judge agreed with the county that child support payments should continue because the woman showed initial “intent” to raise the children, this past May the Court of Appeal in Sacramento reversed that decision to the dismay of gay rights legal activists. This decision is particularly disturbing, asserts Deborah Wald, a San Francisco attorney who specializes in non-traditional family law. “Children of same-sex couples do not have the same rights compared to children that have two parents of opposite sex; this is a shocking ruling and one that we are confident that the state Supreme Court will overturn,” she said. Posthumous Conception: Many are anxiously watching a case that is pending final decision by the Los Angeles federal court. A wife had medical personnel extract her husband’s sperm for freezing after his unexpected death. This was not contested. Four years later, after she conceived a daughter with his sperm, the mother sought Social Security survivor benefits. Although she didn’t seek inheritance or life insurance claims, the outcome of this case is expected to have implications in these other areas.

The Social Security Administration denied the benefits, insisting that the deceased dad is not recognized as the father under California law. The SSA follows specific state guidelines in resolving such issues, and has granted posthumous benefits in other states. But California has no laws governing children conceived after the death of a parent. This case has simultaneously prompted the state Legislature to craft AB 1910, which is enjoying broad support. This bill establishes that a posthumously conceived child is entitled to inheritance rights and other benefits under the Uniform Parentage Act if the decedent intended his or her genetic material to be used for posthumous conception of the child and expressed it in writing. It is expected to be signed by the Governor in September. Copies can be found at www.assembly.ca.gov .

Lesbian Parents and Custody: A woman who provided the donor eggs for her female partner, enabling the partner to conceive twins, signed away her parental rights per a standard egg donor contract used by a Bay Area infertility clinic seven years ago. Nevertheless, the two women spent the next six years living together and raising the children. As the egg donor started pressuring the gestational mother about being identified as a legal co-parent, their relationship fell apart, and the gestational mother moved across country with the twins, eventually cutting off all contact between the children and the egg donor.

A California Court of Appeals ruling affirmed the gestational mother’s hold on primary custody, saying its decision is based on the “intent” contract signed by the egg donor, which absolved her of all parental rights and future claims. The biological mother has appealed, the case has received a flurry of press, and the case may end up at the First District Court of Appeal in 2005.

We occasionally get asked by same sex couples if it is possible to create an embryo, and hence a baby, by using the DNA either from 2 sperm or 2 eggs, instead of the DNA from a sperm and an egg. In mammals, such a feat hasn’t been possible until recently. A paper in the scientific journal Nature (22nd April 2004) reports the birth of 2 mice; each created using the DNA from 2 eggs and with no sperm.

Creating offspring using only female genes and with no paternal contribution is a common phenomenon in nature and in fact is a method of reproduction employed by almost all plants and animals. Mammals however have not been able to reproduce in this way. This impediment is attributed in large part to a process called genomic imprinting.

Experimentally, when mouse embryos are created using only the DNA from 2 eggs, the resulting fetus is well formed, but only a rudimentary placenta develops and the pregnancy fails. This is because the placenta is created mainly by paternal genes, and without the involvement of a sperm, we can’t get a normal placenta.

But if we have 2 copies of almost every gene (one from Mom and one from Dad), why can’t the maternal genes make a placenta? Biologists think that it’s a conflict of interest for Mom’s genes to make the placenta. Since the placenta in many ways is a parasite that fights for Mom’s resources, Mom’s placental genes are deliberately inactivated or switched off and it’s left to Dad to make the placenta. This process of deliberately inactivating a set of genes from one parent, so that the other parent’s genes are left to do the work is called imprinting. These genes carry with them a history of their origin because they are endowed at conception with a maternal or paternal imprint.

One negative consequence of imprinting is that when an imprinted gene is defective or otherwise does not work, the inactive, but perfectly good gene from the other parent can’t be called upon to help out. Diseases like Prader-Willi syndrome and Angelman’s syndrome which have variable physical, mental and behavioral effects on afflicted individuals are caused by defective imprinted genes.

So what happens when an embryo is created using 2 sperm and without maternal DNA? In this instance, as would be expected, the placenta is normal and fully formed, but the fetus is typically deformed and most notably lacks a head. It could be said that without a Mom, mammals lose their heads.

In the Nature paper, the mice without a father were created after exhaustive attempts: 2 live born from 457 reconstructed eggs. And the researchers used a trick to get around the imprinting issue. To make each embryo they used a mature (ovulated) egg and an immature egg from a newborn mouse in which the genomic imprint had not been established (imprinting occurs as eggs grow and mature). This allowed them to overcome the absence of the paternal imprinted genes since there were few or no imprinted (and therefore inactive) genes in the DNA from the immature eggs. The process was not very efficient in creating live offspring, but one of the resulting mice reproduced normally after reaching adulthood. The second mouse was used in tests to determine its DNA normalcy.