It is not the “Old Billings” under a new name and, yes, it works. Talking about “Gozitans being treated as fools when Health Minister Joe Cassar and Gozo Minister Giovanna Debono introduced naprotechnology to Gozitans” and “takes a ride on Catholic teaching to have a technology which competes with IVF” is highly offensive language, to say the least.

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando appears to be very badly informed on a number of issues.

Infertility is a very sensitive subject. The fact that it seems to be on the increase should ring alarm bells to all concerned. From the latest research, it clearly emerges that infertility is caused by multiple factors and, consequently, necessitates a broader response than just that pertaining to research in artificial reproductive treatment.

One of the main factors in infertility is that most are refraining from having children when biologically most fertile. Widespread use of contraception and the choice to delay the first pregnancy predisposes to an increased risk of sexually transmitted disease, endometriosis and other causes of infertility.

There is also the stress factor that is often ignored. Prolonged exposure to chronic stress and environmental pollutants may also play a critical role.

Naprotechnology (NPT) is a medically sound and scientifically supported approach to treating the causes of infertility. It is a disservice to try and discredit this technology when so many couples are benefiting from its use. It has a higher success rate than IVF but is much less invasive.

Naprotechnology is gaining popularity in many countries such as the US, the Irish Republic and Poland, and now is also establishing itself in Britain.

There are at least 10 reasons to choose NPT over IVF. These are due to the fact that NPT focuses on diagnosing and treating the underlying disease resulting in success rates of up to 80 per cent in, for example, resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome.

It does not involve the destruction or freezing of embryos and it does not involve “selective reduction” of embryos. It uses natural sex versus a laboratory procedure. NPT is also more cost effective.

NPT couples have the underlying cause of the problem addressed, so, subsequently, this results in better overall health and further pregnancies. It is gentler on the couple, especially on the woman’s health.

Unlike IVF, it creates no ethical, legal or moral problems.

Although offered at Gozo, initially NPT is also open to Maltese couples. May I also point out that Gozitans strive to work hard, often at the cost of leaving their homes to study both locally and abroad to train themselves well. They are often achievers and seek the best for themselves and their own. History can attest to this.

As to “naprotechnology was nothing more than family planning the way we have known it for years... and just repackaged like a can of baked beans”, may we suggest that Pierre Mallia, “the ethics adviser to the Medical Council”, and all his friends should withdraw their statement and research the issue well prior to embarking on their scepticism.

To mention but one study published in a fertility journal in 2009, Phil Boyle et al reported on a group of patients who had reached the end of available conventional infertility treatment. Despite advanced female age, long-standing infertility and previous unsuccessful attempts with artificial reproductive technology (IVF and ICSI), NPT still achieved a remarkable 32.6 per cent success rate excluding more than three per cent of couples who conceived soon after the first instructions following the first consultation.

I have also seen a lot of cases hailing the success of NPT, including couples who had a child with NPT following failed IVF treatments, a 22-year-old with low sperm count who recovered and patients, with irregular cycles secondary to untreated polycystic ovarian syndrome and very long-standing infertility, that had a child.

Many people need to sit down and think hard as to who wants the best for Malta and the Maltese people.

Dr Spiteri is a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist, a subspecialist urogynaecologist (UK) and a naprotechnology consultant.