Is the focus of treatment for polycystic ovary syndrome on ovulation promotion? What is the status of ovulation promotion therapy? Ovulation promotion therapy is currently very widespread and too arbitrary. Ovulation treatment seems to be a fundamental necessity to solve fertility problems in polycystic ovary syndrome. This is the reason why clomiphene (CC) is used in large quantities in our country, with a chronic shortage of supply, and is almost unknown to the general public. In fact, this very simple method is not more technical and may bring multiple problems. Although ovulation promotion treatment requires the prudent and comprehensive judgment of doctors and accurate use, the arbitrariness of clinical use, which is already no different from the vegetable market, appears to be very foolish and ignorant. This simple and crude method of addressing fertility through ovulation promotion methods has been seen clinically, including our own observations, and in fact the ovulation success rate is not high, nor is the pregnancy success rate. So is this simple method of ovulation promotion, which consumes a lot of precious resources of follicles at the cost of ovulation, needs to be properly understood, converged, or more scientifically requested very urgently. Seeing that many patients come to the clinic having repeatedly used various protocols of ovulation promotion methods many times, while their pathophysiological status or TCM evidence becomes complicated, interspersed with the couple and family’s anxiety and eagerness to have a baby, makes one feel, without rational analysis, the shallowness and ignorance contained in simple ovulation promotion treatment, the disappointing repeated failures, etc., further exacerbating tension and anxiety, more detrimental to pregnancy and pregnancy maintenance. Polycystic ovary syndrome is a complex disease and it often takes more than ten years of reading for a physician to move to the clinic and begin to become a junior physician, requiring a wealth of knowledge as a background. If the underlying pathophysiological contradictions of polycystic ovary syndrome, such as hyperinsulinemia or insulin refusal, or metabolic syndrome, or hypoestrogenic/Kaohsiung state, are not addressed, the blind and presumptuous use of ovulation promotion methods will cost such patients potentially a lifetime. The first danger is the depletion of ovarian resources, for the growth and development of one follicle or mature ovulation, dozens or hundreds of follicles towards atresia, a normal woman has about 200,000 to 500,000 follicles in both ovaries in her lifetime, and ovulates about 400-500 eggs in her lifetime, for these ovulations, more than a hundred times of follicles are needed for their reserve, repeated use of several ovulation promotion methods seriously depletes these reserve follicles. These resources are far more valuable than forests and cannot be reproduced at all during a woman’s lifetime. One might argue that the sheer size of the ovarian resources and the natural process of follicular atresia can support repeated ovulation methods. But can this danger, which can only be seen in the future, be ignored? Without this comprehensive and responsible knowledge as a guarantee, then what is the difference between these blind and presumptuous ovulation promotion methods and strangulation of the ovaries? The human desire is always endless, how contradictory is it to be anxious and superficial to solve ovulation problems today and to retain youth tomorrow! Most importantly, what is the efficiency of this crude and simple ovulation promotion? The lower ovulation and pregnancy rates are more than worth the loss. If the pathophysiology of PCOS is not corrected in many ways, such as hyperinsulinemia and insulin refusal, localized ovarian fibrosis, etc., then it is very sad that if these women are lucky enough to have a successful pregnancy, then abnormal glucose tolerance or even diabetes soon after pregnancy or delivery becomes inevitable. How to be more scientific, comprehensive, thorough and responsible in judging and dealing with this is not only a matter of virtue and responsibility, but also a matter of knowledge and science!!! Ovulation treatment methods, programs are more specific, such as two, three, or even more drugs cumulative, I personally based on pharmacological familiarity with the perspective, and not too much technical content, the key lies in the doctor’s comprehensive, rational judgment, accurate and rigorous use of relevant drugs. However, we often see many problems in clinical practice, such as ovarian hyperstimulation sign (OHSS), where some people have premature ovarian failure due to the lack of clarity of the doctor; or long-term blind ovulation promotion, which further aggravates the endocrine disorder; or ovulation promotion is unsuccessful after several cycles, and the pregnancy fails; or although ovulation promotion is successful, the pregnancy fails. However, we often see examples of successful pregnancies after ovulation promotion, but there is a lack of interest, investigation or analysis of their follow-up. In the clinic I use few, arguably very few, ovulation-promoting drugs, but the rate of ovarian rhythm or ovulation recovery is not low. Or, I do not see a reason why ovulation promotion is necessary. Therefore, when I encounter some patients who question or urge the use of ovulation medication, I will send some time to explain. But clinically, I see more, the ovarian and gonadal axis suggesting a more stable rhythm when ovulation-promoting western drugs are not used, which is reassuring because the follow-up time sees a higher maintenance or success of pregnancy in these individuals. The “hypoestrogenic” state can often be further exacerbated by ovulatory treatments such as the clomiphene approach (CC) or the triamcinolone approach or the aromatase blocker approach, or the simple progesterone approach to menstruation. Therefore, I personally do not recommend using these methods blindly without an accurate judgment of the pathophysiological state, including the endocrine state and systemic manifestations, because they can do more harm than good and are not suitable for improving the condition, or even lead to progression. The view that treatment is more difficult in adolescent or unmarried women may be based mainly on the use of ovulation-promoting methods. In fact, my personal experience is that ovulation promotion therapy is only a superficial treatment for polycystic ovary syndrome and does not correct the underlying pathology of polycystic ovary syndrome. In fact, it does not correct it at all, but only allows follicles to develop in one, just one cycle, and this refers only to those ovulation treatments that are successful, and many others that are not. Regarding ovulation promotion methods, I personally experience multiple disadvantages, which is why I use them sparingly. This is because the low female status is very detrimental to the recovery of polycystic ovary syndrome. Pregnancy success rate decreases, while the disappearance of symptoms such as leucorrhea pulling; fifth is a serious depletion of the limited resources of the ovary, in essence, for the development or dominance of one or two or three follicles, at the expense of tens, more than a hundred or even more follicular atresia as a cost, especially when repeatedly used in multiple cycles, should be more alert, from the long-term or lifelong solution degree, is not conducive to good maintenance of reproductive function, these follicles should allow women to maintain lifelong, not satisfied with momentary fertility; sixth, simple ovulation promotion does not improve the underlying pathophysiological state of COS, but only a simpler promotion of ovulation of follicles to achieve pregnancy, the rate of weight gain and abnormal glucose tolerance during pregnancy or postpartum is high, the rate of recurrence of PCOS after delivery is high, the establishment of natural ovarian cycle although after October pregnancy, but due to the presence or exacerbation of hyperinsulinemia or resistance Seven, ovulation promotion alone does not improve the pregnancy rate or success rate, and potentially increases the chance of ectopic pregnancy without determining whether the fallopian tubes are inflamed; eight, the low female effect associated with ovulation-promoting drugs can lead to a significant increase in the incidence of LUFS (follicular unruptured luteinization syndrome or follicular cysts); nine, some women may experience OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation) when the drug dose or regimen is not used properly. OHSS (ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome) may occur in some women when the drug dose or course of treatment is not used properly, manifesting as further depletion of ovarian resources. In addition, the occurrence of long follicular phase, ovarian sensitivity, or LUFS are associated with low estrogen. And there is no better way to increase estrogen than to produce the associated estrogen from improved ovarian function, which is safer and longer lasting. In clinical treatment, when ovarian function improves, or when systemic pathophysiology improves, follicular development, dominance and ovulation success also increase, no less than with ovulation-promoting drugs. Our clinical practice has confirmed, and patients often report, that follicular ovulation rates were not high when more ovulation-promoting treatments were used in the past, but that follicular development and ovulation were even better with the use of herbal medicine alone, which was no less efficient than ovulation drugs. Of course, Chinese herbal medicine is more reliable when combined with drugs related to improving ovarian sensitivity, hyperinsulinemia or refusal, and other related methods. With several cycles of treatment, most of the BBT (basal body temperature) can appear biphasic.