Could this explain the 'disappearing' frer line?

Hoping for some scientific input here to rubbish these claims or back them up. I myself have suffered from the 'disappearing' frer line on numerous occasions - twice I remember getting a line, posting my bfp then the line gets fainter and dissappears over the next day or so. There has been so many posts about having a line one day, gone or going the next (all on frers) that it prompted me to do some research. Is it even remotely possible that frers are picking up this hcg-h from a blastocyst then when it fails to implant the tests are turning into bfns? It just seems to be happening so often now that I'm inclined to believe it is but my common sense is arguing 'no way' lol. We all know chemicals are quite common, my question is could this be seriously possible or is it just internet rubbish? I have attached two pages of my internet searching and they are in forums which lead me to believe its crap BUT hcg-h or h-hcg appears to be a real thing and I'm wondering why frers work as early as they do based on low hcg levels alone?Attachment 30273Attachment 30274

519b48 Ovulation charts on FertilityFriend.com

I have zero science, but all i can say is that I have never had a problem with FRER until the recently when I got 3 positive FRER test (2 from one box, one from another), that were very faint but definitely visable at 10-11 dpo. Then at 12dpo I had a negative test and at 13 dpo my AF arrived. So I don't know what happened! But I keep seeing on forums more and more women getting "evap" lines on FRER.

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Thank you for sharing your experience familymatters and I just wish I'd saved my photos of past cycles. Here is one from my friend just last cycle. To me its an obvious bfp bottom photo yet the next day is the top one. She had others that actually still showed a faint line after these for a day or so but this photo illustrates one test to another (taking into account diluted urine, time testing etc the line never got this dark again)Attachment 30275

519b48 Ovulation charts on FertilityFriend.com

My biggest issue with all this is: are these disappearing lines not only causing heartache but also leading someone to believe they have fertility issues when they dont! I believe chemicals are way more common than we believe and a natural part of life (in most cases) but getting these lines at early testing is just throwing fuel on the fire so to speak. We all know we shouldn't test until MISSED period but how many of us actually do that? I myself have used in excess of 20 frers ($$$$$$) in one 2ww testing trying to get that line to darken and not disappear. So *IF* they are picking up on this h-hcg then to me its an absolute rort as they are designed specifically for early testing for a bfp not a 'your egg got fertilised but didn't implant bfp'!! I may be way off base but in future I have no intention on testing prior to 10dpo with an frer or better yet later - testing at 8/9dpo seems to lead to nothing but heartache in many cases.

519b48 Ovulation charts on FertilityFriend.com

Pbn3 that is EXACTLY what my bfps looked like. It does cause heartache/confusion because I'm now starting to wonder whether maybe there was something wrong with my lining last month because I've never had any issues with implantation before. Next time I'll try and wait til I miss AF before I test....

Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk

Familymatters that is exactly what my friend is worried about - lining issues! But nothing points to that at all other than this disappearing line which in her case has happened for a few cycles in a row!! This is what I mean about these tests making people feel they have issues when in fact its nature taking its course in most cases!! I'm certainly not saying it isn't an issue in a particular persons case or even my friend's I'm just saying majority of time I believe its simply nature.

519b48 Ovulation charts on FertilityFriend.com

Apparently it's a real thing. I had never heard of it but there are legit studies confirming that this can happen. I think it is probably pretty rare and most times BFPs are due to CPs. I personally don't think it really matters as IMO there is no big difference between a fertilised egg that survives only about a week or so, whether it implanted or not. I think fertilisation is more of a key event than implantation. Most likely there is a serious problem with the zygote in either case, barring a strong history of implantation problems.

It is believed that as many as 50% of pregnancies end in loss, most of those early due to implantation failure. While there are studies on h-HCG, I don't think it's from an egg that is basically still free floating. I think what is happening is the tests are sensitive enough to pick up the low levels present once the embryo starts trying to implant and then drops when it fails for whatever reason.

^Yes, I'm sure that happens too.

I don't know if this could be happening or not. Seems like quite a stretch. To my way of thinking a blastocyst that doesn't implant is still a chemical though really.

I really, really, vastly, to the point of insanity, wish you guys wouldn't test this early. I too believe chemicals are part of life and much more common than we realize and we're "not supposed to know". It's such a complex process for sperm to meet egg and turn into baby that the shock is not that it goes wrong sometimes but that it goes RIGHT as often as it does. No earlier than 10DPO and I prefer 12. I know it's hard to wait but the alternatives all suck even more - false negatives, chemicals, only in the minorities is it actually a positive test that soon.