The area of reproductive medicine has changed dramatically in the last decade. The technology is advancing, but the people who rely on it continue to face a maze of challenges unrelated to biology. Anyone who has had IVF or even considered egg freezing quickly discovers that the experience varies depending on where you live, what your insurance covers, and how much you can actually afford. Some clinics are so busy that new patients must wait months for a consultation, while others lack the capacity to provide all options.
COVID-19 only made all of this more obvious. When clinics suddenly closed their doors, everything stopped. Couples who had spent years saving for one treatment window watched it dissolve overnight. A surprising number never came back. And beneath the surface, another layer existed, one that was not exactly new. Race, income, and long-standing mistrust of the medical system shaped who pushed forward and who quietly stepped away.
Dr. Zaher Merhi’s career took form in a field that is rarely clear or equitable. He grew up in Lebanon, where he was born on August 19th, 1976, before moving to the United States and becoming a citizen. He began his training as an OB/GYN, as is customary for anybody entering women’s health. However, he continued to research the science of fertility and eventually became a specialist in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility. Along the way, he also obtained the accreditation necessary to operate high-complexity IVF laboratories (HCLD).
The HCLD certificate implies that he is more than just the doctor people see in the exam room; he is also trained to supervise the sensitive environment in which eggs, embryos, and incubators are handled daily. It is a part of the process most patients never see, but it shapes everything that happens in the clinic.
Most physicians end up leaning toward either the clinical or the research path, but Merhi somehow kept both active. During his residency at Maimonides in Brooklyn, through his fellowship at Montefiore and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and in later faculty positions at Einstein, the University of Vermont, NYU Grossman, and SUNY Downstate, he moved between teaching, treating, and experimenting with new ideas. At SUNY Downstate, he eventually ran the accredited fellowship program that trains future reproductive endocrinologists.
Outside academia, Merhi founded the Rejuvenating Fertility Center (RFC), a practice that works with a wide range of patients, including those seeking low-stimulation or natural-cycle IVF. RFC’s approach is not the standard template used by many large clinics, and that has attracted both patients and critics. His work as a lab director is inseparable from his clinical role, and this combination led to his leadership positions within the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), where he served as chair of the Physician-Scientists Special Interest Group in 2019–2020. He has also served as an ABOG oral board examiner, evaluating new specialists entering the field.
Merhi’s most notable work has been in areas considered experimental or near-experimental. One of these is platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy delivered directly to the ovary. He and his colleagues have published theories suggesting that PRP may influence the ovarian environment, growth factor activity, or follicular activation. Results reported so far, his and others’, have sparked excited interest from some clinicians and skepticism from others. Critics argue the field needs far more randomized controlled trials; supporters believe it shows enough promise to keep investigating. Even Merhi’s own papers emphasize that the technique is still under study.
The pandemic forced every fertility clinic to rethink how it delivered care. With travel restrictions and periodic shutdowns, Merhi and colleagues explored whether IVF could be made more portable during emergencies. One protocol he helped develop involved transporting gametes and embryos between patients and central labs using portable incubator systems. At least one case study later reported a live birth from this workflow. This raised new questions: Could decentralized IVF be safe in the long term? Should it become part of future emergency planning?
During that time, he used similar themes in his public communications. In interviews, including one televised by NBC New York, he supported immunization while admitting that early evidence for pregnant women or those attempting to conceive was limited. He stated that over 70% of reproductive treatments at his facility had to be halted during the first wave of limitations. Nothing was automated; every instance required a judgment call as the scenario changed week after week.
Outside his own clinic, Merhi has been part of wider conversations about equity in reproduction. Within ASRM’s “Caring for Black Women Seeking Fertility Treatment” initiative and similar spaces, he has spoken about insurance gaps, research design, and the need for fertility studies that reflect the diversity of the people seeking care. He has repeatedly argued that reproductive technology is not just shaped by age or eggs, but by economics, geography, policy, and bias.
Teaching has been a steady part of Merhi’s career for years. He has mentored residents, fellows, and young researchers at several institutions, often encouraging projects that overlap the lab bench and the clinic, an approach that mirrors how he works himself. Some of this research has been supported by grants, including the Bayer Discovery/Innovation Grant and funding from the ASRM and the Ferring Research program. He was awarded the ASRM Star Award for 6 years in a row.
In addition to his clinical and academic activities, he works on the editorial side of reproductive science. He is on the editorial boards of many journals, including Nutrients, Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, and The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism. Most readers never see that work, but it means he assesses proposals, helps select whether research continues ahead, and provides feedback on the types of problems that the discipline is interested in. It’s a subtler form of impact, with no press releases or headlines, yet it influences the course of research.
In recent years, he has spoken more about Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its potential implications for reproductive treatment. Though he often cautions that these models are only as trustworthy as the data they are trained on, he is open to the idea that AI can assist in predicting treatment outcomes or aid in embryo selection. The technology may make current inequities worse rather than better if the data is skewed or insufficient. This worry is closely tied to his interest in reproductive inequalities; he wants science to progress without making the existing injustices worse.
Merhi’s complete body of work gives the impression that the space around him is simultaneously expanding in both directions. On the one hand, most people are unable to keep up with the rapid emergence of new methods and creative concepts. But persistent issues like unequal access and financial obstacles still stand in the way of advancement. His expertise involves both lab science and patient care, and his research on ovarian aging, metabolic factors, and early-stage therapies complements investigations on racial disparities during COVID-19.
