The Kids are Doing Alright: The Culture War is Over

Unhampered from access to use of the mother's body.
First, give me the source of this so that I can check for myself what you have willfully ignored. But it establishes that I am correct if one does not ignore the pieces of information that prove YOU wrong.

I don't pretend to know all the science here, but the fertilized egg has to have some method of identifying the uterine wall. It does not just randomly attach to whatever is convenient. It must respond to information available in the mother's body. The information is some sort of chemical or hormone released, I imagine.

If you would like to find a REAL scientist that is not influenced to form answers through reference to religion, to join the discussion, I am certain he will expose the fact that I am correct.

You demand proof fro me? Where's your fucking proof dorkpuss. Yeah the egg does have a way of identifying what it is self determining to happen...the egg does it all. The woman's body naturally goes through cycles until an egg is fertalized...at that point the EGG not the womans body determines the changes to take place. The Egg puts out specific enzymes and hormones directing the womans body to respond. It even communicates via hormones to the fine hairs in the fallopian tubes to grant it access...

The bolded part of your post about the placenta is supposed to mean what? The placenta which again is directed to feed the baby, by the baby was also created by the baby? Is that your point? That at no point does the mother direct this to happen...is that the point? Everything you claim about the mothers directing any of the proccess is BS. YOU CANNOT PROVE otherwise because it is biologically already been proven that the mother is basically a passive participant as soon as conception happens!

Google any of the claims with regards to the proccess aofwhich biological entity does what...come on dorkpuss do it, prove what I have posted and described is false! I have googled yours and that is why I can laugh out loud at you!
 
You demand proof fro me? Where's your fucking proof dorkpuss. Yeah the egg does have a way of identifying what it is self determining to happen...the egg does it all. The woman's body naturally goes through cycles until an egg is fertalized...at that point the EGG not the womans body determines the changes to take place.
The Egg puts out specific enzymes and hormones directing the womans body to respond. It even communicates via hormones to the fine hairs in the fallopian tubes to grant it access...

The bolded part of your post about the placenta is supposed to mean what? The placenta which again is directed to feed the baby, by the baby was also created by the baby? Is that your point? That at no point does the mother direct this to happen...is that the point? Everything you claim about the mothers directing any of the proccess is BS. YOU CANNOT PROVE otherwise because it is biologically already been proven that the mother is basically a passive participant as soon as conception happens!

Google any of the claims with regards to the proccess aofwhich biological entity does what...come on dorkpuss do it, prove what I have posted and described is false! I have googled yours and that is why I can laugh out loud at you!

How does the woman's body respond or communicate with the fertilized egg? You have already acknowledged my point. I don't need to prove it to you. I am just pointing out the facts that you wish to ignore so that you may pretend the mother does nothing.
 
And another thing... then change your slogans to... abortion sometimes kills... instead of... abortion is murder.

?...I was speaking in terms of our current debate......personally, I consider your approach, that women should be allowed to kill their unborn children without cause, to be murder of the most heinous kind.....and I consider those who advocate on behalf of such an approach to be of the lowest and most vile form of human life...but then, that's just me.....some people can actually tolerate you.....
 
And another place where you acknowledge the point... Is with "basically passive." What that clearly means is, not really passive. Further, passive just means not chosen. But then neither are the actions of the fertilized egg chosen. What happens is automated responses between the mother's body and the fertilized egg. You wish to ignore the mother's part or to dismiss it. It cannot be.
 
And another place where you acknowledge the point... Is with "basically passive." What that clearly means is, not really passive. Further, passive just means not chosen. But then neither are the actions of the fertilized chosen. What happens is automated responses between the mother body and the fertilized egg. You wish to ignore the mother's part or to dismiss it. It cannot be.

Sure there's a relationship. But it's not like lumber and a builder. The baby is new living being, it's dna planning how it's own body grows. You and your stupid analogies are just polluting the web.
 
How does the woman's body respond or communicate with the fertilized egg? You have already acknowledged my point. I don't need to prove it to you. I am just pointing out the facts that you wish to ignore so that you may pretend the mother does nothing.

YOU CANNOT prove your contention that the woman is doing the directing dorkpuss and so you attempt a lil' twist here.

The unborn from zygote to fetus does all the directing, the woman as a passive participant cannot stop herself from responding to the direction of the zygote. In that way she is passive. The only time she can self direct to prevent the fetus from doing what is does is to medically kill the baby in utero.
 
?...I was speaking in terms of our current debate......personally, I consider your approach, that women should be allowed to kill their unborn children without cause, to be murder of the most heinous kind.....and I consider those who advocate on behalf of such an approach to be of the lowest and most vile form of human life...but then, that's just me.....some people can actually tolerate you.....

Which is why I said murder. Why did you object?

I don't condone murder of anything that can be properly called an unborn child, without cause.

And I consider your demand, that a woman give her body to the service of a brainless mass of cells to be slavery. At some point a contract is implied, not to a brainless mass of cells and, therefore, not at conception. Before that point a woman has a right to evict the brainless mass of cells which has no capacity for rights.
 
And another place where you acknowledge the point... Is with "basically passive." What that clearly means is, not really passive. Further, passive just means not chosen. But then neither are the actions of the fertilized egg chosen. What happens is automated responses between the mother's body and the fertilized egg. You wish to ignore the mother's part or to dismiss it. It cannot be.

Well well...you are having to get a little closer to the facts! The last step is admitting your mistaken statment and fully embrace that the mothers body will do nothing unless directed by the egg...and yes dorkpuss, that is a natural predisposed proccess of the fertalized egg...now go ahead and take the next step and acknowledge the passive relationship between the mother and her unborn baby. That the unborn directs its growth just as the infant does; and the young child; the adolecent; until finally adult maturity takes place. The human body is self maturing...you are self deluding :)

I have never denied that the mother is a host; that she provides a nurturing environment for development to take place. No matter how often you say that I have does not make it so... it's pure dishonest BS on your part!
 
Last edited:
YOU CANNOT prove your contention that the woman is doing the directing dorkpuss and so you attempt a lil' twist here.

I did not say it was "directed" in the point you found error with. If I used it anywhere, I can tell you now, that it was not intended to mean that the fertilized egg does nothing or the communication is not two way. If I give you directions to my home you must follow them. Of course, it is two way.

I am not married to any of these words. I am concerned with facts they represent and I am only trying to highlight the point that THE MOTHER’S ROLE IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. Your description of the process as being one in which the fertilized egg is simply “left alone” is absurd. It is not just "left alone." If it were "left alone" it would die quickly.

The unborn from zygote to fetus does all the directing, the woman as a passive participant cannot stop herself from responding to the direction of the zygote. In that way she is passive. The only time she can self direct to prevent the fetus from doing what is does is to medically kill the baby in utero.

And why should her choice against that of a passive (the fertilized egg makes no choice... its actions are just as automatic as the actions of the woman’s body) guest be denied or ignored.

CHOICE IS A KEY FACTOR TO RIGHTS. The fact that the fertilized egg has absolutely no ability to choose is indicative that it does not possess rights and has no need for them.
 
Well well...you are having to get a little closer to the facts! The last step is admitting your mistaken statment and fully embrace that the mothers body will do nothing unless directed by the egg...and yes dorkpuss, that is a natural predisposed proccess of the fertalized egg...now go ahead and take the next step and acknowledge the passive relationship between the mother and her unborn baby. That the unborn directs its growth just as the infant does; and the young child; the adolecent; until finally adult maturity takes place. The human body is self maturing...you are self deluding :)

I have never denied that the mother is a host; that she provides a nurturing environment for development to take place. No matter how often you say that I have does not make it so... it's pure dishonest BS on your part!

Nothing I said was any further from the facts. For some reason (because you are an intellectually dishonest hack) you chose to read "directed" into my comments and then decided that meant the whole process had nothing to do with the fertilized egg.

Then you acknowledge that it is not just "left alone."

Again, a mother can sever her contract with a born child. She must take legal steps to do so, that are intended to protect the rights of the born child. Once the developing life attains the capacity for rights, it is my opinion that the mother should have to follow some sort of process in order to establish that the unborn child poses some grave risk to her life or health to which she did not consent.

You don't give a fuck about the woman and you display that by pretending that her function is insignificant and unimportant, yet you demand that she continue the function she serves against her will. It's not logical, it's not ethical it is not scientifically based. It is based on your stupid religion at every step.
 
I did not say it was "directed" in the point you found error with. If I used it anywhere, I can tell you now, that it was not intended to mean that the fertilized egg does nothing or the communication is not two way. If I give you directions to my home you must follow them. Of course, it is two way.

I am not married to any of these words. I am concerned with facts they represent and I am only trying to highlight the point that THE MOTHER’S ROLE IS VERY SIGNIFICANT. Your description of the process as being one in which the fertilized egg is simply “left alone” is absurd. It is not just "left alone." If it were "left alone" it would die quickly.

And why should her choice against that of a passive (the fertilized egg makes no choice... its actions are just as automatic as the actions of the woman’s body) guest be denied or ignored.

CHOICE IS A KEY FACTOR TO RIGHTS. The fact that the fertilized egg has absolutely no ability to choose is indicative that it does not possess rights and has no need for them.

Originally Posted by RStringfield
*The process of growth is dependent on messages her body sends to the developing life. The fertilized egg would not be able to find its way without them. It would never attach to the uterine wall without them. It may attach to something else if they are distorted.


This is your statement, is is absolutely and scientifically false...period! the womans body is cyclical period! The fertalized egg directs and changes that cycle. The woman's body reacts to the direction of the egg.

The womans' role is passive! (pas·sive –adjective- influenced, acted upon, or affected by some external force, cause, or agency; being the object of action rather than causing action ( opposed to active).It is the zygote that directs implantation and growth...period!

Yet again you wish to create an argument that I never made; I never said that the zygote (fertalized egg) was not preprogrammed to direct. See how you make new arguments to disguise your errors? You are an intellectually dishonest person when you find yourself in error...that makes you a total fucking dorkpuss...and yes a hack.

The fertalized egg is not passive it is active...it directs...more of your BS analysis in action!

You have proven an inability to debate this issue based on facts and science stringy...you suck!
 
So now it's the environmental change?

You're getting your propaganda campaigns confused again. Take a break. Have a smoke. SHoot up bleach. Whatever it is you do for fun.

It's all the changes combined. To say a organism does not change when veins atrophy, blood circulation changes and it immediately adapts when its environment changes from a liquid to a gas is absurd on the face of it. That's why birth was and is a demarcation point and even though people in the past were not aware of the science and all the intricacies they figured that one out.
 
if that is the case no human has a right to life and we should permit them all to be killed at will......

Try again. The problem is classifying something as a human being when everything from common sense to every day practice shows it is wrong.

Everything, as a society, we hold dear....be it the sanctity of life to the equal right to life....has to be twisted and exceptions made when claiming something that has not been born is a human being. It makes a mockery of and erodes the very foundation of everything our society is built upon.
 
Yes the DNA perfoms the process. resources are crucial. But resources are crucial to ALL LIFE. Deny you the reources you need and you fail to perform a certain process. Are you therefore, unalive?

You are therefore not a human being just as a house is not a house if the proper resources are not supplied.

It is a process. Everything in this world is a process. In other words time is involved, be it building a house or "building" a human being.

Just like trees grow and produce fruit. An orange seed is not an orange tree or an egg a chicken even if the DNA matches. DNA is just one way to classify something.
 
yes apple....there is no difference between a child one minute before the umbilical is cut and one minute after.....either could be induced to take it's first breath, if it hasn't already and likely has.......

Again, it is a process. A number of things happen around the same time. The cord is cut. A breath is taken. Blood flow slowly starts to change direction. Etc, etc.

The point is all these changes happen at birth. There is a much greater difference between birth and one or two days later than there is between an 8 and 9 month old fetus.

Did you ever have gold fish when you were a kid? Depending on your age didn't your parents tell you not to take them out of the water?

Do you not realize the change involved going from a liquid environment to a gaseous one? That happens rather quickly at birth.
 
sure you do.......you just don't admit it.....that's your second failing.....

Nope. So then let's define the terms. Murder is an unlawful killing. We are not bickering over what the law is but what it should be, so let's agree then that it is an unjust killing. Without a right to life a being cannot be murdered. A chicken has no legal right to life and I can kill it without having committed murder. Without a working brain a human has no right to life. For instance, the brain dead. Therefore, an unborn child or a being with a right to life exists when it has a working brain. At that point, I would not condone killing it or doing anything that would constitute negligence in the duty to protect it, without just cause. Therefore, I do not condone murder or even negligent homicide of an unborn child/a being with a right to life. Thanks, for playing.
 
The Fetal brain

Murder is a legal term: Since Roe the only time the term murder can be used to address a fetal death is if a prosecutor says so. It is for the sake of debate important to differeniate technical terms to prevent hair splitters like stringy from going off on hair splitting rabbit trails of non arguments. Medical abortions legally kill unborn babies they do not murder them.

That said~~~


Developmental Review, 20, 81-98, 1999).


FETAL BRAIN &
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT



Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D.
Brain Research Laboratory,


ABSTRACT

The human brainstem is fashioned around the 7th week of gestation and matures in a caudal to rostral arc thereby forming the medulla, pons, and midbrain. The medulla mediates arousal, breathing, heart rate, and gross movement of the body and head, and medullary functions appear prior to those of the pons which precede those of the midbrain. Hence, by the 9th gestational week the fetus will display spontaneous movements, one week later takes its first breath, and by the 25th week demonstrates stimulus-induced heart rate accelerations. As the pons, which is later to mature, mediates arousal, body movements, and vestibular and vibroacoustic perception, from around the 20th to 27th weeks the fetus responds with arousal and body movements to vibroacoustic and loud sounds delivered to the maternal abdomen. The midbrain inferior-auditory followed by the superior-visual colliculi is the last to mature, and in conjunction with the lower brainstem makes fine auditory discriminations, and reacts to sound with fetal heart rate (FHR) accelerations, head turning, and eye movements--around the 36th week. When aroused the fetus also reacts with reflexive movements, head turning, FHR accelerations, and may fall asleep and display rapid eye movements. Thus fetal-cognitive motor activity, including auditory discrimination, orienting, the wake-sleep cycle, FHRs, and defensive reactions, appear to be under the reflexive control of the brainstem which also appears capable of learning-related activity.



FETAL BRAIN-BEHAVIOR AND COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

It is now well established that the human fetus is capable of some degree of behavioral complexity. In fact, as early as the 9th week of gestation the fetus is able to spontaneously move the extremities, head, and trunk (de Vries, Visser, & Prechtl, 1985). It has also been suggested that the near term fetus may be endowed with some degree of cognitive capability (e.g., Hepper & Shahidullah, 1994; Kisilevsky, Fearson & Muir, 1998). Cognition has been inferred based on alterations in fetal heart rate (FHR) and habituation to airborne sound (Kisilevsky & Muir, 1991), response-declines to vibroacoustic stimuli (Kisilevsky et al., 1998; Kuhlman, Burns, Depp, & Sabagha, 1988), and what appears to be neonatal preferences for the maternal voice as well as melodies and stories presented up to six weeks prior to birth (DeCasper & Fifer, 1980; DeCasper & Spence, 1986; DeCasper, Lecanuet, Busnel, Granier-Deferre & Maugeais, 1994; Lecanuet, Granier-Deferre, & Busnel, 1989).

As will be detailed below, the behavior of the fetus and newborn is likely a reflection of reflexive brainstem activities which are produced in the absence of forebrain-mediated affective or cognitive processing, i.e. thinking, reasoning, understanding, or true emotionality (Joseph, 1996a, 1999; Levene, 1993; Sroufe, 1996). It is the much slower to develop forebrain which generates higher order cognitive activity and purposeful behaviors, and which is responsible for the expression and experience of true emotions including pleasure, rage, fear and joy and the desire for social-emotional contact (Joseph, 1992, 1996ab, 1999; MacLean, 1990).

At birth and for the ensuing weeks, the forebrain is so immature that its influences are limited to signaling distress in reaction to hunger or thirst; a function of the immature hypothalamus (Joseph, 1982, 1992, 1999) in conjunction with the midbrain periaqueductal gray (e.g. Larson, Yajima, & Ko, 1994; Zhang, Davis, Bandler, & Carrive, 1994). Although various limbic nuclei become functionally mature over the course of the first several postnatal months and years (Benes, 1994; Joseph, 1992, 1999), the neocortex and lobes of the brain take well over seven, ten, and even thirty years to fully develop and myelinate (Blinkov & Glezer, 1968; Conel, 1939, 1941; Flechsig, 1901; Huttenlocher, 1990; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967).

It is rather obvious that the neonate is able to scream and cry and can even slightly lift the corners of the mouth as if smiling. However, these do not appear to be true emotions (Sroufe, 1996; however, see Izard, 1991). In fact, smiling, as well as screaming and crying can be produced from brainstem stimulation even with complete forebrain transection or destruction (Larson et al., 1994; Zhang et al., 1994; reviewed in Joseph, 1996a). Hence, neonatal and premature infant "smiling" or distress reactions to noxious stimulation (e.g. heel lance) are also likely brainstem mediated, particularly in that they may be triggered in the absence of any obvious stimulus source and following forebrain destruction or lack of development (anencephaly). However, as brainstem maturation continues in a caudal-rostral arc (Debakan, 1970; Langworthy, 1937), at term and over the following weeks and months, the immature hypothalamus (which sits atop the midbrain), and thus the forebrain, increasingly contributes to and gains control over these behaviors (Joseph, 1992, 1999).

The progression in behavioral complexity that begins with spontaneous fetal movements and which culminates with presumed preferences for the sound of mother's voice, also appear to reflect maturational events taking place in the brainstem, followed by forebrain structures. Indeed, the brainstem is first fashioned around the 33rd day of gestation (Bayer, 1995; Marin-Padilla, 1988; Sidman & Rakic, 1982) and nearly completes its cycle of development and myelination around the 7th gestational month (Gilles, Leviton, & Dooling, 1983; Langworthy, 1937; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). However, in contrast to the forebrain, the brainstem is incapable of cognition such as reasoning, comprehension, or thought (Joseph, 1996c), but instead reflexively reacts to a variety of stimuli in an exceedingly complex, albeit stereotyped fashion (Blessing, 1997; Cohen, Rossignol & Gillner, 1988; Cowie, Smith, & Robinson,1994; Steriade & McCarley, 1990).

FETAL BRAIN DEVELOPMENT: OVERVIEW

Fetal brain development can be divided into ten stages (Joseph, 1996a)

1. The generation of the neuroectoderm from ectoderm, and the formation of the neural preplate.

2. The splitting of the preplate thereby forming the neural plate.

3. The rising up and the inward folding of the sides of the neural plate which arch together and create a neural tube.

4. The generation of neuroepithelium which gives birth to immature nerve cells, the neuroblasts which migrate and grow leading axonal appendages, and then aggregate in specific, genetically determined locations beginning with what will become the brainstem and spinal cord.

5. The division of the neuroepithelium into ventricular and subventricular zones which produce separate waves of migrating neuroblasts.

6. Flexure of the neural tube which ascends, twists, and bends due to continued neuroblast generation and neuron division, thereby forming three (medulla, pons, forebrain), then later two additional cerebral vesicles (midbrain, telencephalon).

7. The aggregation, differentiation, and division of neurons which form the nuclei of the medulla, then the pons, midbrain, hypothalamus, thalamus, and later the limbic system, striatum, and later, layers I and VII (VIa,b) of the neocortex.

8. The establishment of neocortical layers II through VI as successive waves of neuroblasts are generated and form columns and layers as they sandwich themselves between neocortical layers I and VII (VIa,b).

9. Neuronal differentiation, dendritic growth, the establishment of synapses, and the myelination of activated brainstem axons which have established dendritic synaptic connections.

10. Functional development of the medulla, followed by the pons, then the midbrain, the lastly, the forebrain which does not begin to functionally mature until near term.

THE BRAINSTEM: A FUNCTIONAL OVERVIEW

The brainstem consists of phylogenetically older neurons and nuclei and is organized in a somewhat similar manner across a host of species ranging from fish to woman and man (Aitkin, 1986; Joseph, 1996c; Vertes, 1990) The brainstem is an exceedingly complex structure, consisting of a variety of nuclei and subdivisions which perform an array of divergent as well as interrelated sensory and reflexive motor functions (Blessing, 1997; Klemm, 1990; Skinner & Garcia-Rill, 1990; Vertes, 1990). These include the mediation and control of arousal, orienting, the sleep cycle, heart rate, breathing, gross axial, limb, head and eye movement (Blessing, 1997; Cowie et al., 1994; Masino, 1992; Steriade & McCarley, 1990), as well as visual, somesthetic, gustatory, and acoustic perception and sound production such as screaming and crying (Aitkin, 1986; Davidson & Bender,1991; Larson & Yajima, 1994; Zhang et al., 1994).

Given its exceedingly long and ancient evolutionary history, not surprisingly, many brainstem functions are present before birth and occur without the aid of thinking, reasoning, or even forebrain/neocortical participation (Blessing, 1997; Joseph, 1996cd; Steriade & McCarley, 1990). That is, the motor programs which subserve many basic and vital functions, such as the regulation of heart rate, the sleep cycle, and respiration, are essentially genetically hardwired, reflexively initiated, and produced in accordance with the brainstem's synaptic organization and internally generated rhythms which have been acquired and molded over the course of evolution. Because so many brainstem functions occur in a rhythmic, diurnal, and/or reflexive fashion, they do not require the assistance of the forebrain (Blessing, 1997; Cohen et al., 1988; Joseph, 1996c; Klemm, 1990; Steriade & McCarley, 1990).

Indeed, these same reflexive and rhythmic activities are demonstrated by anencephalic infants who may possess only a brainstem, i.e. respiration, sleeping, waking, crying, leg kicking, rudimentary smiling, and even rapid eye movements while sleeping. Rather, it is only later life that the maturing forebrain begins to exert significant influence on brainstem functioning.

By the 7th gestational month the medulla and pons have nearly completed their cycle of myelination and most of the various descending spinal-motor fiber tracts have reached target tissues and established their synaptic interconnections (Gilles et al., 1983; Langworthy, 1937; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). However, because the fetal brainstem matures in a caudal to rostral arc, and as different nuclei mature and myelinate at different rates, fetal-brainstem reflexes are initially triggered infrequently or in isolation, and thus emerge gradually and in an irregular fashion (Debakan, 1970).

For example, around the 10th week of gestation the fetus may take a single "breath" over a 24 hour time period, whereas by the 40th week "breathing" occurs much more frequently with some degree of regularity in regard to chest and abdominal movement (de Vries et al., 1985; Natale, Nasello-Paterson & Connors, 1988). However, it's not until birth that the breathing (inhalation - exhalation) response occurs in a continual fashion; a function of increasingly mature brainstem development.

Nevertheless, the brainstem continues to mature well after birth, and correspondingly, brainstem reflexes emerge and disappear at different time periods over the course of the first three to six months of postnatal life (Debakan, 1970; see also Capute, Palmer, Accardo, Wachtel, Ross & Palmer, 1984; Piper & Darrah, 1994). For example, initially, vital functions such as heart rate and respiration are irregular, body temperatures fluctuate, and swallowing is precarious. In addition, reflexes such as sneezing, yawning, sweating, salivation, and urination are almost hypersensitive and easily triggered. Moveover, similar to those with forebrain destruction or transection, newborn infants can make stepping, walking, running, crawling and even swimming movements. Neonates can also involuntary grope and reflexively grasp with their hands. These same behaviors are also demonstrated by anencephalics.

Over the ensuing months these reflexes become subject to increasing neurological maturational control and either become stable or incorporated and subsumed by the forebrain, or they disappear and are suppressed; albeit at different time periods in accordance with the maturational events still taking place throughout the brainstem as well as the forebrain. However, if the forebrain were destroyed many of these same primitive reflexes will reappear, including the sucking, head turning, groping, grasping, tonic neck, labyrinthine, supporting, placing, and stepping reflexes.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MEDULLA: A FUNCTIONAL OVERVIEW

Broadly considered, the brainstem consists of the medulla, pons, and midbrain, and matures in a caudal to rostral arc--a process that begins around the 6th to 7th week of gestation and continues well into the first year of postnatal life (Debakan, 1970; Gilles et al., 1983; Sidman & Rakic, 1982; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). Hence, the nuclei of the medulla generally emerge and myelinate prior to those of the pons which precede those of the midbrain. As noted above, this pattern of functional development is also demonstrated behaviorally in the fetus and neonate.

For example, in addition to its many subnuclei, the medulla gives rise to a variety of descending spinal-motor tracts which reflexively trigger limb and body movement. It also sprouts five cranial nerves, the acoustic (VIII), glossopharyngeal (IX), vagus (X), accessory (XI) and hypoglossal (XII), which exert tremendous influences on gross body movement, heart rate, respiration, and head turning. Specifically, the hypoglossal nerve and nucleus, controls the tongue and influences body movement. The spinal accessory nerve and nucleus controls shoulder elevation and head turning. The vagus, glosopharyngeal nerve, and nucleus solitarious control respiration and heart rate.

In regard to heart rate, the nucleus of the solitary tract interacts with and is also coextensive with the medullary respiratory and vasomotor centers. Together with the vagus and glosopharyngeal nerve and in conjunction with the "autonomic nervous system" these nuclei act to excite and depress cardiovascular functioning (Aminoff, 1996; Blessing, 1997; Joseph, 1996c). As per the medulla, control over the cardiovascular system is accomplished via pre- and post-ganglionic vagal fibers which project to the atrial muscle and the sinoatrial and atrioventicular nodes of the heart. However, in regard to fetal development and heart rate, the differential developmental rates of the parasympathetic system vs the sympathetic system, also appear to exert significant influences on the different maturational patterns of FHR deceleration and acceleration (see Kisilevsky & Low, 1998; Sorokin, Dierker, Pillay, Zador, Schreiner, & Rosen, 1982; Wheeler & Murrills, 1978).

As the medullary reticular formation constitutes the core of the medulla this portion of the brainstem is also able to stimulate and thus activate the spinal cord, as well as the more rostral portions of the brain including the forebrain and neocortex (Blessing, 1997; Steriade & McCarley, 1990). However, as the medulla matures in advance of more rostral structures, reflexive movements of the head, body, extremities, as well as "breathing" movements and alterations in heart rate, appear in advance of other functions.

SPONTANEOUS HEART RATE CHANGES, BODY AND BREATHING MOVEMENTS

The neural tube is first fashioned three weeks after conception and by the 7-8th week of gestation the major structures of the medulla have been established (Gilles et al., 1983; Sidman & Rakic, 1982). These include the hypoglossal, spinal accessory, vagus, and glosopharyngeal cranial nuclei, and the neurons of the reticular activating system. As noted, these nuclei and activating pathways subserve arousal, generalized body movements, head turning, shoulder elevation, heart rate, and breathing.

Likewise, beginning as early as the 7th week of gestation, the infant will display spontaneous movements, which by the 9th week come to include the extremities, the trunk, and the head (de Vries et al., 1985). Soon thereafter the fetus will take its first "breath" and by the 10th week of gestation spontaneous "breathing" (chest and abdominal) movements are observed (de Vries et al.,1985).

Initially these "breathing" movements remain rather irregular, variable, and isolated events, such that perhaps one breath might be observed over the course of an hour. Over the ensuing weeks and months these breathing movements occur more frequently and by 24 weeks they may be observed about 14% of the time. By 40 weeks the fetus will breath about 30% of the time over a 24 hour period (de Vries et al. 1985; Natale et al., 1988; Patrick, Campbell, Carmichael, Natale, & Richardson,1980).

As there is no free oxygen which may be inhaled, these "breathing" movements are brainstem reflexes which tend to be produced during periods of brainstem activity and heightened arousal (e.g., Pillai & James, 1990). Thus the aroused fetus (Pillai & James, 1990; Sorokin et al., 1982) not only will take a "breath" but will demonstrate alterations in heart rate and spontaneous movements which are also produced secondary to high levels of brainstem activity --as it is the brainstem which mediates arousal. Thus, during high levels of brainstem arousal, the fetus will spontaneously move its head, trunk, and extremities (de Vries et al., 1985), whereas heart rate may dramatically accelerate (Sorokin et al., 1982).

Moreover, just as breathing occurs more frequently as the medulla matures, spontaneous movements are observed more frequently as well. By 10 weeks spontaneous body movements occur about 14% of the time, whereas by 19 weeks the fetus is active more than 50% of the time (de Vries et al., 1985). That does not mean that FHR acceleration, breathing, and body movements are strictly coupled. For example, after 20 weeks there is an increase in the percentage of FHR acceleration and movement (DiPietro, Hodgson, Costigan, Hilton, & Johnson, 1996), until around 30 weeks at which point body movements decline (Natale, Nasello-Paterson, & Turlink, 1985). By contrast, a decrease in fetal "breathing" is not observed until two days before labor onset (Patrick et al., 1980), which, however, may be due to mechanisms initiating labor rather than maturation per se.

By term, heart rate fluctuations and accelerations again occur in tandem with spontaneous body movements and heightened arousal (Timor-Tritch, Dierker, Hertez, Deagan, & Rosen, 1978); a likely function of maturational changes occuring within the medulla and throughout the brainstem.

However, just as heightened brainstem activity is associated with labored breathing, but a general lack of movement during "paradoxical" sleep (Steriade & McClure, 1990), alterations in brainstem arousal may produce fetal "breathing" but a lack of movement during "quiet" states. As in "deep sleep," "quiet" periods may be due to heightened brainstem inhibitory influences over the spinal cord and cranial nerves; for electrophysiologically, during "deep sleep," the brain is in fact highly active (Steriade & McClure, 1990). Hence the term "paradoxical" sleep; a seemingly "quiet" period associated with a lack of limb, head, or whole body movement other than jerks and twitches, lateral eye movements, and labored breathing.

That these fetal reflexes are produced by an immature and still maturing brainstem and do not reflect cognitive processing or purposeful movement activity is suggested by the fact that breathing and spontaneous movements actually decrease as the fetus nears term (Kozuma, Nemota, Okal, & Mizuno, 1991; Patrick et al., 1980; Patrick, Campbell, Carmichael, Natale, & Richardson, 1982; Trudinger, Aust, & Knight, 1985), though again the contributions of mechanisms related to labor initiation cannot be ruled out. Thus, as the medulla myelinates, stabilizes, and matures, these spontaneous reflexes are not as easily triggered, but begin to be governed by the more stable intrinsic activities generated within the brainstem. Hence, at birth the infant takes its first real breath which is then sequentially repeated without interruption. Likewise, as the brainstem continues to mature after birth, brainstem regulated functions, such as heart rate and breathing, become increasingly stabilized over the ensuing weeks and months.
 
Originally Posted by RStringfield
*The process of growth is dependent on messages her body sends to the developing life. The fertilized egg would not be able to find its way without them. It would never attach to the uterine wall without them. It may attach to something else if they are distorted.


This is your statement, is is absolutely and scientifically false...period! the womans body is cyclical period! The fertalized egg directs and changes that cycle. The woman's body reacts to the direction of the egg.

The womans' role is passive! (pas·sive –adjective- influenced, acted upon, or affected by some external force, cause, or agency; being the object of action rather than causing action ( opposed to active).It is the zygote that directs implantation and growth...period!

Yet again you wish to create an argument that I never made; I never said that the zygote (fertalized egg) was not preprogrammed to direct. See how you make new arguments to disguise your errors? You are an intellectually dishonest person when you find yourself in error...that makes you a total fucking dorkpuss...and yes a hack.

The fertalized egg is not passive it is active...it directs...more of your BS analysis in action!

You have proven an inability to debate this issue based on facts and science stringy...you suck!

It is not scientifically false and you seemed to acknowledge that by saying that the mother's body responds and or communicates in a bi-directional manner. Are you now denying that?

Fine then, I reject the idea that the woman's body is passive. That was not the way I intended it. You have not shown that to be the case.

Her body works with the developing life in concert, both sending and receiving messages. Who initiates the communication? I don't care, it is not relevant. If she is not necessary to the process then there COULD BE NO harm in withdrawing her participation in whatever way she chose. It would be quite simple for developing life to continue its growth disconnected from her body. Because she is, we are left with difficult question about what her duties and rights are. If she has no rights she has no duty and vice versa in a contract.

An unverifiable source that you cut and paste from is of no use to me and I damn sure will not consider it authoritative.

You are simply full of shit. The fertilized egg is not "left alone" by being left to use the mother's body as it sees fit. An unborn child "left alone" can consciously choose actions that will preserve it's life for some time without aid. However, at that point the mother has no right to just leave it alone. She has a duty which she willfully accepted to care and protect for the child. She, also, has the right to discharge those duties under the law. It's still her choice to do with HER body as she sees fit and is balanced against the rights of the child.

You think a brainless mass of cells has absolute rights to do whatever it chooses without regard to its effects on anyone else, until it is born (magic rational fairy appears and takes away its rights to use others), based on nothing but your incoherent religion and ethics. Your position IS NOT based on science alone, which is why you have avoided the issue of rights and the resulting conflicts between those of the mother and the developing life. You also avoid all the questions your answer begs. For instance, why don't we treat "spontaneous" abortions of a brainless mass of cells as a death? Why do we allow fertility patients/doctors do something that is very likely to result in death? Are we going to protect the life of a "baby" conceived against the mother's will?

Now see if there is some word in there that you can play gotcha games with, like the retard and silly angel counter that you are.
 
Back
Top