Dead is dead
- Thread starter Timshel
- Start date
That is a question not only of biology, but of philosophy, politics, psychology, religion, technology, and emotions.
You are confused about what BASIC biology is capable of demonstrating. Period.
I guess, superfreak's understanding of basic biology puts him at an advantage to this person, who agrees with me.
http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2013/10/03/when-does-a-human-life-begins-17-timepoints/
Being a biologist, a textbook author, and a mother, I’ve thought a great deal about the question of when a human life begins. So here are my selections of times at which a biologist might argue a human organism is alive. I’ll save my preference for the end.
1. Life is a continuum. Gametes (sperm and oocyte) link generations.
2. The germline. As oocytes and sperm form, their imprints – epigenetic changes from the parents’ genomes – are lifted.
3. The fertilized ovum. Of the hundreds of sperm surviving the swim upstream to the oocyte, one jettisons its tail and nuzzles inside the much larger cell, which obligingly becomes an ovum, completing its own meisosis. A fertilized ovum = conception.
4. Pronuclei merge, within 12 hours. After fertilization, the packets of DNA from male and female — the pronuclei — approach, merge, and the intermingling chromosomes pair and part, as the first mitotic division looms. A new human genome forms. Following that first division, some genes from the new genome are accessed to make proteins, but maternal transcripts still dominate development.
5. Cleavage. Divisions ensue. The cells of an 8-celled embryo (day 3) have not yet committed to becoming part of the embryo “proper” (one with layers) or the supportive membranes. Such a cell can still, on its own, develop. An 8-celled embryo whose cells are teased apart could lead to an octomom situation.
6. Day 5. The new genome takes over as maternal transcripts are depleted. The inner cell mass (icm) separates from the hollow ball of cells and takes up residence on the interior surface. It will become the embryo proper, distinguishing itself from the remaining part of the ball fated to become the extra-embryonic membranes. The icm is what all the fuss about human embryonic stem (hES) cells is about — the stem cells aren’t the icm cells, but are cultured from them.
7. End of the first week. The embryo implants in the uterine lining.
8. Day 16. The gastrula. Tissue layers form, first the ectoderm and endoderm, then the sandwich filling, the mesoderm. Each layer gives rise to specific body parts.
9. Day 14. The primitive streak forms, classically the first sign of a nervous system and when some nations set the deadline for no longer using human embryos in experiments.
10. Day 18. The heart beats.
11. Day 28. The neural tube closes, within which the notochord, preliminary to the spinal cord, will form, while the bulge at the top will come to house the brain. If the tube doesn’t close completely, a neural tube defect (anencephaly, spina bifida, and a few others) results.
12. End of week 8. The embryo becomes a fetus, all structures present in rudimentary form.
13. Week 14 or thereabouts. “Quickening,” the flutter a woman feels in her abdomen that will progress to squirms and kicks from within.
14. Week 22. A fetus has a chance of becoming a premature baby if delivered.
15. Birth.
16. Puberty. The Darwinian definition of what matters on a population and species level, when reproduction becomes possible.
17. Acceptance into medical school. I don’t know where this came from, a joke about Jewish mothers, but in some circles it might now apply to acceptance into preschool. Or when one’s grown offspring leave home.
My answer? #14. The ability to survive outside the body of another sets a practical limit on defining when a sustainable human life begins.
http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2013/10/03/when-does-a-human-life-begins-17-timepoints/
Being a biologist, a textbook author, and a mother, I’ve thought a great deal about the question of when a human life begins. So here are my selections of times at which a biologist might argue a human organism is alive. I’ll save my preference for the end.
1. Life is a continuum. Gametes (sperm and oocyte) link generations.
2. The germline. As oocytes and sperm form, their imprints – epigenetic changes from the parents’ genomes – are lifted.
3. The fertilized ovum. Of the hundreds of sperm surviving the swim upstream to the oocyte, one jettisons its tail and nuzzles inside the much larger cell, which obligingly becomes an ovum, completing its own meisosis. A fertilized ovum = conception.
4. Pronuclei merge, within 12 hours. After fertilization, the packets of DNA from male and female — the pronuclei — approach, merge, and the intermingling chromosomes pair and part, as the first mitotic division looms. A new human genome forms. Following that first division, some genes from the new genome are accessed to make proteins, but maternal transcripts still dominate development.
5. Cleavage. Divisions ensue. The cells of an 8-celled embryo (day 3) have not yet committed to becoming part of the embryo “proper” (one with layers) or the supportive membranes. Such a cell can still, on its own, develop. An 8-celled embryo whose cells are teased apart could lead to an octomom situation.
6. Day 5. The new genome takes over as maternal transcripts are depleted. The inner cell mass (icm) separates from the hollow ball of cells and takes up residence on the interior surface. It will become the embryo proper, distinguishing itself from the remaining part of the ball fated to become the extra-embryonic membranes. The icm is what all the fuss about human embryonic stem (hES) cells is about — the stem cells aren’t the icm cells, but are cultured from them.
7. End of the first week. The embryo implants in the uterine lining.
8. Day 16. The gastrula. Tissue layers form, first the ectoderm and endoderm, then the sandwich filling, the mesoderm. Each layer gives rise to specific body parts.
9. Day 14. The primitive streak forms, classically the first sign of a nervous system and when some nations set the deadline for no longer using human embryos in experiments.
10. Day 18. The heart beats.
11. Day 28. The neural tube closes, within which the notochord, preliminary to the spinal cord, will form, while the bulge at the top will come to house the brain. If the tube doesn’t close completely, a neural tube defect (anencephaly, spina bifida, and a few others) results.
12. End of week 8. The embryo becomes a fetus, all structures present in rudimentary form.
13. Week 14 or thereabouts. “Quickening,” the flutter a woman feels in her abdomen that will progress to squirms and kicks from within.
14. Week 22. A fetus has a chance of becoming a premature baby if delivered.
15. Birth.
16. Puberty. The Darwinian definition of what matters on a population and species level, when reproduction becomes possible.
17. Acceptance into medical school. I don’t know where this came from, a joke about Jewish mothers, but in some circles it might now apply to acceptance into preschool. Or when one’s grown offspring leave home.
My answer? #14. The ability to survive outside the body of another sets a practical limit on defining when a sustainable human life begins.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
ROFLMAO... no moron, I am not. It IS a question on biology. THAT is the SCIENCE. The rest is emotional and subjective.
A unique human life begins the second the genetic coding of the sperm and egg cells combine. That is SCIENTIFIC FACT. That is not debatable. AT ALL.
- - - Updated - - -
that is all.
Is this supposed to mean something?
It is not a scientific fact. It is your moral opinion. It is debatable.
You ignored her sixteen other instances of when a biologist might argue a human organism is alive and chose an instance that disagrees with what you previously said. You previously said it begins at fertilization which is described in 3 not 4. Damn, you are stupid.
You don't even agree with yourself on what the biology says and you want us to believe that all biologists agree with each other and you without any support or references substantiating your absurd claim. LOL!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
No, it is actually a scientific FACT. It has nothing to do with morals.
You may want to read 3 & 4 again.
Again... I did not disagree with myself...
All of the rest of her posts are based on subjective feelings. It has NOTHING to do with SCIENCE.
Viability does not determine if something is human. Viability does not determine if something is a unique human.
Stage of development does not determine if something is human. Stage of development does not determine if something is a unique human life.
It is absurd to argue otherwise. It is basic genetics. It is basic biology.
No, it is just your self contradicting religious/moral belief.
I don't need to read 3 and 4 again. 3 was fertilization, when you previously said it was a scientific fact that life had begun. 4 is twelve hours later when you say it is a scientific fact that life has begun.
And you are better to judge the biology than she is based on what? The fact that you can't even agree with yourself? Even if you disagree, it becomes obvious that this is not settled by biological science. You want it to be because you are a pea brained moron that has a need for absolutes.
Viability is the point at which a sustainable human life begins. Prior to that it is a biological fact, that it is completely dependent on it's mothers life support systems.
I have provided expert sources in biology and genetics and you have provided nothing but your religious/moral views which contradict each other, biologists and geneticists to claim there is some consensus scientifically factual position on when a human life begins. Sorry, your position is not based on science and is just laughable.
Those conditions that define "not alive" cannot suddenly become "alive" just because your feelings/God tell you they should.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
It begins at fertilization you dolt, it is completed within that first 12 hours. It doesn't just start up at 11 hours and 59 minutes. It is a process. But as she stated... at that point the NEW HUMAN GENOME is formed. A unique human life begins at that time. Period. That is the biological FACT that you want to ignore.
Based on the FACT that I am using the FACTS of biology and not trying to divert a SCIENCE into a philosophical jumble.
No, again you cowardly liar... I am not disagreeing with myself. You are simply trying to spin your way around the fact that you are a science denier.
Well... no shit... but that does not mean it is anything other than a human life prior to that. It is still human and still living prior to being able to do so on its own.
Yes... a point I have never argued against. It still doesn't change the FACT that it is a unique human life while still dependent on its mother. It is the same as a person being put on life support... do they suddenly become non-human? No.
LOL... no... you presented a physicist and a biologist who diverts into philosophy. You have made a complete fool of yourself... yet again.
See how you ramble, twist and spin?
You still want to cling to your belief that a brain dead person is somehow the same as a developing fetus prior to sentience. That is pure nonsense.
You then pretend that I am basing my position on 'feelings' when it is you that is doing so.
As for God... I am agnostic... but you throw God into the mix because you want to create a straw man to knock down.
You believe in fantasy.
I rely upon SCIENCE.
Life is completed twelve hours after fertilization? You sure that's what you want to go with? Is that a biological fact? No, it can't be since you then immediately contradict yourself by stating that "a unique human life begins at that time [twelve hours after fertilization]." You seem to now be arguing that "the beginning of life begins at fertilization?" LMAO!
She is not using the biological "facts?" The other biologist and geneticist, Gilbert, is not using biological facts? Only you are? Isn't that convenient? Again, how do you deal with the fact that you claim this is consensus science while disagreeing with biologists and geneticists? You have offered nothing to show that there is a consensus among biologists on when life begins and even what life is.
You rely on nothing but the opinions of bloated morons in the GOP.
Again, those conditions that define "not alive" cannot suddenly define "alive" just because your feelings/God tell you they should. Your position is not logically consistent and rejects science, per usual.
I am done showing that there is no scientific consensus on when life begins. There is not, but it was never really my point and sf is just going to continue to bloviate on it without any substantiation.
My point was that regardless of what various fields of science might say their definitions don't harmoniously translate to the legal or medical context.
How would you, SF, deal with what you define as rights bearing IVF human beings. Who is responsible for their care/protection and is it murder/manslaughter/malpractice if they die?
My point was that regardless of what various fields of science might say their definitions don't harmoniously translate to the legal or medical context.
How would you, SF, deal with what you define as rights bearing IVF human beings. Who is responsible for their care/protection and is it murder/manslaughter/malpractice if they die?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO... you are truly desperate now. Life begins at conception, that is when the genetic coding of the sperm and egg begin to combine. The new human genome is completed within that first twelve hours. Quit trying to spin. It is pretty fucking simply biology. Something you continue to deny.
For determining when life begins? In her 3 & 4 she is... then she begins using subjective times. Based on what she FEELS, not based on the biological FACT as to when life begins. Each of her subsequent points you can ask two questions of...
Was it human prior to that point?
Was it alive prior to that point?
The answer each and every time to both questions is YES.
No moron... I base it on basic biological FACT.
So you are a coward and a liar?
You continue to equate 'brain dead' with an unborn child. If an unborn child was brain dead, it would no longer continue to grow and develop. That is also a biological fact.
The childs brain is DEVELOPING. A brain dead persons mind is gone. It ceased functioning.
Yet you continue to ignore the fact that I point this out. You continue to run away like the coward you are and refuse to address that. Instead, you pretend my comments are based on feeling/God, when in fact my point is purely about biological function and has nothing to do with God/Feelings. Again LIAR... I am agnostic. God has no relevance in this discussion. You keep injecting him because you know you are wrong. But you are too cowardly to admit it.
-----------Merged------------
Your only valid point is with regards to the legal aspect. I have stated that same point for years.
You are a fucking idiot when it comes to the medical or biological contexts. You are flat out 100% wrong on both.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
AS for your 'consensus'... SCIENCE does not look for CONSENSUS... but given you are someone that denies science, I am not surprised you don't know that.
There is however, biological FACT. A unique human life begins at conception. That is a fact. No matter how somebody 'FEELS' about it... that fact does not change.
You provided no SCIENTIFIC evidence to the contrary. You posted peoples feelings/philisophical rantings.
I am done proving that you are a nothing but a fucking moron who denies science, contradicts himself and that neither when life begins or what life is are settled facts.
Yes, yes, yes, we all know that a brain dead child is not the same thing as a healthy fetus, moron. But what we are talking about here is the necessary conditions for "not life" and "is life." Neither have the necessary parts that make one a rights bearing individual or that make one alive in the legal sense. The fetus' brain will not develop outside of the mother. It would be brain dead and it could not benefit from medical care. It's not a separate and sustainable life.
Dumbfuck, you are the one claiming that this is basic biology, which implies consensus or a settled matter. You have been proven wrong. You are full of shit and have provided nothing but your own opinion which you then contradicted and don't seem to be able to keep straight. Your latest opinion was that it was 12 hours after conception, dumbfuck.