Limited Contraceptives=Abortion?

Can you write your own points joe, or do you have to jump on another person’s bandwagon as you make a stance?

Are eggs/sperm alive? Absolutely, positively NOT even close. With out a shadow of a doubt, a sperm or egg has never reproduced a complete human entity while on their own.

Now guess what happens when you combine the two cells types in the right environment (notice there are three basic requirements for life)? With the right timing of events, a special and unique life is created. This life has never occurred previously, in the entire history of the world. Never once. The embryo has their own DNA, their own metabolism, their own form, etc., their own life.

Now this was one simple point Carl and Ann brought up. I refuse to prove every single point they have wrong (all you did was provide a link). In fact they are right sometimes. Yet the point of life was never even shaken, a human life is created at the moment of conception. Prove that wrong. Rather than copy and paste a website for me to read and waste time on, please prove to me the embryo is NOT alive.

I await your reply.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
It’s not a question of authority. His viewpoint make sense. Is it the only viewpoint that make sense? no. [/quote]

[quote]joebassin wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]joebassin wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Please enlighten me as to when the embryo becomes a person, so I can pass your obvious lack of intelligence on to him and many others who are all shunned in the light of your massive intellect.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
Good old Scott should learn that science does not tell us when an embryo becomes a person. [/quote]
[/quote]

Obviously joebassin hasn’t heard of this neat tool called google…

http://clinicquotes.com/site/story.php?id=28

or,
“The facts above, along with the constancy of the time of gestation, approximately 38 weeks, reasonably declare that the life of the new individual human being begins with fertilization. Virtually every human embryologist and every major textbook of Human Embryology states that fertilization marks the beginning of the life of the new individual human being.”

Read the whole link here…
http://www.all.org/abac/cwk004.htm

It’s funny, the ‘I trust science’ people suddenly don’t when it comes to an issue were science dictates a reality that differs from there opinion…In the end they have nothing to rely on save for the scant hope that their opinion, though contrary to fact is somehow the actual reality…

I am guessing at this point is where ‘creationism’ accustaions start to be leveled, or perhaps I am putting the cart before the horse because a true critical thinking person wouldn’t dare introduce such a pathetic strawman??? [/quote]

Only for those really interested since it’s quite long. Read it, and come back to tell me that Carl Sagan is not a critical person.
http://www.2think.org/abortion.shtml

[/quote]

Carl Sagan the theoretical physicist, really?
Yeah, they pose the same bad arguments that you guys do…Why isn’t sperm considered human? Or flat out lies, such as ‘pro-lifers allow for cases of rape or incest’…Uh, no we don’t. Or the utter stupid argument that there is no such thing as a ‘Right to life’. Really? Go shoot a pregnant woman in the gut and see how many counts of murder you get charged with… The answer is 2. See Scott Peterson.
Just because you don’t want to call something what it is, doesn’t mean it isn’t. Scientifically speaking, the embryo at any stage of gestation is a human organism. Good luck disproving that fact.
Really, all you have left is the question ‘when is it ok to take human life’. Unmistakably the life you take is human and nothing else. [/quote]

  1. I have never denied the fact that the embryo is a human organism. I said it’s not a person.
    [/quote]
    What are the properties of ‘personhood’?

You can’t really know that. Consciousness is an elusive thing. You can’t really know what has it and what does not. Further, you can’t kill it because it’s not physical.

Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.

[quote]
4. A woman as a right to her body. She’s free to decide if she want to abort or not.

This is my opinion feel free to have a different one. I do not have the intention nor care to change your opinion. [/quote]

It’s not the woman’s body I am concerned with. It’s her kids she see’s fit to kill because she’s an incompetent, lazy piece of shit and can’t be bothered to accept the consequences of her actions. It’s still murder.
If she wants to cut her arm off and shove it up her ass, I have no issues with that.

[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.

It’s not the woman’s body I am concerned with. It’s her kids she see’s fit to kill because she’s an incompetent, lazy piece of shit and can’t be bothered to accept the consequences of her actions. It’s still murder.
If she wants to cut her arm off and shove it up her ass, I have no issues with that.[/quote]

It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.

And that “lazy piece of shit” might be a rape victim, so how about you shut your fucking mouth? Consequences of her actions? We both know how horrible people can be, don’t you dare try and pull this bullshit.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Can you write your own points joe, or do you have to jump on another person’s bandwagon as you make a stance?

Are eggs/sperm alive? Absolutely, positively NOT even close. With out a shadow of a doubt, a sperm or egg has never reproduced a complete human entity while on their own.

Now guess what happens when you combine the two cells types in the right environment (notice there are three basic requirements for life)? With the right timing of events, a special and unique life is created. This life has never occurred previously, in the entire history of the world. Never once. The embryo has their own DNA, their own metabolism, their own form, etc., their own life.

Now this was one simple point Carl and Ann brought up. I refuse to prove every single point they have wrong (all you did was provide a link). In fact they are right sometimes. Yet the point of life was never even shaken, a human life is created at the moment of conception. Prove that wrong. Rather than copy and paste a website for me to read and waste time on, please prove to me the embryo is NOT alive.

I await your reply.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
It’s not a question of authority. His viewpoint make sense. Is it the only viewpoint that make sense? no. [/quote]
[/quote]

I’m curious about your stance on in vitro fertilization (fertilizing multiple eggs outside the body and injecting one or a few embryos after fertilization has occurred in vitro):

Embryo culture

Typically, embryos are cultured until having reached the 6�¢??8 cell stage three days after retrieval. In many Canadian, American and Australian programmes[citation needed], however, embryos are placed into an extended culture system with a transfer done at the blastocyst stage at around five days after retrieval, especially if many good-quality embryos are still available on day 3. Blastocyst stage transfers have been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates.[4] In Europe, transfers after 2 days are common.

Culture of embryos can either be performed in an artificial culture medium or in an autologous endometrial coculture (on top of a layer of cells from the woman’s own uterine lining). With artificial culture medium, there can either be the same culture medium throughout the period, or a sequential system can be used, in which the embryo is sequentially placed in different media. For example, when culturing to the blastocyst stage, one medium may be used for culture to day 3, and a second medium is used for culture thereafter.[5] Single or sequential medium are equally effective for the culture of human embryos to the blastocyst stage.[6] Artificial embryo culture media basically contain glucose, pyruvate, and energy-providing components, but addition of amino acids, nucleotides, vitamins, and cholesterol improve the performance of embryonic growth and development.[7] Methods to permit dynamic embryo culture with fluid flow and embryo movement are also available.[8] A new method in development uses the uterus as an incubator and the naturally occurring intrauterine fluids as culture medium by encapsulating the embryos in permeable intrauterine vessel.[9]
[edit] Embryo selection

Laboratories have developed grading methods to judge oocyte and embryo quality. In order to optimise pregnancy rates, there is significant evidence that a morphological scoring system is the best strategy for the selection of embryos.[10] However, presence of soluble HLA-G might be considered as a second parameter if a choice has to be made between embryos of morphologically equal quality.[10] Also, two-pronuclear zygotes (2PN) transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than those that constantly remain 2PN.[11]

More advanced methods of embryo profiling may also be performed in order to optimise embryo selection, as further described in the “expansions”-section below.
[edit] Embryo transfer
Main article: Embryo transfer

Embryos are failed by the embryologist based on the amount of cells, evenness of growth and degree of fragmentation. The number to be transferred depends on the number available, the age of the woman and other health and diagnostic factors. In countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, a maximum of two embryos are transferred except in unusual circumstances. In the UK and according to HFEA regulations, a woman over 40 may have up to three embryos transferred, whereas in the USA, younger women may have many embryos transferred based on individual fertility diagnosis. Most clinics and country regulatory bodies seek to minimise the risk of pregnancies carrying multiples. As it is not uncommon for more implantations to take than desired, the next step faced by the expectant mother is that of selective abortion. The embryos judged to be the “best” are transferred to the patient’s uterus through a thin, plastic catheter, which goes through her vagina and cervix. Several embryos may be passed into the uterus to improve chances of implantation and pregnancy.

I’m surprised more people aren’t bombing those clinics. Aside from the case of too many embryos taking, can you imagine how many embryos just go straight into the trash?

“Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them implanted at a time where pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (with results in their unviability). Individual moral views on disposing leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and definition and/or value of potential future persons and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values).”

Similar is NOT the same thing! Please provide a verifiable source that can prove apes and humans are the same organism. If you believe a primate and a human are the same thing, you are a bigger moron than most of the posters here.

And please stop arguing your case while using a group, that is less than one percent of the whole. What do you call the bullshit you are trying to spew?

[quote]Makavali wrote:
It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.

And that “lazy piece of shit” might be a rape victim, so how about you shut your fucking mouth? Consequences of her actions? We both know how horrible people can be, don’t you dare try and pull this bullshit.[/quote]

I asked you to write your own reply and you come back with a cut and paste article? At least cite the source, it really is quite easy.

In vitro fertilization is something people need to understand better before they choose the technology. Most people can’t afford the procedure because of the labor and technicians required. My cousin actually had this done when she became pregnant her first time. She conceived naturally shortly after the twins were born. Sheri then donated the embryos to science. Want to guess the reason for her conception problems? She told me the contraceptives she had used when she was younger, caused much of the problems she had later in life. Shutting down a human bodies natural system WILL cause problems. People like mak need to learn the truth before they think they know the answer to any problem.

Now comes the MAJOR problem. With millions of dollars spent in funding the research and the human life wasted, want to guess how many lives have been saved with Embryonic Stem Cell Research? Look around the internet and find one person. In the entire world you will find NOT ONE! The reason is because the embryos reproduction of random body parts cannot be shut off. An embryo has to be everything in the body and shutting of the genes isn’t possible. Dr.'s claim they might be able to someday, yet after two decades it has yet to happen, even once.

Adult Stem Cells are taken from the diseased patient and treated with their own cells. They will not reject the tissue. In fact something like 73 [http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm] diseases are fully curable with ASC.

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/press/2008-02-27_JAMA.pdf

Why Embryonic Stem Cells Are Obsolete by Dr. Bernadine Healy

I ask that you understand a source, rather than copy the stuff you find with google.

[quote]ironcross wrote:
I’m curious about your stance on in vitro fertilization (fertilizing multiple eggs outside the body and injecting one or a few embryos after fertilization has occurred in vitro):

Embryo culture

Typically, embryos are cultured until having reached the 6�?�¢??8 cell stage three days after retrieval. In many Canadian, American and Australian programmes[citation needed], however, embryos are placed into an extended culture system with a transfer done at the blastocyst stage at around five days after retrieval, especially if many good-quality embryos are still available on day 3. Blastocyst stage transfers have been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates.[4] In Europe, transfers after 2 days are common.

Culture of embryos can either be performed in an artificial culture medium or in an autologous endometrial coculture (on top of a layer of cells from the woman’s own uterine lining). With artificial culture medium, there can either be the same culture medium throughout the period, or a sequential system can be used, in which the embryo is sequentially placed in different media. For example, when culturing to the blastocyst stage, one medium may be used for culture to day 3, and a second medium is used for culture thereafter.[5] Single or sequential medium are equally effective for the culture of human embryos to the blastocyst stage.[6] Artificial embryo culture media basically contain glucose, pyruvate, and energy-providing components, but addition of amino acids, nucleotides, vitamins, and cholesterol improve the performance of embryonic growth and development.[7] Methods to permit dynamic embryo culture with fluid flow and embryo movement are also available.[8] A new method in development uses the uterus as an incubator and the naturally occurring intrauterine fluids as culture medium by encapsulating the embryos in permeable intrauterine vessel.[9]
[edit] Embryo selection

Laboratories have developed grading methods to judge oocyte and embryo quality. In order to optimise pregnancy rates, there is significant evidence that a morphological scoring system is the best strategy for the selection of embryos.[10] However, presence of soluble HLA-G might be considered as a second parameter if a choice has to be made between embryos of morphologically equal quality.[10] Also, two-pronuclear zygotes (2PN) transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than those that constantly remain 2PN.[11]

More advanced methods of embryo profiling may also be performed in order to optimise embryo selection, as further described in the “expansions”-section below.
[edit] Embryo transfer
Main article: Embryo transfer

Embryos are failed by the embryologist based on the amount of cells, evenness of growth and degree of fragmentation. The number to be transferred depends on the number available, the age of the woman and other health and diagnostic factors. In countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, a maximum of two embryos are transferred except in unusual circumstances. In the UK and according to HFEA regulations, a woman over 40 may have up to three embryos transferred, whereas in the USA, younger women may have many embryos transferred based on individual fertility diagnosis. Most clinics and country regulatory bodies seek to minimise the risk of pregnancies carrying multiples. As it is not uncommon for more implantations to take than desired, the next step faced by the expectant mother is that of selective abortion. The embryos judged to be the “best” are transferred to the patient’s uterus through a thin, plastic catheter, which goes through her vagina and cervix. Several embryos may be passed into the uterus to improve chances of implantation and pregnancy.

I’m surprised more people aren’t bombing those clinics. Aside from the case of too many embryos taking, can you imagine how many embryos just go straight into the trash?

“Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them implanted at a time where pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (with results in their unviability). Individual moral views on disposing leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and definition and/or value of potential future persons and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values).”[/quote]

You didn’t ask me for my own reply. I was replying to your reply to someone else.

Your reply has nothing to do with the point of my post, which was that, considering sheer numbers, it’s very plausible that more embryos have been made and killed in petri dishes in recent years than aborted, yet I am not seeing a huge effort to call a halt to these fertilization practices or punish the people involved in them. Why is that? If you truly consider embryos people, you better get on the ball about this! It also stands as an example that the scientific community at large doesn’t view embryos as living beings with rights.

BTW, I posted the article from wikipedia, which had some great references if anyone wants to go on there and check them out, in case anyone wasn’t up to speed about what I’m referring to.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I asked you to write your own reply and you come back with a cut and paste article? At least cite the source, it really is quite easy.

In vitro fertilization is something people need to understand better before they choose the technology. Most people can’t afford the procedure because of the labor and technicians required. My cousin actually had this done when she became pregnant her first time. She conceived naturally shortly after the twins were born. Sheri then donated the embryos to science. Want to guess the reason for her conception problems? She told me the contraceptives she had used when she was younger, caused much of the problems she had later in life. Shutting down a human bodies natural system WILL cause problems. People like mak need to learn the truth before they think they know the answer to any problem.

Now comes the MAJOR problem. With millions of dollars spent in funding the research and the human life wasted, want to guess how many lives have been saved with Embryonic Stem Cell Research? Look around the internet and find one person. In the entire world you will find NOT ONE! The reason is because the embryos reproduction of random body parts cannot be shut off. An embryo has to be everything in the body and shutting of the genes isn’t possible. Dr.'s claim they might be able to someday, yet after two decades it has yet to happen, even once.

Adult Stem Cells are taken from the diseased patient and treated with their own cells. They will not reject the tissue. In fact something like 73 [http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm] diseases are fully curable with ASC.

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/press/2008-02-27_JAMA.pdf

Why Embryonic Stem Cells Are Obsolete by Dr. Bernadine Healy

I ask that you understand a source, rather than copy the stuff you find with google.

[quote]ironcross wrote:
I’m curious about your stance on in vitro fertilization (fertilizing multiple eggs outside the body and injecting one or a few embryos after fertilization has occurred in vitro):

Embryo culture

Typically, embryos are cultured until having reached the 6�??�?�¢??8 cell stage three days after retrieval. In many Canadian, American and Australian programmes[citation needed], however, embryos are placed into an extended culture system with a transfer done at the blastocyst stage at around five days after retrieval, especially if many good-quality embryos are still available on day 3. Blastocyst stage transfers have been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates.[4] In Europe, transfers after 2 days are common.

Culture of embryos can either be performed in an artificial culture medium or in an autologous endometrial coculture (on top of a layer of cells from the woman’s own uterine lining). With artificial culture medium, there can either be the same culture medium throughout the period, or a sequential system can be used, in which the embryo is sequentially placed in different media. For example, when culturing to the blastocyst stage, one medium may be used for culture to day 3, and a second medium is used for culture thereafter.[5] Single or sequential medium are equally effective for the culture of human embryos to the blastocyst stage.[6] Artificial embryo culture media basically contain glucose, pyruvate, and energy-providing components, but addition of amino acids, nucleotides, vitamins, and cholesterol improve the performance of embryonic growth and development.[7] Methods to permit dynamic embryo culture with fluid flow and embryo movement are also available.[8] A new method in development uses the uterus as an incubator and the naturally occurring intrauterine fluids as culture medium by encapsulating the embryos in permeable intrauterine vessel.[9]
[edit] Embryo selection

Laboratories have developed grading methods to judge oocyte and embryo quality. In order to optimise pregnancy rates, there is significant evidence that a morphological scoring system is the best strategy for the selection of embryos.[10] However, presence of soluble HLA-G might be considered as a second parameter if a choice has to be made between embryos of morphologically equal quality.[10] Also, two-pronuclear zygotes (2PN) transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than those that constantly remain 2PN.[11]

More advanced methods of embryo profiling may also be performed in order to optimise embryo selection, as further described in the “expansions”-section below.
[edit] Embryo transfer
Main article: Embryo transfer

Embryos are failed by the embryologist based on the amount of cells, evenness of growth and degree of fragmentation. The number to be transferred depends on the number available, the age of the woman and other health and diagnostic factors. In countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, a maximum of two embryos are transferred except in unusual circumstances. In the UK and according to HFEA regulations, a woman over 40 may have up to three embryos transferred, whereas in the USA, younger women may have many embryos transferred based on individual fertility diagnosis. Most clinics and country regulatory bodies seek to minimise the risk of pregnancies carrying multiples. As it is not uncommon for more implantations to take than desired, the next step faced by the expectant mother is that of selective abortion. The embryos judged to be the “best” are transferred to the patient’s uterus through a thin, plastic catheter, which goes through her vagina and cervix. Several embryos may be passed into the uterus to improve chances of implantation and pregnancy.

I’m surprised more people aren’t bombing those clinics. Aside from the case of too many embryos taking, can you imagine how many embryos just go straight into the trash?

“Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them implanted at a time where pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (with results in their unviability). Individual moral views on disposing leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and definition and/or value of potential future persons and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values).”[/quote]
[/quote]

oh god my eyes

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Can you write your own points joe, or do you have to jump on another person’s bandwagon as you make a stance?

Are eggs/sperm alive? Absolutely, positively NOT even close. With out a shadow of a doubt, a sperm or egg has never reproduced a complete human entity while on their own.

Now guess what happens when you combine the two cells types in the right environment (notice there are three basic requirements for life)? With the right timing of events, a special and unique life is created. This life has never occurred previously, in the entire history of the world. Never once. The embryo has their own DNA, their own metabolism, their own form, etc., their own life.

Now this was one simple point Carl and Ann brought up. I refuse to prove every single point they have wrong (all you did was provide a link). In fact they are right sometimes. Yet the point of life was never even shaken, a human life is created at the moment of conception. Prove that wrong. Rather than copy and paste a website for me to read and waste time on, please prove to me the embryo is NOT alive.

I await your reply.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
It’s not a question of authority. His viewpoint make sense. Is it the only viewpoint that make sense? no. [/quote]
[/quote]

What about you go read my post and stop talking to me about stupid crap I never said.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.

It’s not the woman’s body I am concerned with. It’s her kids she see’s fit to kill because she’s an incompetent, lazy piece of shit and can’t be bothered to accept the consequences of her actions. It’s still murder.
If she wants to cut her arm off and shove it up her ass, I have no issues with that.[/quote]

It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.
[/quote]
Oh! Do please explain it to me.

[quote]
And that “lazy piece of shit” might be a rape victim, so how about you shut your fucking mouth? Consequences of her actions? We both know how horrible people can be, don’t you dare try and pull this bullshit.[/quote]

Could have been a girl you dated at one time to. Considering that rape is a fraction of all abortions and most abortions are done out of convenience. You may kindly shut your fucking mouth. If we get rid of all abortions save for the ones by women who have been raped, I will indeed shut the fuck up about it forever.

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Can you write your own points joe, or do you have to jump on another person’s bandwagon as you make a stance?

Are eggs/sperm alive? Absolutely, positively NOT even close. With out a shadow of a doubt, a sperm or egg has never reproduced a complete human entity while on their own.

Now guess what happens when you combine the two cells types in the right environment (notice there are three basic requirements for life)? With the right timing of events, a special and unique life is created. This life has never occurred previously, in the entire history of the world. Never once. The embryo has their own DNA, their own metabolism, their own form, etc., their own life.

Now this was one simple point Carl and Ann brought up. I refuse to prove every single point they have wrong (all you did was provide a link). In fact they are right sometimes. Yet the point of life was never even shaken, a human life is created at the moment of conception. Prove that wrong. Rather than copy and paste a website for me to read and waste time on, please prove to me the embryo is NOT alive.

I await your reply.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
It’s not a question of authority. His viewpoint make sense. Is it the only viewpoint that make sense? no. [/quote]
[/quote]

I’m curious about your stance on in vitro fertilization (fertilizing multiple eggs outside the body and injecting one or a few embryos after fertilization has occurred in vitro):

Embryo culture

Typically, embryos are cultured until having reached the 6�?�¢??8 cell stage three days after retrieval. In many Canadian, American and Australian programmes[citation needed], however, embryos are placed into an extended culture system with a transfer done at the blastocyst stage at around five days after retrieval, especially if many good-quality embryos are still available on day 3. Blastocyst stage transfers have been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates.[4] In Europe, transfers after 2 days are common.

Culture of embryos can either be performed in an artificial culture medium or in an autologous endometrial coculture (on top of a layer of cells from the woman’s own uterine lining). With artificial culture medium, there can either be the same culture medium throughout the period, or a sequential system can be used, in which the embryo is sequentially placed in different media. For example, when culturing to the blastocyst stage, one medium may be used for culture to day 3, and a second medium is used for culture thereafter.[5] Single or sequential medium are equally effective for the culture of human embryos to the blastocyst stage.[6] Artificial embryo culture media basically contain glucose, pyruvate, and energy-providing components, but addition of amino acids, nucleotides, vitamins, and cholesterol improve the performance of embryonic growth and development.[7] Methods to permit dynamic embryo culture with fluid flow and embryo movement are also available.[8] A new method in development uses the uterus as an incubator and the naturally occurring intrauterine fluids as culture medium by encapsulating the embryos in permeable intrauterine vessel.[9]
[edit] Embryo selection

Laboratories have developed grading methods to judge oocyte and embryo quality. In order to optimise pregnancy rates, there is significant evidence that a morphological scoring system is the best strategy for the selection of embryos.[10] However, presence of soluble HLA-G might be considered as a second parameter if a choice has to be made between embryos of morphologically equal quality.[10] Also, two-pronuclear zygotes (2PN) transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than those that constantly remain 2PN.[11]

More advanced methods of embryo profiling may also be performed in order to optimise embryo selection, as further described in the “expansions”-section below.
[edit] Embryo transfer
Main article: Embryo transfer

Embryos are failed by the embryologist based on the amount of cells, evenness of growth and degree of fragmentation. The number to be transferred depends on the number available, the age of the woman and other health and diagnostic factors. In countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, a maximum of two embryos are transferred except in unusual circumstances. In the UK and according to HFEA regulations, a woman over 40 may have up to three embryos transferred, whereas in the USA, younger women may have many embryos transferred based on individual fertility diagnosis. Most clinics and country regulatory bodies seek to minimise the risk of pregnancies carrying multiples. As it is not uncommon for more implantations to take than desired, the next step faced by the expectant mother is that of selective abortion. The embryos judged to be the “best” are transferred to the patient’s uterus through a thin, plastic catheter, which goes through her vagina and cervix. Several embryos may be passed into the uterus to improve chances of implantation and pregnancy.

I’m surprised more people aren’t bombing those clinics. Aside from the case of too many embryos taking, can you imagine how many embryos just go straight into the trash?

“Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them implanted at a time where pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (with results in their unviability). Individual moral views on disposing leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and definition and/or value of potential future persons and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values).”[/quote]

Which is why this too, is an abominable practice and should be done away with as well.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ironcross wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Can you write your own points joe, or do you have to jump on another person’s bandwagon as you make a stance?

Are eggs/sperm alive? Absolutely, positively NOT even close. With out a shadow of a doubt, a sperm or egg has never reproduced a complete human entity while on their own.

Now guess what happens when you combine the two cells types in the right environment (notice there are three basic requirements for life)? With the right timing of events, a special and unique life is created. This life has never occurred previously, in the entire history of the world. Never once. The embryo has their own DNA, their own metabolism, their own form, etc., their own life.

Now this was one simple point Carl and Ann brought up. I refuse to prove every single point they have wrong (all you did was provide a link). In fact they are right sometimes. Yet the point of life was never even shaken, a human life is created at the moment of conception. Prove that wrong. Rather than copy and paste a website for me to read and waste time on, please prove to me the embryo is NOT alive.

I await your reply.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
It’s not a question of authority. His viewpoint make sense. Is it the only viewpoint that make sense? no. [/quote]
[/quote]

I’m curious about your stance on in vitro fertilization (fertilizing multiple eggs outside the body and injecting one or a few embryos after fertilization has occurred in vitro):

Embryo culture

Typically, embryos are cultured until having reached the 6�??�??�?�¢??8 cell stage three days after retrieval. In many Canadian, American and Australian programmes[citation needed], however, embryos are placed into an extended culture system with a transfer done at the blastocyst stage at around five days after retrieval, especially if many good-quality embryos are still available on day 3. Blastocyst stage transfers have been shown to result in higher pregnancy rates.[4] In Europe, transfers after 2 days are common.

Culture of embryos can either be performed in an artificial culture medium or in an autologous endometrial coculture (on top of a layer of cells from the woman’s own uterine lining). With artificial culture medium, there can either be the same culture medium throughout the period, or a sequential system can be used, in which the embryo is sequentially placed in different media. For example, when culturing to the blastocyst stage, one medium may be used for culture to day 3, and a second medium is used for culture thereafter.[5] Single or sequential medium are equally effective for the culture of human embryos to the blastocyst stage.[6] Artificial embryo culture media basically contain glucose, pyruvate, and energy-providing components, but addition of amino acids, nucleotides, vitamins, and cholesterol improve the performance of embryonic growth and development.[7] Methods to permit dynamic embryo culture with fluid flow and embryo movement are also available.[8] A new method in development uses the uterus as an incubator and the naturally occurring intrauterine fluids as culture medium by encapsulating the embryos in permeable intrauterine vessel.[9]
[edit] Embryo selection

Laboratories have developed grading methods to judge oocyte and embryo quality. In order to optimise pregnancy rates, there is significant evidence that a morphological scoring system is the best strategy for the selection of embryos.[10] However, presence of soluble HLA-G might be considered as a second parameter if a choice has to be made between embryos of morphologically equal quality.[10] Also, two-pronuclear zygotes (2PN) transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than those that constantly remain 2PN.[11]

More advanced methods of embryo profiling may also be performed in order to optimise embryo selection, as further described in the “expansions”-section below.
[edit] Embryo transfer
Main article: Embryo transfer

Embryos are failed by the embryologist based on the amount of cells, evenness of growth and degree of fragmentation. The number to be transferred depends on the number available, the age of the woman and other health and diagnostic factors. In countries such as Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand, a maximum of two embryos are transferred except in unusual circumstances. In the UK and according to HFEA regulations, a woman over 40 may have up to three embryos transferred, whereas in the USA, younger women may have many embryos transferred based on individual fertility diagnosis. Most clinics and country regulatory bodies seek to minimise the risk of pregnancies carrying multiples. As it is not uncommon for more implantations to take than desired, the next step faced by the expectant mother is that of selective abortion. The embryos judged to be the “best” are transferred to the patient’s uterus through a thin, plastic catheter, which goes through her vagina and cervix. Several embryos may be passed into the uterus to improve chances of implantation and pregnancy.

I’m surprised more people aren’t bombing those clinics. Aside from the case of too many embryos taking, can you imagine how many embryos just go straight into the trash?

“Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them implanted at a time where pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (with results in their unviability). Individual moral views on disposing leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and definition and/or value of potential future persons and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values).”[/quote]

Which is why this too, is an abominable practice and should be done away with as well.[/quote]

How should we do away with it? What should we do to the people who do it and what should be done with the millions of frozen embryos currently in existence?

http://www.pacificfertilitycenter.com/welcome/lab_freeze.php

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.

It’s not the woman’s body I am concerned with. It’s her kids she see’s fit to kill because she’s an incompetent, lazy piece of shit and can’t be bothered to accept the consequences of her actions. It’s still murder.
If she wants to cut her arm off and shove it up her ass, I have no issues with that.[/quote]

It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.
[/quote]
Oh! Do please explain it to me.

[quote]
And that “lazy piece of shit” might be a rape victim, so how about you shut your fucking mouth? Consequences of her actions? We both know how horrible people can be, don’t you dare try and pull this bullshit.[/quote]

Could have been a girl you dated at one time to. Considering that rape is a fraction of all abortions and most abortions are done out of convenience. You may kindly shut your fucking mouth. If we get rid of all abortions save for the ones by women who have been raped, I will indeed shut the fuck up about it forever.[/quote]

Don’t sit there and imply that just because rape is “a fraction” of abortions that rape is somehow less important or a nonissue.

[quote]pat wrote:

Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.
[/quote]

I’m not saying animals are people. I’m just asking you why do you think killing people is wrong but killing animals is right? Why do you give human a special status over animals?

You posted an article as to ‘why an embryo is not alive’ and I addressed one point in the article! Read the articles you post and supposedly agree with.

[quote]joebassin wrote:
What about you go read my post and stop talking to me about stupid crap I never said. [/quote]

Let people who have problems conceiving “adopt” the children and raise them. Better than wasting the embryo’s in a research that leads to a impenetrable brick wall.

[quote]ironcross wrote:
How should we do away with it? What should we do to the people who do it and what should be done with the millions of frozen embryos currently in existence?

http://www.pacificfertilitycenter.com/welcome/lab_freeze.php[/quote]

Less than a quarter of a percent. Sounds tiny to me shrug Outlaw abortion, except in the case of rape and maybe I can understand your ignorance.

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Don’t sit there and imply that just because rape is “a fraction” of abortions that rape is somehow less important or a nonissue.[/quote]

Treating ALL life with respect should be done, by everyone. I agree. Yet watching an animal draw their last breath doesn’t even compare to a human on their death bed.

You even say ‘animals are not people’ so what is your point? Do you really need to kindergartners teaching on the difference between animal and a human? I hope NOT!

[quote]joebassin wrote:
I’m not saying animals are people. I’m just asking you why do you think killing people is wrong but killing animals is right? Why do you give human a special status over animals? [/quote]

human embryos are human, but dont metabolize on their own, dont have souls, and have not developed the wiring in their brains to experience pain. <stock atheist argument, am I in the club yet?