#human embryo

[hometoursandotherstuff]

[wisdomfish]

ABORTIONIST DR. JOAN FLEISCHMAN'S DECEPTION AND THE COMPLICITY OF THE GUARDIAN NEWSPAPER IN PROMOTING HER UNSCIENTIFIC LIES

Abortionist Dr. Joan Fleischman says she sometimes shows her patients the pregnancy tissue she removes after an abortion. She says that post-abortive women are “stunned by what it actually looks like,” and the women “feel they’ve been deceived.”...

When I saw the pictures, I was stunned as well. Not only could I not believe my eyes, but I also couldn’t believe the dishonesty of this story. Why? See for yourself. Here is the image the article labeled as “Nine weeks of pregnancy.”

It’s surprising because the image doesn’t show anything resembling a tiny person or even what one would imagine looks like a tiny embryo. All you can see is what appears like wet cotton material floating in a petri dish.

It’s no wonder the article slams pro-lifers for propping up images that, as Dr. Fleischman claims, lead women to expect “to see a little fetus with hands—a developed, miniature baby.” After seeing the tissue, women respond with, “You’re kidding. This is all that was?”

This is very misleading. That is not at all what “pregnancy” looks like at nine weeks. You could turn to innumerable pregnancy books, human development websites, and medical journals and see what the unborn looks like at nine weeks gestation. Contrary to The Guardian’s report, you will see a miniature baby.

Perhaps the most well-known images, though, were published in 1965 by Swedish photographer Lennart Nilsson. Here is one of his famous photos taken of a human embryo at a similar development stage as the image provided by The Guardian story.

Notice you can clearly see the head, eyes, and fingers of the unborn. Besides seeing more accurately what “pregnancy” looks like, the irony of this image is that it was taken from The Guardian’s own website. Thirteen years ago, they published a story highlighting the impact of Nilsson’ work and attached this image of the unborn.

No doubt, the human embryo at this stage is small (only about an inch long), and if an abortion were to take place, it might be difficult for anyone to clearly see identifiable body parts with the naked eye.

~ Alan Shlemon

[noosphe-re]

Human embryo: 16 cells and counting, Dr Yorgos Nikas/Science Photo Library (via New Scientist)

[photosthatspeaktome]

Lennart Nilsson photograph of a human embryo published in the book ‘A Child is Born‘

Published in 1965 by the Swedish photojournalist, the book contains photographs showing the developmental stages of a human baby from conception to birth. Apparently, it is the best-selling illustrated book ever published. Since publication, the book's images have featured heavily in the abortion debate and received a lot of feminist critiques.

A superb study in technique and deeply emotional photographs.

[currentsinbiology]

Skepticism surfaces over CRISPR human embryo editing claims 

When the first U.S. team to edit human embryos with CRISPR revealed their success earlier this month, the field reeled with the possibility that the gene-editing technique might soon produce children free of their parents’ genetic defects. But the way CRISPR repaired the paternal mutation targeted in the embryos was also a surprise. Instead of replacing the gene defect with strands of DNA that the researchers inserted, the embryos appeared to use the mother’s healthy gene as a template for repairing the cut made by CRISPR’s enzyme.

But such a feat has not been observed in previous CRISPR experiments, and some scientists are now questioning whether the repairs really happened that way. In a paper published online this week on the preprint server bioRxiv, a group of six geneticists, developmental biologists, and stem cell researchers offers alternative explanations for the results. And uncertainty about exactly how the embryos’ DNA changed after editing leaves many questions about the technique’s safety, they argue. (The authors declined to discuss the paper while it’s being reviewed for publication.)

[nj-stone]

Virginia judge rules human embryos are 'chattel' based on centuries-old slave laws

The preliminary opinion by Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Richard Gardiner is being criticized by some for wrongly and unnecessarily delving into a time in Virginia history when it was legally permissible to own human beings.

Virginia judge rules human embryos are 'chattel' based on centuries-old slave laws https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/virginia-judge-rules-human-embryos-are-chattel-based-on-centuries-old-slave-laws

[prophetpedia]

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HUMAN FACE DURING GESTATION

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HUMAN FACE DURING GESTATION

Facial developments occurs mainly between the fourth and eighth weeks of gestation. In these first few weeks, a primitive face will take form with large dark circles for eyes followed by the mouth, lower jaw and throat. This CGI animation reveals how an embryo’s facial features form inside a womb. This eerie animation created by the BBC was made by using scans of a developing embryo taken in…

View On WordPress

[pinkstor3]

Scientists Create Early Embryos That Are Part Human, Part Monkey

Rob Stein, photographed for NPR, 22 January 2020, in Washington DC.

ROB STEIN