Originally Posted by Observer

Well, foundit, it's blatantly obvious that you reject MEDICAL DOCTORS findings and the JOURNALS in which their findings were published.

Originally Posted by Observer

That they were found on an anti-abortion site requires (in your mind) that you dismiss them is untrue or unacceptable.

Originally Posted by Observer

Anyone with a mind that closed is not worth debating.

Originally Posted by foundit66

Day after pill.
Is it ethical to use the day after pill?



See my above refutation.
Quit quoting "I wanna pretend to be" science...

Originally Posted by foundit66

This "40 days" crap is an oft-repeated lie by anti-abortionists/pro-lifers who quote NOT peer-reviewed science, but rather refuted claims...


Sykes digs through the generations of pamphlets citing other pamphlets to find the original science on which the factoid is based, and comes up with a cite from a 1964 AMA convention speech transcript (not a research paper at all) published in the JAMA arguing for brain function rather than heart function to determine cessation of life, and a 1982 letter (not a peer-reviewed paper) published in the NEJM. As Sykes says, "no original research is being described here, which makes it dishonest and misleading to quote it as the source of a claim".

The quotes used by 'pro-lifers', when laid out in formal cite form, certainly do look impressive to anyone not in the habit or reading the original paper to evaluate a scientist's conclusions:


At only 40 days after fertilization electrical waves as measured by the EEG can be recorded from the baby's brain, indicating brain functioning47, 48.
47. Hamlin, H. (1964), "Life or Death by EEG," Journal of the American Medical Association, October 12, 113.




Brain function, as measured on the Electroencephalogram, "appears to be reliably present in the fetus at about eight weeks gestation," or six weeks after conception.

J. Goldenring, "Development of the Fetal Brain," New England Jour. of Med., Aug. 26, 1982, p. 564
Sykes dissects the misuse of these citations (both should strictly mention the status as convention proceedings/letters rather than research papers), showing that both of these opinion pieces incorrectly summarise science that is now either discredited or obsolete (and always refers to "electrical activity" rather than "brain waves"), then goes on to detail what medical science actually does show about the development of a functioning human brain:


When people, including physicians, talk about "brain waves" and "brain activity" they are referring to organized activity in the cortex. While no embryo or fetus has ever been found to have "brain waves," extensive EEG studies have been done on premature babies. A very good summary of their findings can be found in Pain and its effects in the human neonate and fetus," a review article (often cited by "pro-lifers" writing about fetal pain, but not about brain development) by K.J.S. Anand, a leading researcher on pain in newborns, and P.R. Hickey, published in NEJM:

"Functional maturity of the cerebral cortex is suggested by fetal and neonatal electroencephalographic patterns...First, intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks."
http://tigtogblog.blogspot.com/2006/...myths-and.html

Originally Posted by Observer

And this:

About Our Volunteers


Our experts are all volunteers, people with knowledge in their area of expertise who are willing to share their knowledge with others. We can't guarantee they can answer every question, but we can guarantee that most try to help. The really great thing about our service is that it's people based - volunteers helping people without money exchanging hands!

Believe me when I tell you, Abortion is a multi billion dollar industry!!

They make it sound soooo kosher!

Originally Posted by Observer

Well, foundit, I gave you a picture of an 11 week "fetus". Do you still say it's not a human life?

Originally Posted by observer

From your own source: Week 3
beginning development of the brain, spinal cord, and heart
beginning development of the gastrointestinal tract
Seems this agrees with my sources.

Originally Posted by Observer

Apparently, Margaret Sykes isn't too proud of her work or her profession. I followed the link for information about her, and found this (which has nothing to do with her, per se, but to the website she sponsors:

Ask any question! Allexperts.com is the oldest & largest free Q&A service on the Internet.

"Disclaimer


By your use of the service, you agree to the following:



To indemnify and hold harmless Allexperts.com, its owners and its volunteers for any liability arising from any death, injury, decapitation, dismemberment or defenestration to you and to third parties resulting from the use of this service, as well as for any loss or damage to property to you or to third parties resulting from any use of our service, including but not limited to information you obtain by asking questions, reading previously asked questions, follow-up answers, FAQs, using our message boards, or reading our articles.


Such indemnity and hold harmless agreement is in addition to any other indemnity and hold harmless agreement you may agree to when using specific sections of our site.


You also acknowledge by using this service that you understand that our volunteers have varying levels of expertise and haven't been certified as "experts" (or anything else) by us in any professional way. Many of them are professionals in their own right, but Allexperts has not undertaken to verify the credentials or abilities of any of our volunteers." (hmmm, I wonder why? They should be proud of their sources!) Source
I see, foundit, you reject medical journals but accept this without reservation.
Tell me, just what IS your agenda??