Dear Editor,
I am traveling, enjoying the scenery, a brief story of the
Hilton Garden Inn and perusal of the Aug. 6 edition of The
Dispatch.
As a medical doctor, I must reply to the response of Mr. James
Brescoll to several individuals as to, I assume, the abortion
and/or stem cell research issue.
Dear Editor,
I am traveling, enjoying the scenery, a brief story of the Hilton Garden Inn and perusal of the Aug. 6 edition of The Dispatch.
As a medical doctor, I must reply to the response of Mr. James Brescoll to several individuals as to, I assume, the abortion and/or stem cell research issue.
Since he claims he “does not know” as to the inception of a human life and confirms this ignorance by his statements, a written response is given for his instruction and edification.
By the word “inception” one understands a beginning. In the case of Homo Sapiens, such is preceded by the union of an egg and a sperm resulting in a single cell organism (the embryo).
This single cell organism is complete and expresses such through the principles of differentiation and maturation. It does not become anything, nor reveal anything, other than it’s inherent being, nor can it do so (unless it is dead).
To quote Dr. Maureen L. Condic, Associate Professor of Neurobiology and Anatomy as the University of Utah (and this quote is in the context of stem cell research but applicable to the abortion question): “The single cell embryo fully possesses a substantial form that is organized toward the generation of increasing complex systems, ultimately culminating in an adult individual, whereas, a ES (embryonic stem) cell possesses a qualitatively different substantial form that is organized toward the maintenance of cellular life and generation of other cells like itself … The radical difference in kind between ES cells and embryos exists from the earliest stages of embryonic development and does not magically come into existence at the primitive streak stage.”
By the way, the Bible contradicts his statement as to theological uncertainty and speaks to and of in utero embryological development. It defines and identifies, as does biological science, the distinctness and separateness of the unborn child to his or her mother, as at the time of the one cell embryo.
It is perilous ground on which Mr. Brescoll stands to have his arguments based on ignorance and then to exalt in such. His pejorative statements are non-productive to civil discourse.
Daniel McGehee, Lompoc
