Is the human fetus a parasite according to science?

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="galerouth"]

do you know that a parasite forces itself on it's host? if not, why would the host need to parasitic organism around?

the woman allowed the baby to suckle her breast and she gets a benefit... milk production burns calories, so a baby breast-feeding is not parasitic relationship.

unlike a baby being allowed to brest-feed, a zyogte being concieved from RAPE or consensual sex is moot, which i already told you that... a zyogte is still a parasite because it has to invade and hijack a woman's body to live.

the only person making a stupid argument here is you, i got truth and science on my side....what do you got?

sonicare

and the evolution of the uterus is moot, the zyogote still has to invade the woman's body.

Most importantly - "science" as in the medical community does not classify the human fetus as a parasite. End of story.

sonicare

that's really, lame because the scientific community didn't believe in black holes either, until proven.

[QUOTE="Frame_Dragger"]It's too bad that we can't explore this issue without it being linked to reproductive rights... it makes for a relatively unique view. I mean, Sonicare is correct, but so are others, and exploring the personal cost of reproduction throughout a number of species could make for a lot of fun. Well... my kind of fun... boredom for some.sonicare

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

Most importantly - "science" as in the medical community does not classify the human fetus as a parasite. End of story.

that's really, lame because the scientific community didn't believe in black holes either, until proven.

No. A zygote is made inside a woman's body. That is what science says. Logic says that an object created in a woman's body can't then invade that body. because it is already in her body.

thegerg

yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

"The placenta functions as an immunological barrier between the mother and the fetus, creating an immunologically privileged site. For this purpose, it uses several mechanisms: It secretes Neurokinin B containing phosphocholine molecules. This is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.[2]

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_tolerance_in_pregnancy

"Progesterone enriches the uterus with a thick lining of blood vessels and capillaries so that it can sustain the growing fetus. Due to its highly-negative charge, hCG may repel the immune cells of the mother, protecting the fetus during the first trimester. It has also been hypothesized that hCG may be a placental link for the development of local maternal immunotolerance."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_chorionic_gonadotropin

science is against you, not me.

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="thegerg"] No, a zygote does not invade a woman's body. You still seem to be very confused. A zygote is created inside of her body and, thus, cant invade the body because it is already inside of that body.galerouth

and the evolution of the uterus is moot, the zyogote still has to invade the woman's body.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] It is also located inside the woman's uterus. The uterus is an organ designed with the implicit intent of housing the fetus. Nothing is being hijacked. That is the function of that organ.thegerg

and the evolution of the uterus is moot, the zyogote still has to invade the woman's body.

ok, repeat: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

"The placenta functions as an immunological barrier between the mother and the fetus, creating an immunologically privileged site. For this purpose, it uses several mechanisms: It secretes Neurokinin B containing phosphocholine molecules. This is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.[2]

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_tolerance_in_pregnancy

"Progesterone enriches the uterus with a thick lining of blood vessels and capillaries so that it can sustain the growing fetus. Due to its highly-negative charge, hCG may repel the immune cells of the mother, protecting the fetus during the first trimester. It has also been hypothesized that hCG may be a placental link for the development of local maternal immunotolerance."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_chorionic_gonadotropin

You don't need to repost the same quotes ad nauseam.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] It is also located inside the woman's uterus. The uterus is an organ designed with the implicit intent of housing the fetus. Nothing is being hijacked. That is the function of that organ.sonicare

and the evolution of the uterus is moot, the zyogote still has to invade the woman's body.

nice, you use the word "implant" instead of "invade" knowing that "implant" is not correct: as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it.

in·vade(n-vd)

You don't need to repost the same quotes ad nauseam.

sonicare

i call it science, and if you keep ignoring science, then i will have to repost it.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"]

No. A zygote is made inside a woman's body. That is what science says. Logic says that an object created in a woman's body can't then invade that body. because it is already in her body.

thegerg

yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

science is against you, not me.

sigh, again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells to SURVIVE...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

on this, science is my homey. and dude, don't miss with my homey.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] No, science is not against me. You keep claiming that a zygote invades a woman's body, which is simply untrue. A zygote is created in her body, it is incapable of invading a body which it is already in. It is also unnecessary that it invade that body, because it is already inside that body. You seem to be very confused.

thegerg

sigh, again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells to SURVIVE...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

on this, science is my homey. and dude, don't miss with my homey.

If it's created in a body it can't invade that body. I've got no problem with science. Science does not say that a zygote invades a woman's body.thegerg

again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

This is literally the single most pointless thread I've ever seen on OT. At this point I think the TC is just the biggest troll ever.. nothing else can explain this.

[QUOTE="thegerg"][QUOTE="galerouth"]

sigh, again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells to SURVIVE...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

on this, science is my homey. and dude, don't miss with my homey.

MrPraline

FRAK HIS HOMEY! if we could do a dance-off, i would destory him and win the fight to save the dance-off to save the recreation center, all at the same time.

This is literally the single most pointless thread I've ever seen on OT. At this point I think the TC is just the biggest troll ever.. nothing else can explain this.

hartsickdiscipl

it's only pointless because you beat me and science proving that the human fetus is a parasitem, so go play WOW or something.

[QUOTE="thegerg"]

If it's created in a body it can't invade that body. I've got no problem with science. Science does not say that a zygote invades a woman's body.galerouth

again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

You forgot the part about the proliferation of the species. How many other "parasites" do that for their "host?" TBH, that's the only point that matters in this whole discussion. All this other stuff you're spewing is completely immaterial to the bigger issue.

This thread is an abortion.

FRAK HIS HOMEY! galerouth

This thread is an abortion.

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

hartsickdiscipl

You forgot the part about the proliferation of the species. How many other "parasites" do that for their "host?" TBH, that's the only point that matters in this whole discussion. All this other stuff you're spewing is completely immaterial to the bigger issue.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Its a me... um....

But your argument was that the woman is allowing the baby to be breastfed, so it follows that in order for your argument to be sound that the woman isnt allowing the baby to be formed inside her. Which is false in most cases. Right now all you did was just add to your argument, you're not sticking to it.

Also I said it from the very beginning of this thread. I dont care if you call it a parasite since I dont see how a simple label even if true changes the way I view babies (I'm pro-choice). However when you make stupid arguments that's where I feel like commenting.

galerouth

do you know that a parasite forces itself on it's host? if not, why would the host need to parasitic organism around?

the woman allowed the baby to suckle her breast and she gets a benefit... milk production burns calories, so a baby breast-feeding is not parasitic relationship.

unlike a baby being allowed to brest-feed, a zyogte being concieved from RAPE or consensual sex is moot, which i already told you that... a zyogte is still a parasite because it has to invade and hijack a woman's body to live.

the only person making a stupid argument here is you, i got truth and science on my side....what do you got?

You said that a woman allows the baby to breastfeed from her in order to contrast that with conception and the developement of the fetus. The fact is that the woman does allow the baby both to be conceived and to grow inside her, so saying that the woman allows the baby to be breastfed is actually the moot point. You yourself are rendering it moot by not sticking to it as an argument.

Just admit that the particular argument was a fail and move on, ok?

Not to mention that nothing about it was particularly scientific. You used common sense and even that was abused since one of the premises was flat out wrong. When someone actually has to "teach" you how to apply common sense, you cant hope to be able to critically use scientific data, now can you...

PS: I never even formed an argument in this recent exchange, I'm just refuting yours. Are you dense?

If it was created in her body how can you claim it invaded her body?thegerg

repeat: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

"The placenta functions as an immunological barrier between the mother and the fetus, creating an immunologically privileged site. For this purpose, it uses several mechanisms: It secretes Neurokinin B containing phosphocholine molecules. This is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.[2]

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immune_tolerance_in_pregnancy

"Progesterone enriches the uterus with a thick lining of blood vessels and capillaries so that it can sustain the growing fetus. Due to its highly-negative charge, hCG may repel the immune cells of the mother, protecting the fetus during the first trimester. It has also been hypothesized that hCG may be a placental link for the development of local maternal immunotolerance."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_chorionic_gonadotropin

i will find a link to the video proving a zygote will ONLY LIVE FOR A FEW DAYS WITH OUT INVADING THE WOMAN OR IT WILL DIE.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"]

If it's created in a body it can't invade that body. I've got no problem with science. Science does not say that a zygote invades a woman's body.hartsickdiscipl

again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

You forgot the part about the proliferation of the species. How many other "parasites" do that for their "host?" TBH, that's the only point that matters in this whole discussion. All this other stuff you're spewing is completely immaterial to the bigger issue.

i didn't forget anything, perliferation of the species..has nothing to do with symbiosis.

HINT: THE FETUS BEING A PARASITE TO A WOMAN'S BODY IS VALID.

This thread is an abortion.

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

This thread is an abortion.

galerouth

No, this thread is an abortion. More specifically, it is a PARASITE which should be aborted as per moderator choice.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

again: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

galerouth

You forgot the part about the proliferation of the species. How many other "parasites" do that for their "host?" TBH, that's the only point that matters in this whole discussion. All this other stuff you're spewing is completely immaterial to the bigger issue.

i didn't forget anything, perliferation of the species..has nothing to do with symbiosis.

HINT: THE FETUS BEING A PARASITE TO A WOMAN'S BODY IS VALID.

Let's assume for a second that in some twisted, somewhat scientifically plausible way, that the fetus really is a parasite. What's your point? What do we do with this revelation?

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Its a me... um....

But your argument was that the woman is allowing the baby to be breastfed, so it follows that in order for your argument to be sound that the woman isnt allowing the baby to be formed inside her. Which is false in most cases. Right now all you did was just add to your argument, you're not sticking to it.

Also I said it from the very beginning of this thread. I dont care if you call it a parasite since I dont see how a simple label even if true changes the way I view babies (I'm pro-choice). However when you make stupid arguments that's where I feel like commenting.

Teenaged

do you know that a parasite forces itself on it's host? if not, why would the host need to parasitic organism around?

the woman allowed the baby to suckle her breast and she gets a benefit... milk production burns calories, so a baby breast-feeding is not parasitic relationship.

unlike a baby being allowed to brest-feed, a zyogte being concieved from RAPE or consensual sex is moot, which i already told you that... a zyogte is still a parasite because it has to invade and hijack a woman's body to live.

the only person making a stupid argument here is you, i got truth and science on my side....what do you got?

You said that a woman allows the baby to breastfeed from her in order to contrast that with conception and the developement of the fetus. The fact is that the woman does allow the baby both to be conceived and to grow inside her, so saying that the woman allows the baby to be breastfed is actually the moot point. You yourself are rendering it moot by not sticking to it as an argument.

Just admit that the particular argument was a fail and move on, ok?

Not to mention that nothing about it was particularly scientific. You used common sense and even that was abused since one of the premises was flat out wrong. When someone actually has to "teach" you how to apply common sense, you cant hope to be able to critically use scientific data, now can you...

PS: I never even formed an argument in this recent exchange, I'm just refuting yours. Are you dense?

well, stop moving the goal post... if you move it, i will have to prove you wrong and bring it back to the topic of the debate.

it doesn't matter, if the woman allows the pregnancy to continue: THE FETUS IS STILL A PARASITE. as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.'

"an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by it"
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/parasite

it doesn't matter if the woman allows the baby to breast-feed from her: THE BABY IS NOT A PARASITE, THE RELATIONSHIP IS MUTUALISM.

I ALREADY TOLD YOU THIS. that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

Please try to answer the question. You are avoiding the issue of your claim that a zygote invades a woman's body by trying to articulate that it invades her uterus, which is a separate issue. Again, if it was created in her body how can you claim it invaded her body?thegerg

has many times do i have to answer your question? that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of its TROPHOBLAST cells.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

I can't believe this idiotic thread is still goingUCF_Knight

it's science. don't like it: go play wow or something.

well, stop moving the goal post... if you move it, i will have to prove you wrong and bring it back to the topic of the debate.

it doesn't matter, if the woman allows the pregnancy to continue: THE FETUS IS STILL A PARASITE. as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.'

"an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by it"
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/parasite

it doesn't matter if the woman allows the baby to breast-feed from her: THE BABY IS NOT A PARASITE, THE RELATIONSHIP IS MUTUALISM.

I ALREADY TOLD YOU THIS. that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

galerouth

And stop trying to prove to me that the fetus is a parasite by using different arguments than the one I quoted. Or can you not distinguish between the arguments you make? You're so obsessed to portray the baby as a parasite that you think everyone here at all times are just trying to refute that claim, while in reality some might even agree with you but dont like your sh*tty arguments.

Stick to the argument you made:

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]A breast-fed baby is also using the mother's body to survive. In fact the term fetus is Latin for "suckling", it refers to the child not only before, but also after birth.galerouth

You tried to bring up the factor of whether or not the mother allows something in order to contrast breastfeeding (brought up by whipassmt, the other great mind of OT) to the fetus being conceived and grown inside the uterus.

Bringing up the factor though is useless since the mother allows both of those things. Thus, a failed argument.

Stick to the ones that look sound at least on the surface. Thank you.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"]

Please try to answer the question. You are avoiding the issue of your claim that a zygote invades a woman's body by trying to articulate that it invades her uterus, which is a separate issue. Again, if it was created in her body how can you claim it invaded her body?thegerg

has many times do i have to answer your question? that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about: yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus by the use of its TROPHOBLAST cells.

as a zygote, it invaded the woman's uterus using its TROPHOBLAST cells, hijacked her immune system by using NEUROKININ B and HCG--- so her body doesn't kill it, steals her nutrients to survive, and causes her harm or potential death.

The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

You have said a number of times that a zygote invades a mother's body, but you now say it is created inside her body. If it is created inside her body, how can it invade that body?

Stop avoiding the question by commenting again on the nature of the zygote's entry into the uterus. Answer the question about the body.

If you can't answer that question, go play Candyland or something.

again, i will repeat yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus ( HER BODY) by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

i never said that a zygote in most situationS were created outside the woman's body; unless the zygote invades the woman's BODY( uterus) with it's TROPHOBLAST cells...IT WILL DIE.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]I'm not the one who is moving the goal post.

And stop trying to prove to me that the fetus is a parasite by using different arguments than the one I quoted. Or can you not distinguish between the arguments you make? You're so obsessed to portray the baby as a parasite that you think everyone here at all times are just trying to refute that claim, while in reality some might even agree with you but dont like your sh*tty arguments.

Stick to the argument you made:

[QUOTE="galerouth"][QUOTE="whipassmt"]A breast-fed baby is also using the mother's body to survive. In fact the term fetus is Latin for "suckling", it refers to the child not only before, but also after birth.Teenaged

You tried to bring up the factor of whether or not the mother allows something in order to contrast breastfeeding (brought up by whipassmt, the other great mind of OT) to the fetus being conceived and grown inside the uterus.

Bringing up the factor though is useless since the mother allows both of those things. Thus, a failed argument.

Stick to the ones that look sound at least on the surface. Thank you.

I ALREADY PROVE THAT THE HUMAN WAS A PARASITE IN THE FIRST POST, YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT.

WHEN DID SAY A BABY, WAS A PARASITE? YOU DID, NOT I.

AGAIN, BEING ALLOWED...IS MOOT, BECAUSE HER PERMISSION IS NOT REQUIRED IN SYMBIOSIS.

I ALREADY TOLD YOU THESE THINGS.

[QUOTE="UCF_Knight"]I can't believe this idiotic thread is still goinggalerouth

it's science. don't like it: go play wow or something.

I ALREADY PROVE THAT THE HUMAN WAS A PARASITE IN THE FIRST POST, YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT.galerouth

I ALREADY PROVE THAT THE HUMAN WAS A PARASITE IN THE FIRST POST, YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT.galerouth

I didnt even try to refute that claim in this recent exchange. Are you even reading my posts?

WHEN DID SAY A BABY, WAS A PARASITE? YOU DID, NOT I.galerouth

When did I say you said the baby is a parasite? I said that you said that the fetus is a parasite. I'll have to ask again: are you even reading the posts you're replying to?

AGAIN, BEING ALLOWED...IS MOOT, BECAUSE HER PERMISSION IS NOT REQUIRED IN SYMBIOSIS.

galerouth

Cool.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]I ALREADY PROVE THAT THE HUMAN WAS A PARASITE IN THE FIRST POST, YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT.UCF_Knight

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

[QUOTE="thegerg"] You are, once again, not answering the question. Again, I am not asking about a zygote being moved to a woman's uterus and whether or not that constitutes invasion.

You have said a number of times that a zygote invades a mother's body, but you now say it is created inside her body. If it is created inside her body, how can it invade that body?

Stop avoiding the question by commenting again on the nature of the zygote's entry into the uterus. Answer the question about the body.

If you can't answer that question, go play Candyland or something.

thegerg

again, i will repeat yes, the zygote is formed within the woman's body using both man's and woman's DNA, but it can't survive for long by itself with OUT a host, so it invades a woman's uterus ( HER BODY) by the use of it's TROPHOBLAST cells...that's what you don't understand or willingly being ignorant about.

i never said that a zygote in most situationS were created outside the woman's body; unless the zygote invades the woman's BODY( uterus) with it's TROPHOBLAST cells...IT WILL DIE.

NOT, CONFUSED...A VIRUS LIVING ON YOUR NOSE HAIR, IS NOT AN INVASION.... BUT IT'S INSIDE YOUR BODY, IS IT?

YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT THIS SENTENCE THAT PROVES MY POINT: The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

the zygote ( A DIFFERENT ORGANISM) can exist inside the shell of the ovum, for a while and the body won't know about it, UNTIL IT NEEDS TO INVADE TO WOMAN'S BODY ( UTERUS) TO LIVE.

[QUOTE="galerouth"]

I didnt even try to refute that claim in this recent exchange. Are you even reading my posts?

[QUOTE="galerouth"]WHEN DID SAY A BABY, WAS A PARASITE? YOU DID, NOT I.Teenaged

When did I say you said the baby is a parasite? I said that you said that the fetus is a parasite. I'll have to ask again: are you even reading the posts you're replying to?

AGAIN, BEING ALLOWED...IS MOOT, BECAUSE HER PERMISSION IS NOT REQUIRED IN SYMBIOSIS.

galerouth

Cool.

your choose to ignore: The invasion of a specific type of trophoblast (extravillous trophoblast) into the maternal uterus is a vital stage in the establishment of pregnancy: Failure of the trophoblast to invade sufficiently is important in the development of some cases of pre-eclampsia. Too firm an attachment may lead to placenta accreta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophoblast

[QUOTE="galerouth"]I ALREADY PROVE THAT THE HUMAN WAS A PARASITE IN THE FIRST POST, YOU CHOSE NOT TO ACCEPT IT.UCF_Knight

great, prove science wrong in the first post, or go play WOW or something.