Archive for the Fetal Development Category

1970’s Commission looks into fetal experimentation and research

Posted in Abortion History, Fetal Development, fetal heartbeat, Fetal Homicide, Fetal Organs, Fetal Pain, fetal Remains, fetal research, Fetal Stem Cell, Fetal Surgery, Fetal Tissue, The Ryan Program with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2018 by saynsumthn

Some abortion survivors were kept alive almost a day for experimentation

Image: 10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image credit: Life Magazine Sep 10, 1965)

In part one of this series on fetal research, Live Action News detailed a number of experiments conducted on living abortion survivors. Due to the outrage over such experiments reported in the media in the 1970s, the National Research Act established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission was chaired by Kenneth John Ryan, MD, an abortionist who also taught others how to do abortions.

IMage: Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

A report published by the Harvard Gazette at the time of Ryan’s death states:

 President Jimmy Carter appointed Ken to chair the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.

…When he became the Chief of Staff at the Boston Hospital for Women in 1973, one year after the Roe vs Wade decision, he established the first abortion service in a university hospital and included training in the necessary skills as a routine part of residency education. In 1975 Ken credentialed and granted admitting privileges to Dr. Kenneth Edelin, an African-American, even as he was under indictment for manslaughter in a politically motivated prosecution for performing a legal abortion at Boston City Hospital.

The Ryan Program, which bears the doctor’s name and partners with Planned Parenthood, was established in 1999 to train OB-GYN residents in abortion.

Dr. Paul Ramsey, a Professor of Religion at Princeton University, also served on the commission. He wrote a lengthy opinion in the section entitled, “Moral Issues in Fetal Research,” criticizing NIH definitions of life and death regarding the preborn child, with good reason:

The answer seems clear enough: the difference between the life and death of a human fetus/abortus should be determined substantially in the same way physicians use in making other pronouncements of death… the 1973 NIH proposed guidelines studiously refuses to speak of the previable fetus as “living” or having “life.” By studiously refusing to speak of a previable fetus/abortus who may still be medically “alive” and by leaving the determination of viability entirely to the discretion of physician researchers (not even excluding abortuses with respiration from being deemed previable and entered into experimentation), the American guidelines can be faulted for lack of definitional clarity. Indeed, if and only if the previable fetus is human, unique for certain purposes, and alive in significant medical respects–i.e., if it is not dead–could claims be made that researchers need the knowledge uniquely to be gained by using the fetus/abortus while it is still living, growing and reacting as a tiny, whole fetal human being or entity.

This national commission was tasked to investigate and study research involving abortion survivors, and to recommend whether and under what circumstances such research should be conducted or supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW). Up to this time, the July 1974 “National Research Act” had ruled that the “Secretary may not conduct or support research in the United States or abroad on a living human fetus, before or after the induced abortion of such fetus, unless such research is done for the purpose of assuring the survival of such fetus.”

Report Research on the Fetus

At the time the commission began, a New York Times article detailed how members of the commission had reviewed existing research of human fetuses. Members told the paper that the amount of research already conducted using aborted fetuses was “so substantial as to seem surprising.”

Image: article Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

The most controversial form of research the commission found was on the “fetus outside the womb,” involving “fetuses delivered by abortion.” The commission claimed hundreds of reports of such cases had been conducted. Experiments were also conducted on already expired fetuses from spontaneous or induced abortions. Below is a small sample of what the commission found:

  • Physiologic and Metabolic Studies: Fetal hearts, removed just after death of a fetus following hysterotomy abortion, have been studied to establish physiologic response data.
  • Studies of the Pregnant Mother: Women undergoing elective midtrimester abortion have been starved for 87 hours before abortion in an attempt to learn the effects of caloric deprivation on pregnancy and to gain some information as to whether the fetus could adapt to fuels other than glucose.
  • Research With the Previable Fetus Outside the Uterus: To learn whether the human fetal brain could metabolize ketone bodies, brain metabolism was isolated in 8 human fetuses (12-17 weeks’ gestation) after hysterotomy abortion by perfusing the isolated head (the head was separated from the rest of the body). The study demonstrated that, similar to other species, brain metabolism could be supported by ketone bodies during fetal life suggesting avenues of therapy in some fetal disease states.
  • Another technique for studying the ability of the midtrimester fetus to carry out endocrine reactions used 4 fetuses (16-20 weeks’ gestation) immediately after hysterotomy abortion. The fetuses were perfused through their umbilical veins while being housed in a perfusion tank. Fetal tissues were examined at the end of the study.
  • After studies with newborn and fetal mice, cutaneous respiration (breathing through the skin) was studied in 15 fetuses (9-24 weeks’ gestation) from induced abortions. The fetuses were immersed in a salt solution with oxygen at high pressure. The fetuses were judged to be aliveby a pulsating cord or visible heart beat; if necessary the chest was opened to observe the heart. Four fetuses were supported for 22 hours in this attempt at developing a fetal incubator.
  • Seven previable fetuses (200-375 grams) from spontaneous or induced abortions were immersed in a perfusion tank and perfused with oxygenated blood through their umbilical vessels. The fetuses survived and moved for 5-12 hours.

Interestingly, in addition to general experimentation, the commission noted that if the fetus could “feel pain” then experimenting on abortion survivors would not be permissible. Of course, that debate continues to linger despite evidence that they do feel pain.

Still, members were mixed:

The fetus in utero or in process of being aborted provides a more difficult ethical analysis than does the dead fetus or the living viable infant. There is a presumption of viability at any stage in gestation for the living fetus as long as it remains inside the uterus. Thus experimentation involving that fetus must have acceptably low risk of any harmful effect on viability or on the potential for meaningful, healthy life. If the process of abortion has begun, the life of the fetus will soon end. There is debate about whether different standards apply in that situation and we disagree in our own analysis.

One view holds that no risks can be imposed that would not be acceptable for the fetus which was continuing life. Another view will accept an increase in risks if the information is important and alternate ways of obtaining the information are not practical, if the methods of the experiment are acceptable in themselves (i.e., would be used in other classes of human subjects), and if the process of dying for the fetus were not altered in an unacceptable way.

In any event, expected benefits from the experimentation still must be clear and must require the use of the human fetus to gain the desired information. Ethical considerations as to sensory perception by the fetus also must be addressed. We know of no evidence to suggest or support a contention that the fetus at midgestation or earlier, when abortions are performed, is aware of pain or has a psychologic fear of death.

Image: Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

The commission ultimately drafted several recommendations, including a restriction on experimenting on living abortion survivors. But their report also recommended that research resulting in “no harm to the fetus” be permitted, so long as that research might benefit other fetuses.

Unfortunately, this did not stop the push for the research nor the push to obtain federal funding. According to a historical timeline of fetal research regulations published in a report by the Institute of Medicine:

After the National Commission issued its report (Report and Recommendations: Research on the Fetus), fetal research following abortion was permitted under subsequent [Department of Health Education and Welfare] DHEW regulations for therapeutic reasons, but otherwise held to the standard of “minimal risk.” Minimal risk means that no more potential harm is tolerated than would be encountered in daily life. In the case of a fetus, almost all interventions exceed minimal risk, and the regulations did not distinguish between fetuses that were carried to term and those intended for abortion. The DHEW regulations, however, contained the possibility of waiver of the minimal risk standard on a project-by-project basis by a complicated procedure to be decided ultimately by an Ethics Advisory Board.

Image: article 1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

The first Ethics Advisory Board (EAB) was convened in 1978. The sole waiver issued by this body was to test the efficacy of using fetal blood samples for prenatal diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. The charter for the EAB expired in 1980, and despite publication of a draft charter in 1988, it has not been reactivated.

According to CQ Researcher, in 1988, an NIH commission “voted 18–3 to pronounce fetal tissue transplant research ‘acceptable public policy’—a position then unanimously endorsed by the standing advisory committee to the director of the NIH. That advice, however, was rejected in November 1989 by Louis W. Sullivan, the Bush administration’s secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), NIH’s parent department. Sullivan decided instead to extend, indefinitely, the moratorium on NIH funding of fetal tissue research first ordered by the Reagan administration in March 1988. The moratorium barred NIH funding of clinical transplantation studies using tissue from induced abortions.”

However, “The NIH moratorium did not affect privately funded research in the United States.”

Co-chairman on that 1988 NIH panel was none other than Kenneth Ryan, the same abortionist/trainer who chaired the 1970’s commission. When the push for federally funded research failed, Ryan began calling for private funding to experiment on aborted children.

In part three of this series, Live Action News will detail who eventually lifted the ban on federal funding of fetal tissue research and how much taxpayers spend on this research every year.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Not just Nazis: The grisly history of research on abortion survivors

Posted in Abortion History, Fetal Development, fetal Remains, fetal research, Fetal Surgery, Fetal Tissue with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 26, 2018 by saynsumthn

A look back at some of the grisly experiments once conducted on human abortion survivors will most likely make your stomach turn. This history shows the depravity a society can spiral into when medical research is allowed to advance untethered to any sense of ethical morality. Today, as videos of Planned Parenthood staffers haggling over the price of aborted baby body parts come to mind, a look into the fetal research market dating back to the 1930s reveals again how those who experiment on the bodies of tiny victims will often justify their actions as good.

Davenport Hooker’s Fetal Experiments on Living Aborted Babies

Image: Davenport Hooker University of Pittsburgh

Davenport Hooker University of Pittsburgh

Davenport Hooker (Image credit: University of Pittsburgh)

From the 1930s until the mid 1960s, University of Pittsburgh anatomist Davenport Hooker conducted research on children who survived surgical abortion by hysterotomy, a risky procedure similar to Caesarian section, where the doctor opens up the uterus with an incision and pulls the baby out.

Forensic anthropologist Emily K. Wilson authored a paper in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, explaining how Hooker obtained the abortion survivors:

Immediately following a surgical abortion by hysterotomy, performed on an unnamed woman at a nearby lying-in hospital, Hooker took the seven-week-old fetus to an observation room. He touched and stroked the face, body, arms, and legs as a motion picture camera recorded the fetus’s corresponding movements and reflexes. Over the next thirty-one years, Hooker would observe more than 150 fetuses and prematurely born infants in this manner. The project resulted in over forty articles and one nine-minute medical film and contributed information and photographic stills to numerous scientific and popular publications.

Wilson also writes, “But while Hooker and the 1930s medical and general public viewed live fetuses as acceptable materials for nontherapeutic research, they also shared a regard for fetuses as developing humans with some degree of social value.”

According to PittMed, a publication of the University of Pittsburgh, “Hooker purchased a 35-mm motion picture camera. Having gained the trust and permission of the obstetricians at Magee-Womens Hospital, Hooker was able to observe therapeutically aborted fetuses removed by Caesarian section. Upon stimulating the skin, he recorded the degree of reflex development, and in January of 1933, created the first films ever made of human fetal movement.”

Rutgers professor Johanna Schoen, an abortion supporter, adds, “In 1952, he [Hooker] assembled his footage into a silent educational film called “Early Fetal Human Activity.” The film showed the muscle activity of six fetuses ranging from 8 1/2 to 14 weeks.”

Video from that film can be viewed below (Warning – Images may be disturbing for some):

Author Lynn Morgan also did research on Hooker and discovered a brief account of Hooker’s experiments before the American Philosophical Society were published in a 1938 Time Magazine article entitled, “Embryonic Grasp.” Morgan writes:

“It described how a twenty-five week old fetus “snatched a glass rod weighing three grams from the scientist’s hand, waved it feebly but triumphantly for an instant before the spark of life went out.”

Hooker pointed out to his audience that an abortion survivor at twelve weeks gestation makes a “pretty fair fist.”

Article: Time Magazine Research on aborted baby 1938

Time Magazine Research on aborted baby 1938

The article noted that the doctor was notified by a Pittsburgh hospital, “whenever it has on hand a living abortus so that Dr. Hooker can rush to the scene with his photographer, make pictures and experiments before the fetus expires.”

Writing in her book, “Icons of Life: A Cultural History of Human Embryos,” Morgan seemed troubled by the calloused demeanor of Hooker’s audience and the journalist, writing:

“The journalist cited the “admiring voice” of the scientist as Hooker described his findings before a “spell bound” audience… Didn’t the audience question the ethics of fetal experimentation? Didn’t the audience question whether 149 women would have had to be subjected to major abdominal surgery if the researchers had not wanted the fetuses delivered alive?”

Schoen, who approves of using abortion survivors for research, goes on to write that, “Several of Hooker’s images were published in 1962 in an early pregnancy guidebook, ‘The First Nine Months of Life.’ Its author, Geraldine Flanagan, did not discuss how the fetuses were photographed or mention the conditions, such as therapeutic abortion, that allowed them to be used in research.”

Images: Davenport Hooker fetal specimens featured in First Nine Months of Life

Davenport Hooker fetal specimens featured in First Nine Months of Life

Nurse Testifies Aborted Fetuses Shipped Alive on Ice

In 1972, a former Magee-Women’s Hospital nurse anesthetist testified before the Pennsylvania Abortion Law Commission that she witnessed the hospital shipping aborted and still living human fetuses to researchers for experimentation. Wilhamine Dick told the committee she witnessed “live fetuses being packed on ice” for use in research. According to a March 15, 1972, article published by the Indiana Evening Gazette, the former nurse also told the commission, “It was repulsive to watch live fetuses being packed in ice while still moving and trying to breathe, then being rushed to some laboratory and hear the medical students later discuss the experience of examining the organs of a once live baby.” She added that she resigned because she was “no longer able to accept seeing tiny arms and legs considered routine specimens.”

Image: article 1972 Nurse testifies about living human fetuses shipped alive

1972 Nurse testifies about living human fetuses shipped alive

Stanford University Experiments on Living Aborted Children 

A report by the New York Times detailed experiments which involved scientists at Stanford University who allegedly immersed 15 abortion survivors in a salt solution to see if they could absorb oxygen through the skin. An October 4, 1973, report by the Placerville Mountain Democrat quoted an alleged witness by the name of James Babcock, who told a legislative panel that he “learned that live fetuses had been placed in a special chamber, their ribs cut open to observe their heartbeat under certain conditions.”

report by the Stanford Daily, which did not dispute that the experiments happened, claimed the project had been “terminated in 1969.” In fact, according to the report, Dr. Robert Goodlin, an associate professor of gynecology and obstetrics, performed the research at Stanford in the 1960s and told the paper, “Our goal was to keep the fetus alive.” He added, “Cutting the fetus open was sometimes necessary to observe heart action and at other times to massage the heart.”

Paul Ramsey, author of “The Ethics of Fetal Research,”writes that the longest Goodlin was able to keep a fetus alive was eleven days, adding, “Again, the experiments would have been pointless if those previable abortuses had not been importantly and relevantly ‘alive’ before yet having capacity for respiration.”

The Stanford Daily reported, “Funds for further research were halted in 1969 when it was decided that Goodlin and other scientists were ‘too far away’ from their goal of keeping the fetus alive outside the womb….”

Image: article Stanford Daily Med School Doctors attack fetal research ban

Stanford Daily Med School Doctors attack fetal research ban

The paper also stated:

Stanford, along with other medical schools in the nation, made their research widely known in Life magazine article in September, 1965. Life stated that Goodlin and other scientists were “working toward the day when it would become routine to save prematurely aborted fetuses at almost any age and carry them through to “birth” in artificial wombs.

… In 1965, Life magazine depicted a 10-week-old fetus kept alive in an artificial womb by Goodlin’s team of Stanford physicians. Goodlin said the objective at all times was “to preserve life.”

Image: 10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image: Life Magazine)

10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image: Life Magazine)

That same year, Life Magazine published Swedish photographer Lennart Nilsson’s photo essay, “Drama of Life Before Birth.” Nilsson later published many of the images in the book, “A Child is Born.”

Today, there seems to be a bit of a mystery about where Nilsson may have obtained his images. In fact, Time.com claims that some of those babies he photographed had been aborted:

Image: Life Magazine cover from 1965

Life Magazine cover from 1965

In the accompanying story, LIFE explained that all but one of the fetuses pictured were photographed outside the womb and had been removed—or aborted—“for a variety of medical reasons.” Nilsson had struck a deal with a hospital in Stockholm, whose doctors called him whenever a fetus was available to photograph. There, in a dedicated room with lights and lenses specially designed for the project, Nilsson arranged the fetuses so they appeared to be floating as if in the womb.

The website Making Visible Embryoscreated in part by an historian of biological and medical sciences, makes a similar claim:

Although claiming to show the living fetus, Nilsson actually photographed abortus material obtained from women who terminated their pregnancies under the liberal Swedish law. Working with dead embryos allowed Nilsson to experiment with lighting, background and positions, such as placing the thumb into the fetus’ mouth. But the origin of the pictures was rarely mentioned, even by ‘pro-life’ activists, who in the 1970s appropriated these icons.

Whether allegations that some of the photographed babies came from abortions is true or not is difficult to verify; however, a paper published in Bulletin of The History of Medicine, written by Solveig Julich, associate professor and senior lecturer at the Department of History of Science and Ideas at Uppsala University in Sweden, makes a compelling case. She writes in part:

He admitted that most of the pictures were of “fetuses, just removed surgically” in connection with miscarriages or extrauterine pregnancies. They looked as if they were alive because they were still alive. He had only a few minutes in which to take the pictures before they developed ugly blotches and were changed. A few of the pictures, Nilsson told the reporter, were “taken inside the mother by means of a cystoscope and a flash in connection with a necessary abortion.” But he insisted that his photographs should not be seen as a contribution to the abortion debate: all he wanted to do was to give a clear conception of the origin and development of human life.

In all fairness to Nilsson, now deceased, there is no way to absolutely confirm these allegations nor to understand fully what his motivation was, if, in fact, he did use aborted babies in his photography.

Read the full paper here.

History is full of examples in which scientists and doctors went too far in their research on human subjects. The most vivid example of this comes out of the Holocaust, during which Nazi physicians believed the medical advances from experiments somehow justified their actions. In an article published by the Montreal Gazette, Dr. Hans Munch, an SS research pathologist at a Nazi institute near Auschwitz, described concentration camp physician Josef Mengele, who experimented on Jews inside the horrific camps:

Mengele saw the gassings as the only rational solution and argued that as the prisoners were going to be gassed anyway, there was no reason not to use them for medical experiments.

Sadly, that kind of reasoning for experimenting on human subjects sounds too familiar, as readers will see in parts two and three of this series on the history of experimentation on abortion survivors.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Stunning fetal surgery images offer amazing glimpse of baby in the womb

Posted in Fetal Development with tags , , , , , , , , , , on November 28, 2017 by saynsumthn

Fetal surgery is becoming more and more common, saving lives and improving the conditions of preborn children. Like many other medical advances, open fetal surgery (as displayed in the images below) offers an amazing look at the developing person inside the womb.

Images and videos below are of surgical procedures and may be disturbing for some viewers. 

1. Open fetal surgery by Michael Harrison, MD, and the UCSF Fetal Treatment Center:

Fetal Surgery by Dr Michael Harrison, MD

2. Fetal surgery Ted Talk by Dr. Oluyinka Olutoye:

Fetal Surgery Dr. Oluyinka Olutoye Ted Talk

3. Houston Chronicle report on Texas Children’s Hospital, “Spina bifida case marks advances in fetal surgery“:

Houston Chronicle Open Fetal Surgery (Photo: Karen Warren, Houston Chronicle)

4. Vanderbilt University report on fetal surgery procedure yielding positive results:

22 week old preborn baby (Image:1999 file photo by Anne Rayner/Vanderbilt)

5. CNN’s report on spina bifida surgery for a 20-week-old preborn baby:

Fetal Surgery CNN Report on 20-week baby with spina bifida

6. Medscape – Fetal Surgery for Sacrococcygeal Teratoma Technique:

Pulse oximeter placed on foot of fetus (image: Dr Douglas Miniati and Dr Payam Saadai, Division of Pediatric Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine)

7. Open fetal surgery for 25-week preborn baby with spina bifida (watch video):

Fetal Surgery spine of preborn baby

8. Today.com: Baby ‘born twice’ thrives after life-saving surgery:

Fetal Surgery – tumor removed

9. Live Science – Fetus Brought Partway Out of Womb for Tumor Surgery:

Fetal Surgery 24 weeks (Image Credit: AJOC)

10. “Hand of Hope” by Michael Clancy, taken in 1999 of 21-week-old preborn Samuel Armas, grabbing a doctor’s hand during surgery. As Life News reported years later, “Armas was in the womb when Dr. Joseph Bruner performed a surgery on him to help correct some of the potential effects of spina bifida before his birth.”

Clancy’s iconic photo and story were later documented by PressTV and other worldwide media outlets:

Michael Clancy Hand of Hope (image: PressTV)

11. PBS produced “Twice Born,” a stunning documentary about fetal surgery:

PBS Documentary: Twice Born

It is amazing the extent to which members of the medical profession will go to save preborn children growing inside their mother’s wombs. Tragically, there is an inhuman side of “medicine” as well, which believes that ending the lives of other preborn child in an abortion is the better solution.

We long for the day when abortion in unthinkable. Until then, these tiny persons in the womb testify of their humanity.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Nick Loeb: on embryo fight “Two lives were already created” no different than born child

Posted in Fetal Development, Hollywood, IVF, Men and Abortion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 7, 2015 by saynsumthn

Nick Loeb told the Today Show that the embryos his ex-fiance wants to “destroy” are already life.

nick-loeb-sofia-vergara-today-150506-01_eafc59e030271155e8650b0fd72c4df5.today-inline-large

But, Modern Family actress, Sofia Vergara has accused Nick Loeb of being an opportunist and she wants the embryos they created as a couple to be “destroyed.”

Sofia Vergara Howard Stern Embryo 1

Sofia Vergara Howard Stern Embryo

Loeb filed motion for control of the embryos in August of last year, but the private matter turned public when he wrote about it a New York Times op-ed piece on April 29. “In my view, keeping them frozen forever is tantamount to killing them,” he wrote.

Nick Loeb embryo killing abortion NY Times

More from Loeb’s letter:

    “When we create embryos for the purpose of life, should we not define them as life, rather than as property? Does one person’s desire to avoid biological parenthood (free of any legal obligations) outweigh another’s religious beliefs in the sanctity of life and desire to be a parent? A woman is entitled to bring a pregnancy to term even if the man objects. Shouldn’t a man who is willing to take on all parental responsibilities be similarly entitled to bring his embryos to term even if the woman objects? These are issues that, unlike abortion, have nothing to do with the rights over one’s own body, and everything to do with a parent’s right to protect the life of his or her unborn child.”
    “In 2013, Sofía and I agreed to try to use in vitro fertilization and a surrogate to have children. We signed a form stating that any embryos created through the process could be brought to term only with both parties’ consent. The form did not specify — as California law requires — what would happen if we separated. I am asking to have it voided.”

Loeb then admits he had a girlfriend who had an abortion writing,

    “When I was in my 20s, I had a girlfriend who had an abortion, and the decision was entirely out of my hands. Ever since, I have dreamed about a boy at the age he would be now. Later, I was married for four years to a woman with whom I tried to have children, with help from a fertility specialist. The difficulties we had made me feel, more than ever, that the ability to create life was special. When she left me, as I was running for a seat in the Florida State Senate, my dreams of a family were shattered.”

After the couple broke up after four years together, Loeb said he asked Sofia for the embryos and said he, “offering to pay for all expenses to carry our girls to term and raise them.”

    “She has refused. Her lawyer, Fred Silberberg, has told reporters that she wants to keep the embryos “frozen indefinitely.” In my view, keeping them frozen forever is tantamount to killing them.”

He then told to the Today Show that two lives had already been created:

Nick Loeb

In the interview Loeb stated:

    You know – you know- we filed this back in October, this is not something that’s new.

    This has nothing to do with this at all.

    This has to do with bigger really moral you no legal or ethical concepts that are out there about lives that we’ve already created and nothing to do with anything else.

    It has nothing to do with whether it is her baby or a baby.

    Lives were already created.

    You know a lot of the question is why don’t you move on and meet somebody else and and no doubt I would love to do that.

    But doesn’t it matter that two lives have already been created?

    I wouldn’t just toss them aside – no different than a child that had been born.”

Original video here.

Inside pregnancy the developing unborn miracle in video

Posted in Babies, Fetal Development, Video with tags , , , , , , , on February 25, 2015 by saynsumthn

I came across this fascinating animated video series called Inside Pregnancy.

The fetal development series created by Baby Center is worth watching:

Provocative display links shootings of Blacks by police with abortion victims

Posted in Black Conservative, Black Genocide, Black Lives Matter, Black Pastor, CBR, Clenard Childress, Fetal Development, Fetal Pain, Police Abuse with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 18, 2015 by saynsumthn

A National pro-life group is teaming up with African American leaders to introduced a provocative new pro-life sign display entitled, “All Black Lives Matter.”

All Lives Matter

The signs, created by The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR), display images of abortion victims with various messages directed to the African American community and ask, where is the African-American community’s outrage over the hundreds of thousands of preborn black children butchered this year by the brutality of abortion?! Why isn’t the civil rights slogan “Don’t shoot” accompanied by the exhortation “Don’t abort”?

According to the group’s press release, the exhibit was inspired by the tragic series of encounters between black suspects and white police officers in which the suspects lost their lives while being taken into custody.

CBR said that they believes the rule of law requires that police officers who employ excessive force should be prosecuted, convicted and punished appropriately, “A young black man who raises his hands, shouting “Don’t shoot!” has a right to be apprehended unharmed,” they said.

CBR Dont Shoot Dont Abort

CBR also stated that a young black man restrained in a police choke-hold should never die of asphyxiation after declaring, “I can’t breathe.”

“The evidence is often in dispute, but where proven beyond a reasonable doubt, police brutality is an intolerable outrage — especially if racially motivated. But where is the African-American community’s outrage over the hundreds of thousands of preborn black children butchered this year by the brutality of abortion?! Why isn’t the civil rights slogan “Don’t shoot” accompanied by the exhortation “Don’t abort”? When will African-American religious and political leaders acknowledge that aborted babies can’t breathe either? A police choke-hold can be a form of torture, and abortion also tortures babies to death. As Lila Rose recently established in another of her brilliant Live Action videos, the abortion industry lies to mothers about fetal pain,” their release says.

CBR icant breathe abortionn prolife Al Lives Matter

More from the Press Release:

    The British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology reports in a review titled, “Fetal Pain: Implications for Research and Practice” (September 1999), that “… It is possible that the fetus can feel pain from 20 weeks and is caused distress from interventions as early as 15 or 16 weeks” (p 885). Brain structures activated by 16 weeks “… could be associated with unpleasant conscious experience” (p 885). Between 13 and 16 weeks is when “… it is likely that the fetus is aware of anything that is going on in its body …” (p 882). At eight weeks, “The fetus starts to make movements in response to being touched …” (p 882). More than 100,000 babies each year are aborted after 13 weeks (about 10% of the 1.1 million annual total). Approximately 17,000 are killed after 21 weeks (about 1.4% of the total).

    A large percentage of these babies are African-American and many are dying slow, agonizing deaths. Those who aren’t torn to pieces suffer excruciating heart attacks after being injected with lethal doses of digoxin or potassium chloride, the same poisons being used to stop the hearts of death row inmates (See Boston.com, “Shots Assist in Aborting Fetuses,” August 10, 2007.)

    The Orange County Register, January 24, 2015, published a story headlined “Justices to Review Drug for Execution,” which reported that the U.S. Supreme Court is examining the possibility that these drugs are causing inmates “intense” pain. The Los Angeles Times, on the same day, notes that an African-American inmate named Charles Warner recently exclaimed, “My body is on fire,” after receiving this lethal injection.

    The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is rightly dismayed to report (NAACP LDF Report “Death Row U.S.A.,” Summer 2013) that black inmates comprise 42% of death row prisoners. Why, then, do they strongly support the slaughter of the far greater numbers of African-American preborn children being executed with the same lethal injections?

    NAACP leader Julian Bond recently equated abortion rights with racially-related civil rights (“NAACP Leader: Right to Abort is Same as Right to Eat at Lunch Counter,” LifeNews.com, August 6, 2014). The NAACP is so intellectually dishonest concerning black genocide that its board refuses to permit any debate on any proposed resolution related to abortion and won’t even allow the public reading of such proposals.

clenard-childress

CBR said they are teaming up with the Rev. Clenard Childress a black minister who is a member of their board and will be holding a press conference in Washington D.C to unveil the new display. Rev. Childress is founder of BlackGenocide.Org. Several other African-American pastors and pro-life activists will also present brief remarks.

10985599_10203781242231008_5985418963745748156_n

As these abortion photos prove incontestably, abortion is an act of violence which kills a baby, and abortion is teaching an entire generation of young African-Americans to solve its problems by resorting to violence,” they said.

10255964_10203781234470814_7319819608855068856_n

In addition, the group points out that the targeting of the African American community by Planned Parenthood’s “abortion care” has suppressed the black vote more effectively than poll taxes, literacy tests, voter I.D. requirements and Ku Klux Klan lynchings combined.

Abortion suppresses the Black Vote.”

CBR Abortion Surpresses Black Vote

These new signs are intended to stop this fratricidal atrocity,” says CBR, “CBR will collaborate with African-American anti-abortion leaders across the country to display them at middle schools, high schools, universities and churches with substantial black enrollment. Our African-American president has betrayed us. It is long past time for us to take matters into our own hands with an unavoidable witness against this great evil,” they said.

Read more here.

Planned Parenthood describes abortion and fetal development

Posted in Fetal Development, Planned Parenthood abortion description with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on February 2, 2015 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood has a page on their website which details fetal development; what women can expect at various points in their pregnancy.

Planned Parenthood week to week

Weeks 5–6

The embryo is less than 1/5 inch (4–5 mm) long.
A very basic beating heart and circulatory system develop.
Buds for arms and legs develop.
The neural tube begins forming. The neural tube will later form the brain, spinal cord, and major nerves.
The bud of a tail develops.
The umbilical cord begins developing.

Weeks 9–10

The embryo develops into a fetus after 10 weeks. It is 1–1.5 inches (21–40 mm) long.
The tail disappears.
Fingers and toes are longer.
The umbilical cord connects the abdomen of the fetus to the placenta. The placenta is attached to the wall of the uterus. It absorbs nutrients from the woman’s bloodstream. The cord carries nutrients and oxygen to the fetus and takes wastes away from the fetus.

Planned Parenthood also has pages that describe abortion, although in the most minimal way.

Planned Parenthood abortion

Aspiration abortion

D+E Abortion

Apparently, according to Planned Parenthood there are two main types of abortion:

PP in clinic and d+e abortion

In Clinic Abortion and D+E abortion.

There is more than one kind of in-clinic abortion procedure. The most common is called aspiration. It is also known as vacuum aspiration. Aspiration is usually used up to 16 weeks after a woman’s last period.

“D&E – dilation and evacuation – is another kind of in-clinic abortion. D&E is usually performed later than 16 weeks after a woman’s last period.”

________________________________________________________________

Let’s intertwine Planned Parenthood’s abortion descriptions with their fetal development descriptions:

______________________________________________

ASPIRATION Abortion as described by Planned Parenthood:

A speculum will be inserted into your vagina

Your health care provider may inject a numbing medication into or near your cervix

Your health care provider may inject a numbing medication into or near your cervix

PP Fetal develop 7 to 8 weeks

The opening of your cervix may be stretched with dilators — a series of increasingly thick rods. Or you may have absorbent dilators inserted a day or a few hours before the procedure. They will absorb fluid and get bigger. This slowly stretches open your cervix. Medication may also be used with or without the dilators to help open your cervix.

PP Fetal develop 9 to 10 weeks

You will be given antibiotics to prevent infection

A tube is inserted through the cervix into the uterus

PP Fetal develop11 to 12 weeks

Either a hand-held suction device or a suction machine gently empties your uterus

PP Fetal develop 13 to 14 weeks

Sometimes, an instrument called a curette is used to remove any remaining tissue that lines the uterus. It may also be used to check that the uterus is empty. When a curette is used, people often call the abortion a D&C — dilation and curettage.

An aspiration procedure takes about 5 to 10 minutes. But more time may be needed to prepare your cervix. Time is also needed for talking with your provider about the procedure, a physical exam, reading and signing forms, and a recovery period of about one hour.

________________________________________________________________________

Now, we’ll look at Planned Parenthood’s description of a D+E abortion:

Exactly what is a D+E abortion?

Planned Parenthood gives a very vague description on purpose $$$$

Listen to former abortion doctor Dr. Anthony Levatino explain it here:

Thanks to ClinicQuotes.com – there is another transcript of his explanation below:

A second trimester D&E abortion is a blind procedure. The baby can be in any orientation or position inside the uterus. Picture yourself reaching in with the Sopher clamp and grasping anything you can. At twenty weeks gestation, the uterus is thin and soft so be careful not to perforate or puncture the walls. Once you have grasped something inside, squeeze on the clamp to set the jaws and pull hard – really hard. You feel something let go and out pops a fully formed leg about 4 to 5 inches long. Reach in again and grasp whatever you can. Set the jaw and pull really hard once again and out pops an arm about the same length. Reach in again and again with that clamp and tear out the spine, intestines, heart and lungs.

The toughest part of a D&E abortion is extracting the baby’s head. The head of a baby that age is about the size of a plum and is now free floating inside the uterine cavity. You can be pretty sure you have hold of it if the Sopher clamp is spread about as far as your fingers will allow. You will know you have it right when you crush down on the clamp and see a pure white gelatinous material issue from the cervix. That was the baby’s brains. You can then extract the skull pieces. If you have a really bad day like I often did, a little face may come out and stare back at you.”

Congratulations! You have just successfully performed a Suction D&E abortion. You just affirmed her right to choose. You just made $600 cash in fifteen minutes.

de

Life News has more descriptions here.

Below- the Planned Parenthood version: (which profits from abortion)

D&E – Dilation & Evacuation

During a D&E:

Your health care provider will examine you and check your uterus.

You will get medication for pain. You may be offered sedation or IV medication to make you more comfortable

A speculum will be inserted into your vagina

PP Fetal develop 15 to 16 weeks

PP Fetal develop 17 to 18 weeks

Your cervix will be prepared for the procedure. You may be given medication or have absorbent dilators inserted a day or a few hours before the procedure. They will absorb fluid and grow bigger. This slowly stretches open your cervix

You will be given antibiotics to prevent infection

In later second-trimester procedures, you may also need a shot through your abdomen to make sure there is fetal demise before the procedure begins

Your health care provider will inject a numbing medication into or near your cervix

PP Fetal develop 17 to 18 weeks

PP Fetal develop 19 to 20 weeks

Medical instruments and a suction machine gently empty your uterus

A D&E usually takes between 10 and 20 minutes. But more time is needed to prepare your cervix. Time is also needed for talking with your provider about the procedure, a physical exam, reading and signing forms, and a recovery period of about one hour.

PP Fetal develop 21 to 24 weeks

PP Fetal develop 25 to 28 weeks

PP Fetal develop 29 to 32 weeks

PP Fetal develop 33 to 36 weeks

PP Fetal develop 37 to 40 weeks