Been having an interesting debate on another thread about the fetal/female relationship and thought it would make a decent topic to explore in it's own right. I have maintained that the fetal/female relationship is a parasitic-like one, while my opponent has declared that it is symbiotic. What I will attempt to do here is to show that the symbiotic is little or no different from the parasitism relationship. Firstly we need to establish what a symbiosis is; sym·bi·o·sis [sim-bee-oh-sis, -bahy-] noun, plural sym·bi·o·ses [-seez] 1. Biology . a. the living together of two dissimilar organisms, as in mutualism, commensalism, amensalism, or parasitism. b. (formerly) mutualism ( def 1 ) . 2. Psychiatry. a relationship between two people in which each person is dependent upon and receives reinforcement, whether beneficial or detrimental, from the other. 3. Psychoanalysis . the relationship between an infant and its mother in which the infant is dependent on the mother both physically and emotionally. 4. any interdependent or mutually beneficial relationship between two persons, groups, etc. I have highlighted the relevant terms for the purpose of this topic Symbiosis, as can be seen can be one of four (or combinations of) "sub" categories - mutualism, commensalism, amensalism, or parasitism Each of the four terms are defined as follows; mu·tu·al·ism [myoo-choo-uh-liz-uhm] noun 1. a relationship between two species of organisms in which both benefit from the association. 2. the doctrine that the interdependence of social elements is the primary determinant of individual and social relations, especially the theory that common ownership of property, or collective effort and control governed by sentiments of brotherhood and mutual aid, will be beneficial to both the individual and society. 3. Sociology . the force or principle of mutual aid. com·men·sal·ism [kuh-men-suh-liz-uhm] noun 1. Ecology . a type of relationship between two species of a plant, animal, fungus, etc., in which one lives with, on, or in another without damage to either. 2. Sociology . peaceful coexistence among individuals or groups having independent or different values or customs. a·men·sa·lism [ey-men-suh-liz-uhm] noun Ecology .a relationship between two species of organisms in which the individuals of one species adversely affect those of the other and are unaffected themselves. par·a·sit·ism [par-uh-sahy-tiz-uhm, -si-] noun 1. Biology . a relation between organisms in which one lives as a parasite on another. 2. a parasitic mode of life or existence. 3. Pathology . a diseased condition due to parasites. 4. a. unemployment or refusal to work. b. employment in work considered nonessential by the state. Having defined the terms I will now show the changes, both physical and chemical that occur within the female during pregnancy. The fetus releases a chemical molecule called phosphocholine which is also found in the nematode worm, the purpose of this molecule is to suppress the immune system and prevent it attacking the "foreign" object "Another role for foetal transferrin receptors on trophoblasts could be to bind maternal transferrin at the materno-foetal interface, thus frustrating maternal immunosurveillance. This is similar to a mechahism used by schistosomes in the host-parasite relation where host proteins are bound by the parasite to escape immunological recognition." Abstract "During implantation, fetally derived cells (trophoblast) invade the maternal endometrium and remodel the endometrial spiral arteries into low-resistance vessels that are unable to constrict. This invasion has three consequences. First, the fetus gains direct access to its mother's arterial blood. Therefore, a mother cannot reduce the nutrient content of blood reaching the placenta without reducing the nutrient supply to her own tissues. Second, the volume of blood reaching the placenta becomes largely independent of control by the local maternal vasculature. Third, the placenta is able to release hormones and other substances directly into the maternal circulation. Placental hormones, including human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and human placental lactogen (hPL), are predicted to manipulate maternal physiology for fetal benefit. " Citation Well Known Physical Changes Nausea. Constipation. Sore boobs. Vomit all day long, not just in the morning. You can't eat your favorite foods because you'll throw up. Indigestion and heartburn. Braxton Hicks. Depression. Anxiety. Constant crying. Fatigue. You look and feel like a fat cow(trust me, I know this from experience). You feel bloated. Youre carrying around some extra weight. Insomnia. You have to (*)(*)(*)(*) like Seabiscuit every 20 minutes. Other Not So Well Known Physical Changes Hyperemesis gravidarum Temporary and permanent injury to back Severe scarring requiring later surgery (especially after additional pregnancies) Dropped (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other pelvic floor weaknesses -- 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele, and enterocele) Pre-eclampsia (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy, associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 - 10% of pregnancies) Eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death) Gestational diabetes Placenta previa Anemia (which can be life-threatening) Thrombocytopenic purpura Severe cramping Embolism (blood clots) Medical disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother or baby) Diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles Mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication) Serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis) Hormonal imbalance Ectopic pregnancy (risk of death) Broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone") Hemorrhage and numerous other complications of delivery Refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease Aggravation of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency of seizures) Severe post-partum depression and psychosis There is also research that shows a possible link between ovarian cancer and female fertility treatments, including "egg harvesting" from infertile women and donors http://www.nhs.uk/news/2011/10October/Pages/ovarian-cancer-risk-ivf.aspx Research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease. http://www.hearthealthywomen.org/am-i-at-risk/am-i-at-risk/hfpregnancy.html now given these items one must come to the following conclusions; 1. The fetus and the female are not "dissimilar" organisms as defined in the symbiosis definition 2. That according to the symbiosis definition the relationship can be either beneficial or detrimental 3. Based on the numerous items listed above it is obvious that the woman receives no benefit in the relationship, quite the contrary, and therefore the symbiotic relationship is detrimental to the female, while being beneficial to the fetus. 4. Again the relationship cannot be mutualism, which is defined as a relationship mutually beneficial to both. 5. The relationship cannot be commensalism, which is defined as a relationship where no damage occurs to either 6. amensalism moves us closer to the actual relationship, the fetus adversely effects the female while not being effected itself 7. parasitism is by far the closest comparison to the fetus/female relationship, the fetus lives of the woman for the duration of the pregnancy. And before anyone says that a fetus cannot be a parasitic-like organism as it is the same species as the host, there are parasites that are of the same species, they are called intraspecific parasites, examples of which are males of some deepsea fish that live on females of the same species absorbing food from them. I therefore conclude that the fetal/female relationship is both amensalism and parasitism based on the evidence provided.
As I know I will be requested to supply evidence to intraspecific parasites I thought I would preempt those requests. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglerfish http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v256/n5512/abs/256038a0.html Even a nice picture Haplophryne mollis
Let's make this short: Questions: "Is a human being in the womb (while in the fetal stage of their life, growth and development) a parasite? Answer: "No" Thank you.
From your link So you use a religious based argument to dispute the scientific points raised .. lol, nice try, care to have another go, and even the links the cite as source material are also pure pro-life. BTW please show me where I actually state that a fetus IS a parasite.. I have said it displays parasitic-like tendencies. for what, not having the capability to answer the OP.
What? One can't have morals without religion? Do any atheists here want to speak to that? I digress. Thank you for admitting that a human being in the fetal stage of their life is not a "parasite."
Again never said that, a bad habit you have of putting words into peoples mouths, I merely pointed out to you (ignored by you as usual) that your source relied on religious information to support its premise. Pretty standard for you Nothing to admit as it is something I have never said. Now are you going to address the conclusions made based on the scientific evidence or just keep evading them .. to remind you here they are again; 1. The fetus and the female are not "dissimilar" organisms as defined in the symbiosis definition 2. That according to the symbiosis definition the relationship can be either beneficial or detrimental 3. Based on the numerous items listed above it is obvious that the woman receives no benefit in the relationship, quite the contrary, and therefore the symbiotic relationship is detrimental to the female, while being beneficial to the fetus. 4. Again the relationship cannot be mutualism, which is defined as a relationship mutually beneficial to both. 5. The relationship cannot be commensalism, which is defined as a relationship where no damage occurs to either 6. amensalism moves us closer to the actual relationship, the fetus adversely effects the female while not being effected itself 7. parasitism is by far the closest comparison to the fetus/female relationship, the fetus lives of the woman for the duration of the pregnancy.
The woman is the parent of the fetus. A child is not a parasite of the parent. Grow up. Stop ignoring the fact that parents have responsibilities for their own children.
We have reached the same conclusions. 1. A pregnancy is a symbiotic relationship and 2. A child in the womb is not a parasite. I don't see any reason to split hairs over the details and the specifics.
Yep she is also the host to the fetus The science proves you wrong Says the little boy who can't even debate That is your opinion and if true would mean we have no need of adoption or child care homes. Now you need to "grow up" and actually research before placing inane comments on subjects you obviously know nothing about.
Funny that, you do when it comes to your precious UVVA, must conclude that the rule only applies to your posts. and thank you for agreeing that a fetus is like a parasite.
1-She chose to get pregnant. It's not like she randomly got infected by some tapeworm. 2-Calling the fetus a "parasite" is just an appeal to the emotions. 3-Ageist. 4-You have no morals. According to you, a woman can take away her own child's life because of convenience.
completely irrelevant, we choose to have a number of parasites in our bodies already. how so when it is based on scientific evidence and actual definitions Yep, just like you "grow up" comment .. if you can't take it don't dish it Irrelevant to the OP, can you not stay on topic at least once.
Its action seems parasitic but in reality the trade off is the female gets her gene's to continue on after her death, so while not parasitic, I do not think symbiotic is correct either - so how about reproductive!?
The fetus can not be parasitic because the woman's body, and the woman's physical actions she herself engaged in, brought the fetus into existence. Furthermore, pregnancy is the most NATURAL thing in the world. The woman herself was once a fetus. Pregnancy is an absolutely necessary part of the human life cycle. Why do you think the woman even has a uterus to begin with?
And please tell, what is the fetus/female relationship if the woman is not getting an abortion, hmmm? Sometimes I wonder how much pro-choicers are really capable to care about their children who have already been born.
In reality the fetus displays characteristic parasitic traits, more so than any of the other forms of symbiosis, what many seem to forget is that parasitism IS a form of symbiosis, and further more the topic is fetal/female relationship, not the mechanics which is what reproduction is.
and you don't think that there are parasites that are brought into existence through voluntary actions then .. hmm You do know that almost all parasites are passed through voluntary actions don't you, such as eating, kissing, drinking and breathing and when infested the host offers the best conditions for the parasite to reproduce. If it is SO natural why does the fetus need to produce phosphocholine which is also found in the nematode worm, for the purpose of suppressing the immune system and prevent it attacking the "foreign" object. and this is relevant how, or are you agreeing that even the woman displayed parasitic tendencies when she was a fetus. and in the case of some parasites, being inside a host is also an absolutely necessary part of their life cycle .. like the fetus they cannot survive without it. and again how is this relevant. You need to step off the high horse and actually read the OP because no where in it do I say that a fetus is a parasite. Now do you want to try again to dispute the scientific evidence and the definitions of the terms used?
Once the birth has taken place it isn't a fetal/female relationship anymore .. obviously, and it is irrelevant whether the woman is planing an abortion or not, it still doesn't change the fact that the fetus displays parasitic tendencies, above an beyond any of the other symbiotic relationships .. the difference is the woman who wants to continue the pregnancy makes the choice
So far not one single person has been able to dispute the evidence provided .. sure there have been lots of opinions, but nothing backed with any evidence to support that opinion .. Even two replies doing the usual pro-life thing of trying to de-rail the thread .. as fair warning, any and all attempts to do so will be ignored and reported.
So you have evidence that every woman who has become pregnant has specifically chosen to become pregnant? Or, is this more of that "choosing sex means choosing pregnancy" poop? Abortion is primarily an emotional issue. If it were judged purely on facts, there would be no pro-life side. Fugazi has never said that a woman has the right to kill her child. A woman has a right to end her pregnancy. Killing her child is murder which is illegal and something for which you'll find little support from any of the different camps on this issue.
Your point to grandstand on the two words parasitic and symbiotic are trivial at best. Yes, a human fetus could be defined as either in a complete non-static sense. However, unlike animals, we as humans are inherited such qualities such as itellect, moral comprehension, cognitive thinking, and prognostication or awareness of mortality. We, as humans, have been granted (by perceived definition as opposed to animals) the bearers of such labor as the the gifts of awareness, obligation, integrity, purpose, reason, etc. Your reasoning of definition implies that we as a human race are nothing more than animals. You seem to imply that we are afforded the ability to regard life as nothing more than inconvenience by way of practicality. It is in this way your are implying that we have no more regard for pregnancy than that of animals. I believe we have a higher level of responsibility upon this planet to regard all reasoning and definitions of human life to more carefull standards than parasitic or symbiotic ones. I believe we have bigger purpose than to plan how we can ehtically and effectively abort pregnancy. Added note: You seem to adhere to the idea that you provided 'evidence' yourself and waiting for contradictory evidence. The truth is, 'evidence' is not a relative term in the debate, discussion or topic of abortion. It is highly subjective to opinion.
When it comes down to it we are animals with all that-that implies, sure we impose self inflicted restraints onto what we are, that however doesn't change the fact that we ARE animals (mammals to be precise). Everything you have posted above is what you believe, and therefore is opinion, you are perfectly entitled to believe what you will however opinion doesn't stand as a debate item unless backed by evidence. If as you assert that any and/or all evidence relating to abortion is subjective then you should have little or no problems refuting the points made .. can you do that?
Hi, Please do not take this as my attempt to "butt" into your conversation, but this being an open forum I would like to comment on some points you made. Hope you will not take it the wrong way or object too much. Thanks. Those two points are factual though, something that yourself are stipulating to and are based on scientific principles. Why do you feel that they are trivial? From where do you feel we are inheriting such traits? Is it possible that you meant evolved to have them? Also how does that play into the abortion issue? By the way, would you agree that many animals also have similar traits. We certainly know that many animals are intelligent, have great memory and learning capacity, are nurturing and even risk or sacrifice themselves for humans. As such they too posses admirable traits. You are alluding to a higher power that you have yet to identify. Who is this grantor other than evolution and what role is played by this grantor in this issue? A higher order certainly, but animals none the less. Are you disputing that? In certain instances that is correct. We as a species exist, can only exist by taking other life and we do that for any number of reasons above the basic need to sustain life. The lives we take encompass all the species on this planet, of course including the lives of countless humans. We that with and under a myriad or circumstances and reasons, we do it with direct and indirect action, inaction, neglect and criminal deeds, just to name the most obvious. This leave open the question of how this does or should influence the abortion issue. You mean the developing fetus yes? How much regards should it be accorded and by who? Is not the pregnant woman the one who should and does establish that and if it is, by what authority can or should anyone impose a different regard for the fetus? Would you please share what that purpose is in your view or belief.
