Tag Archives: biology

Investigating NFP: The Great Embryo Killer? (Part II)

2 Replies

Read Part I of "The Great Embryo Killer?"

Having used what he believes to be sound reasoning to implicate NFP in avoidable embryo deaths, he then entertains some possible pro-life responses. Since there’s little actual reasoning in Bovens arguements, I’d just as soon skip his charicatures of pro-life rebuttals. However, since they involve subtle changes to his arguments and could easily stand on their own, I’ll briefly address them, if only to highlight his slight of hand.

"So what is the alternative? If one is concerned about minimising embryonic death, then one should avoid types of contraception whereby each unintended pregnancy (due to its failure) comes at the expense of a high embryonic death rate. Given our first assumption, a condom user (who makes no distinction between HF and non-HF periods) can count on one embryonic death for each unintended pregnancy. A rhythm method user, however, should count on two to three embryonic deaths for each unintended pregnancy. Assuming a success rate of 95% for condom usage, we can count on an expectation of .5 pregnancies in 10 years. Hence, the expectation of embryonic death is .5 per ten years for a condom user, which is substantially lower than the expectation of two to three embryonic deaths per ten years on the rhythm method. Even a policy of practising condom usage and having an abortion in case of failure would cause less embryonic deaths than the rhythm method."

"So how can this argument be blocked? First, one could say that the empirical data are questionable. However, the result really depends on the simple assumption that embryos conceived outside the HF period are less viable than embryos conceived during the HF period. If this is the case, then the success of the rhythm method is contingent on a higher embryonic death rate and so every pregnancy due to a failure of the technique will come at the expense of a higher embryonic death rate—and this is all that is needed to get the argument off the ground."

If that’s the case, then the argument is grounded. Continue reading →

Pages: 1 2

Investigating NFP: The Great Embryo Killer? (Part I)

15 Replies

[Errors in my arguments were fixed and additional material was added after initial publication. – Funky]

St. Blog’s Parish will soon be all aflutter with news that Luc Bovens, a professor of philosophy at the London School of Economics, has written an article ("The rhythm method and embryonic death", J Med Ethics 32: 355-356) that links the use of the "rhythm method" with embryonic death, i.e. early miscarriage or spontaneous abortion. (Fedora Tip: UnSpace)

"Some proponents of the pro-life movement argue against morning after pills, IUDs, and contraceptive pills on grounds of a concern for causing embryonic death. What has gone unnoticed, however, is that the pro-life line of argumentation can be extended to the rhythm method of contraception as well. Given certain plausible empirical assumptions, the rhythm method may well be responsible for a much higher number of embryonic deaths than some other contraceptive techniques."

Though some responses to the sloppy arguments made in this paper have been made by American Papist, Epiphany, and other bloggers, I do not believe the responses I’ve so far seen address the scientific/statistical aspects of Bovens’ claims. For instance, they rightly point out that the rhythm method was long ago replaced by much more reliable empirical methods collectively known as natural family planning (NFP). However, I suspect that Bovens chose to deliberately seem ignorant of pro-life/anti-contraceptive terminology in order to subtly mock what he sees as ignorance of reproductive medicine on the part of those who call the birth control pill abortifacient. I fear that Catholic bloggers have allowed themselves to be distracted by a red herring.

Continue reading →

Pages: 1 2 3

Catholic Condom Controversy

1 Reply

Those interested in the recent media hubbub about the Catholic Church’s stance regarding condom use to prevent the spread of AIDS should give the following a read:

American Papist:
Where the condom controversy currently stands
Cardinal Martini roundup

Michael Liccione (Sacramentum Vitae):
Why the condom debate is big for the Church
The Catholic condom debate II

Jimmy Akin:
Condoms & HIV/AIDS
Contraception & Extra-Marital Sex

Stem Cell Update II

Leave a reply

Hot off the presses: a stem cell paper connected to the disgraced Hwang laboratory in South Korea has been just retracted for misleading use of  photos that were claimed to be of different stem cells, but were actually the same (doctored) photograph.

The NY Times had a good article a few months ago on spotting doctored photos; Adobe Photoshop is a very useful tool in laboratory work so you can zoom in on areas of interest or clear up some noise. Astronomers also alter the color scales so X-Ray photographs, for instance, correspond to our visible spectrum (you’ll see how some beautiful photos of astronomical objects are called "false color"–this is an example).

Alas, these powerful programs can also be used for cheating.

Stem Cell Update

Leave a reply

Researchers in both the USA and Germany claim to have produced embryonic-like stem cells from testicular cells. The Germans published the results of their work on mice in Nature last week; the Americans claimed to have done similar things with human testes (ouch), but have not published in a peer-reviewed journal, but rather presented it at a conference. The group that did the work in America is also studying similar work on ovaries.

Presumably these cells can be entirely legitimate from a Catholic bioethical standpoint, provided that the germ cell (i.e., testicular or ovarian tissue) material is donated and procured in an ethical manner (which can get complicated, but we’ll leave that for another entry). The problem with embryonic research to date is that the process involves killing or harming human embryos, and perhaps involves involves cloning to boot. Since this embryonic-like cells are taken from adult donors, this intrinsic stumbling-block is removed.

In addition to avoiding that big ethical issue, this technique, if it works, would also avoid some serious technical barriers facing embryonic stem cells. If you give a patient stem cells derived from an embryo, you must either try to create a cloned embryo or else face the risk of tissue rejection. Human cloning has yet to done, now that Dr. Hwang was exposed as a fraud, and any therapy that involves such a concept faces quite a few issues with expense, technical validation, etc.

In other news, Geron Corporation, which holds the rights to the original human embryonic stem cell lines that Dr. Thompson derived at the University of Wisconsin Madison (thus sparking this whole debate) is preparing to launch a clinical trial of human embryonic stell cells on human patients–and just to clarify, unlike the embryonic-like stem cells that I mentioned above, these ones are derived from destroyed human embryos. I believe that this is the first such trial to happen in the USA in several years–in the last trial on Parkinsons Disease patients, the subjects’ symptoms got worse after getting the cells.