Of course life begins at conception, but that still doesn’t make a fertilised ovum a human being

I WOULD like to take issue with most of the points made by Mark Lambe (Write Back, October 17).

He has obviously little knowledge of embryology, because he describes the words ‘embryo’ and ‘pregnancy’ as “hoodwinking” terms. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These are well-defined scientific terms, along with ‘blastula’, ‘gastrula’ and ‘foetus’. It is his ignorance that leads him to be hoodwinked into thinking terms such as these are “fallacious”.

He also claims that in a survey of almost 6,000 biologists, 95% agreed that human life begins at conception, but he does not quote his source, nor the questions asked.

I am surprised that it was not 100%, because human life does, indeed, begin at conception, as does the life of all diploid organisms. However, it does not follow that the fertilised ovum is a human being. It only has potential to develop into such. The fact is that a large proportion of fertilised ova fail to develop to full term for natural reasons.

The real question that has not been addressed is, at what point in development is a foetus able to survive outside the mother’s womb, with or without artificial support systems?

This is a difficult question to answer, because of advances in support technology, but it is possible at any given time to provide an answer.

Medics can, in the main, determine when human life ends without resorting to the use of a mirror, as was once the case in the distant past, so it should be possible to decide when it begins.

In any case, legislation allowing women the right to choose in no way forces anyone to terminate a pregnancy against their beliefs.

DAVID FULLERTON

Belfast