Three thoughts, in increasing order of seriosity:
-
Cassie wrote to “Straight Dope” and promised to name her baby after her correspondent if… Does that mean the baby will be named “Straight Dope Smith (or whatever)”?
-
It sounds like Cassie should look into getting another doctor, if this one is not sympathetic. It seems to me that a woman having a baby would want another woman as her doctor, other things being equal.
-
The formulation in the answer does not necessarily imply that an embryo is not a human, but the wording is unfortunate. Given our society’s anguish with the abortion issue, I would be very careful here.
Welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board, AgiaSophia!
When you start a new topic, it is helpful if you provide a link to the Staff Report that you’re referencing… that will help people track what’s going on. In this case, it’s Why do pregnant women get morning sickness?
If you meant to post this in response to the other topic called “morning sickness”, please note the difference between “REPLY TO TOPIC” and “START NEW TOPIC.” Not to feel bad, this is a mistake even seasoned posters make.
In response to the “human” vs “non-human”, the reference seems to me to be pretty clear, that there are biological distinctions in terms of immunity between already-born-people and not-yet-born-embryonic-people. Calling them “humans” and “embryos” is shorter and seems more comprehensible than calling them “already-born-people” and “not-yet-born-embryonic-people.”
This seems to be the wording in question:
I’m sorry, I don’t see what your concern is. The wording clearly implies that embryos are humans. It says normally harmless to humans, and then lists a special case where a subset of humans (embryos) are at risk.