#human embryology

[cheerfullycatholic]

[biologist4ever]

𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐜𝐲𝐭𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐈𝐧𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

 𝐓𝐡𝐞 d𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐦 𝐨𝐟 s𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 f𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 d𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 f𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧

[strikeslip]

One of the things about the Commonweal books is they will differentiate the various named species by metabolism before they tell you what anyone looks like. We get thorough descriptions for Creeks, Graul, and not much else. I know Elegants drink ethanol instead of water and are 'pretty', which is not a helpful description without an idea of what's socially constructed as pretty. I know Typicals gesture a noticeable amount and will argue about egalité till they drop, but I have no idea what lets people visually differentiate them from Regulars. I know some kind of difference exists because the differentiation happens, you've got Crane as a 'possible typical antecedent' and more than one comment on how the various types of Regulars are hard to tell apart, even for Regulars. But what that looks like? Hahahaha, no.

I say this because on my uncountable Nth reread of Under One Banner, I finally noticed a reference to rope sandals and was shocked and delighted. There aren't no visual notes, there's lots of heights for comparison to Creeks, there's enough skin color descriptions to know various shades of brown are expected, there's references to seasonal wear like hats and mud shoes, there's a few wraps and tabard-like things, there's almost enough military uniform descriptions to give me confidence the army wears plate, individually sized via magic, and there's sorcerer formalwear and Halt's knitting. But still, rope sandals! Exciting!

Now please, please, please, give me some visual hints on how to make a dozen different humanoid species distinct without going to the classic elf ears and animal-parts. Because there's absolutely no justification for either of those default fantasy tropes in this book and I want to know if Wake has a different skull shape or what. How do you expect me to draw the height chart. Please. I just want to make art that can be recognized.

[justabunchofdragons]

ok guys im officially lost to the stars i cannot seriously be scrolling through the embryology tag on TUMBLR.

[chefeader]

RE-INTRO?:)

Dental Student BDS1

would love to connect with other dental students and dentists from the dental community <3

will try to post study updates.

My first year subjects are:

GENERAL HUMAN ANATOMY , HISTOLOGY & EMBRYOLOGY

DENTAL ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY & EMBROLOGY

PHYSIOLOGY

BIOCHEMISTRY

DENTAL MATERIAL SCIENCE & PROSTHODONTICS

feel free to dm me if ya'll wanna talk :)

[icaerosthefool]

Someone in my embryology class implied that naming two of three proteins necessary for fertilization after Izumo, a Japanese shrine dedicated to marriage, and Juno, the Roman goddess of marriage and childbirth was not poetic or beautiful.

Excuse me, have you considered how amazing, clever, and sweet that is and also that you are objectively wrong?

[sci-memes-yura15cbx]

In the first month of development, the gill arches are laid in the human embryo, that is, according to the law of recapitulation of the Baer, it passes the stage of fish development..

На первом месяце развития у человеческого эмбриона закладываются жаберные дуги, то есть он по закону рекапитуляции Бэра проходит стадию развития рыб

My memes мои мемы

[tenth-sentence]

Lederberg's proposals for euphenics – modification of development – and his interest in embryology draw the comment that 'he is at once maddened and obsessed by the nine-month phase in which the human organism has been exempted from experimental and therapeutic intervention – such a waste of time before the scientists can get at us'.

"Frankenstein's Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture" - Jon Turney

[liberalsarecool]

“In four years of medical school, three years of residency training, and nearly 30 years in practice as a family physician I have never been asked “what is the definition of a woman?”

Seems obvious that one could just look at the genitalia. You’re either a boy or a girl, right? Well, not always. Although it’s rare, many people are born with ambiguous genitalia. The OB/GYN and the pediatrician are simply unable to determine the sex. Historically, in consultation with the family, a sex would be assigned. Turns out that often as not the child would ultimately identify with the sex they were not assigned.

So it must be the chromosomes. The 23rd pair in humans is designated XX in females and XY in males. The Y chromosome determines male characteristics, so you are either a boy or a girl, right? Well, not always.

In embryology the default setting is female. The Y chromosome normally triggers male development. Ever heard of testicular feminization syndrome, now more properly referred to as androgen insensitivity syndrome? Sometimes an XY baby is born with essentially normal female external genitalia. The body simply does not respond to androgens associated with the Y chromosome. As the child grows and enters puberty there will be normal female breast development and other feminine characteristics. Unless genetic testing has been done at some point, the abnormality is not discovered until the teenage daughter presents to the doctor with concerns that menstruation has not started. Examination will reveal that the vagina ends in a blind pouch, no uterus, and undescended testes. They are often very feminine - cheerleaders, beauty pageant contestants, etc.

Nearly everybody is a “normal” XX or XY, has anatomy to match, and is perfectly at peace with themselves. But not everybody. Several studies have identified how the sexual diversity between men and women does not exclusively involve the genitals, but also the development of different brain areas. And just as genitals can be ambiguous, or not match what XY would predict,so can the brain in some instances develop in a different direction than the genitals. Animal studies suggest this is likely due to atypical levels of sex hormones in the womb.

One of several such structures studied in the human brain have involved an area of the limbic system known as the nucleus of the terminal stria. The volume of this area appears to be influenced by the stimulation of sex hormones during brain development, and in men the volume of this area is greater than in women. Scans of this area in transgender women (genetic/anatomic men who identify as females) resemble that of non transgender females. In this matter gender identity develops from the complex interactions between sex hormones and brain during its development; moreover, this appears to be genetically predetermined and is not influenced by hormonal stimuli during the adult phase. It is important to understand that at this point it is not known for certain what causes gender dysphoria or incongruence, just as we don’t know for certain what makes someone gay or for that matter, left handed.

Gender dysphoria often begins in childhood and can lead to severe distress, depression, and suicide. Treatment includes thorough psychological and medical evaluation and psychotherapy. Hormonal treatments in children are designed to delay puberty until decisions about desired gender characteristics can be made. The treatments are not permanent and are REVERSIBLE. Hormone treatments are not given to prepubertal children and in fact are not started until Tanner stage 2 of puberty. Sex change (gender reassignment) operations are not done on children. (Rare exception might be in the case of ambiguous genitalia where surgery may be done to make genital appearance more consistent with the genetic sex).

Unfortunately there are many people who cannot or will not understand that someone different from themselves might really be different for a real reason. I recently watched a video of a Fox News personality guffawing, in an arrogant and grotesque display of not knowing what one does not know, about how "woke liberals" were looking into the science of what makes someone a man or a woman. I hope the information provided here explains why that question is not quite as simple as it sounds.

It is also unfortunate in Texas that people with political power seem to think that trans people just want to get on the girls' track team

to win a lot of medals or get in the girls' rest room to watch them pee. Governor Abbott, Lt Gov Patrick, and AG Paxton have shown profound ignorance and cruelty in decreeing treatment for these kids to be child abuse. Even right wing columnist Mona Charen called Abbott's behavior "malice masquerading as policy making". They really no different than lunchroom bullies.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Medical Association, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Endocrine Society have expressed outrage that government is inserting itself into a matter that should be left to families, patients, and their doctors. There are well established evidence based procedures that have been in place for decades. This is not a new phenomenon and it is not a fad. Treatment saves lives. Denying treatment is cruel.

I would hope that someone will share this with a conservative friend. For most of us it seems ridiculous that a guy would think he is a woman, or a woman to think she is a man. The human brain and human body are complex and wondrous and get it “right” almost every time, but sometimes they get it different. And different should not be wrong, and different people and their families should not be attacked by their own government.”

- Joe McCreight, MD

[cimerran-714]

I figured that it would be helpful to call out ten of the most common pro-choice arguments that you might notice online. I'll preface it by saying that I am not a philosopher (or at least not yet), but I am a person with common sense, and you can see through these "arguments" if you have two brain-cells left.

Also, I understand that there are good PC arguments out there (although they are of course not successful, for a strong argument doesn't necessarily have to succeed). I am only arguing some of the most insane and ridiculous ones you'd spot.

If you want to go through some really good claims made by pro-choice/pro-abortion advocates, I'd recommend David Boonin's 'A Defense of Abortion'. It'd help you instead of you having to regurgitate whatever you are spoon-fed by the leftist cult. Go check out that book even if you're pro-life, because it's a great one.

Let's get started, shall we?

A human embryo/fetus is not human:

Yes, it's both human and alive. Biologists agree with this (including pro-choice biologists), and even pro-choice philosophers acknowledge this. This is basic empirical reality. And you only have to open an embryology textbook to know how wrong you are. Also, these people can never explain what species the fetus belongs to if not "Homo Sapiens".

2. It's just a "clump of cells".

All of us are made up of cells. Some are "clumpier" than others. And plus, it's not merely a clump of cells: the embryo is a human organism in its earlier stages of development, and very soon is also differentiated as it grows. That's like saying that it's okay to destroy a car because it's just "a bunch of metal thrown together".

3. It's not a person/sentient, yadda yadda:

Irrelevant and it's the same logic that slave-owners used to own people. Human rights is species-based, and the embryo/fetus is human. That's all that matters. These people love to make up ridiculous, arbitrary criteria to justify their bigotry.

4. You cannot force people to donate their organs...

Not the same thing at all. You cannot be forced to save people, but that doesn't mean you can actively kill them. This is the difference between killing someone and letting them die. There is a significant moral difference between deliberately pushing someone off a cliff and not saving someone who's hanging off a branch at a cliff. Abortion is the former.

5. Women would die...

All states have life-threat exceptions built into it, so this is just deflection. And yes, there are doctors who refuse to perform entirely legal abortions, but that is their fault. It IS legal. They're just cowards, and you can't blame the law for this because they already make this exception.

6. You cannot force your views onto others:

If you support democracy (and, you know, voting) you're forcing your views onto others. That's how law works.

7. The child would grow up in poverty, yadda yadda yadda...:

We don't kill born children because of these reasons, so it's a ridiculous claim. You don't solve poverty by killing the poor.

8. They are just pro-birth:

Statistics show that Republicans donate more to charity than Democrats. Also, just because they don't agree with your method of helping people doesn't mean that they don't care about born people. You see, it's like saying "A fire-fighter rescued someone from a fire, but they don't want to pay out of their pockets to look after them throughout their lives. They don't actually care!"

9. Showing pics of fetuses belonging to other species as a gotcha:

Yes, mammals of different species look the same in their earlier stages, but that doesn't mean there isn't a difference between them. This is, once again, bigoted slaver logic (to want to kill people based on their looks).

10. Men cannot have a say because:

As men are directly affected by this, they absolutely have a say. They are fathers too, and remember that they're the ones who have to pay child support.

There you go. I am not expecting you to be pro-life yet if you are not, but I hope that I have cleared your head up somewhat.

[mindblowingscience]

Exposure to fine particulate matter, a common air pollutant, can significantly decrease the odds of a successful in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle, even in areas with good air quality, a new study found. The Australian study published Sunday in the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology found that exposure to pollution before the retrieval of eggs during IVF can reduce the odds of achieving a live birth by almost 40 per cent. “Climate change and pollution remain the greatest threats to human health, and human reproduction is not immune to this,” said Dr. Sebastian Leathersich, lead author of the study and a fertility specialist based in Australia.

Continue Reading.

[o-craven-canto]

Embryophylogeny

(original picture here)

A map showing the derivation of various structures and tissues of the human body from the parts of the early embryo.

Human figure partly traced from this Wiki Commons image (public domain). Main source is TW Sadler, Langman's medical embryology (12th ed.), 2012.

[cheerfullycatholic]

Some Pro-Life Information and Resources

The information;

The Pro-Life Movement is against abortion because it ends the life of a living human being in the womb. While many people have biblical reasons for being pro life, the movement acknowledges that it is a scientific fact that life begins at fertilization (aka conception) and we believe that that life shouldn't be taken away, and that human beings have the right to life, from the moment they are conceived. Here is one scientific study that goes over when life begins in the womb, but below are a few short quotes, as well.

...

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

...

“The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation, and fertilization … The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.”

J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers. 1974 Pages 17 and 23.

...

“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

...

“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3

...

The Resources;

We in the Pro-Life Movement acknowledge that one of the reasons why a woman may consider an abortion is because she may, for reasons such as financial difficulties or lack of support from the people in her life, believe she is unable to have a baby. Because of that, we have very many organizations within the movement that offer all kinds of support for pregnant women and their families, all of which are completely free. Here is a list of a few organizations (reblogs with more is highly encouraged and appreciated, especially for international organizations).

Option Line is a good place to find further information and pregnancy centers near you.

Let Them Live offers financial support and has fundraisers going on for different women in need all the time.

Birthright International is another website that offers support, referrals, and information.

Support After Abortion, as the name states, offers support and healing if you've lost a child to abortion. It is a judgement free organization that offers help to both women and men.

This post by no means is a complete list of pro life information or resources, as its purpose is only to be a starting point for understanding the movement. If you have any questions regarding the topic, please feel free to ask.

[farisjax]

One lesser-known aspect of the Quran is its emphasis on knowledge and scientific inquiry. The Quran encourages the pursuit of knowledge and reflection on the natural world, which is evident in several verses. Here are some points highlighting this aspect:

1. **Encouragement of Knowledge and Learning**: The Quran repeatedly emphasizes the importance of knowledge. For instance, the first word revealed to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was "Iqra," which means "Read" or "Recite." This is found in Surah Al-Alaq (96:1-5), which starts with, "Read in the name of your Lord who created."

2. **Reflection on Nature**: The Quran contains numerous verses that urge believers to observe and reflect on the natural world. Surah Al-Imran (3:190) states, "Indeed, in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and the day are signs for those of understanding."

3. **Scientific Phenomena**: The Quran mentions various natural phenomena and encourages contemplation of these signs. For instance:

- **Astronomy**: Surah Al-Anbiya (21:30) mentions, "Do not the disbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were a closed-up mass, then We opened them out?" This is often interpreted as a reference to the Big Bang theory.( Allah knows if big bang theory is true and legit)

- **Embryology**: Surah Al-Mu’minun (23:12-14) describes the development of the human embryo in stages, which has been found to align with modern embryological knowledge.

4. **Oceans and Deep Seas**: Surah An-Nur (24:40) describes the depths of the oceans, mentioning the darkness found there, a phenomenon that was unknown to people at the time. It states, "Or [they are] like layers of darkness within an unfathomable sea which is covered by waves, upon which are waves, over which are clouds."

5. **Water Cycle**: The Quran also describes aspects of the water cycle. Surah Az-Zumar (39:21) says, "Have you not seen that Allah sends down rain from the sky and makes it flow as springs in the earth?"

The Quran is full of wisdom but we must understand it by doing justice with the Quran by reading it everyday with the intention to please Allah

[midnightshade]

I don't usually do Mundane!AU, but I was thinking about potential professions for everyone and I settled on these:

Satoru is a physicist

Suguru is a mythologist and folklorist

Sukuna is a yakuza boss

Uraume is a world class chef hired by Sukuna

Kenjaku is a scientist with a focus on human embryology and neuroscience. He has a big focus on developmental psychology.

Shoko is still a medical doctor. One of the best surgeons in the country

Utahime is a musician with a focus on traditional Japanese arts.

Yuki is an anthropologist who travels the world for her job

Yorozu is an entomologist

[discworldwitches]

The newly emerging registers of sex/gender and sexuality were inextricably entwined through the hegemonic discourse of evolutionary theory. Determined to reorder dominant social hierarchies, scientists explained deviations of normative being and behavior in terms of a hetero-teleological scale of evolutionary development. Blacks, homosexuals, children, and women were situated at lower points on this scale than white heterosexual men, not able (or not yet able) to reach the highest stage of (hu)man evolution. The category of bisexuality played a central role in this linear model, and thus in the epistemological configuration of the category of sexuality (Angelides, 2001). The human differences of race, age, gender and sexuality were thought to be the effect of a specific temporal and spatial relation to what evolutionists and sexologists referred to as primordial hermaphroditism or embryological bisexuality. Believed to be the earliest form of human ancestry, primordial hermaphroditism, or bisexuality, as Frank Sulloway (1979, p. 179) points out, became the evolutionists “missing bisexual link.” This was confirmed by recapitulation theory, which posited that the human embryo repeated “in its own life history the life history of the race, passing through the lower forms of its ancestors on its way to maturity” (Russett, 1989, p. 50). In other words, as Charles Darwin (1927 [1871], p. 525) posited, every individual “bears rudiments of various accessory parts, appertaining to the reproductive system, which properly belong[s] to the opposite sex.” This meant that blacks, women, children and homosexuals were thought to be the effect of an unsuccessful evolution, closer to, or retaining many more elements of, the originary (pre-historic) bisexuality of the human race and individual embryo. Put differently, an individual’s distance from this state of primordial bisexuality dictated the degree of one’s evolutionary advancement. Within this framework, therefore, the axes of race, age, gender and sexuality were defined and aligned by their very relation to bisexuality.

However, bisexuality posed a problem for sexological discourse. In the attempt to catalogue human sexual behavior, sexologists were [confronted] with the dilemma of containing its variant forms within the nascent and rigid oppositional categories of hetero- and homosexuality. After all, even in his 1897 publication, Sexual Inversion, Havelock Ellis (1897, p. 133) acknowledged the “person who is organically twisted into a shape that is more fitted for the exercise of the inverted than of the normal sexual impulse, or else equally fitted for both” (emphasis added). Similarly, Krafft-Ebing (1965, pp. 373-385) had identified what he called “psychical hermaphroditism.” Yet, sexology was unable to account for bisexuality as a form of sexuality. For instance, on the one hand, Ellis (1928 [1901], p. 88) claimed that “[t]here would seem to be a broad and simple grouping of all sexually functioning persons into three comprehensive divisions: the heterosexual, the bisexual, and the homosexual.” Yet, on the other hand, he affirmed like Krafft-Ebing, that “[m]ost of the bisexual prefer their own sex . . . [and that this] would seem to indicate that the bisexuals may really be inverts.” “In any case,” stated Ellis (1928 [1901], p. 278), “bisexuality merges imperceptibly into simple inversion.”

The difficulty for sexologists constrained by a linear logic of temporal succession was how to reconcile bisexuality as at one and the same time a biological cause (embryological bisexuality) and a psychological effect (bisexual identity). Ultimately, bisexuality as a form of sexuality or identity had to be refused in the present tense.5 That is to say that bisexuality always had to be somewhere else–in the embryo, the sphere of human prehistory–or something else–either really heterosexual or homosexual. It could never be a stable sexual identity in the here and now otherwise the epistemological integrity of the very categories of man, woman, heterosexual and homosexual would be thrown into doubt (Angelides, 2001).

steve angelides, historicizing bisexuality p. 130-132