What is this ? Have the years on this forum removed all traces of common sense from your brain ?<quoted text>
Do you need me to read it to you as well?
"The following functions, taken together, constitute the minimal number of basic integrative physiologic functions to support an inference of viability:
(1) Perfusion of tissues with adequate oxygen and prevention of increasing accumulation of carbon dioxide and/or lactic and other organic acids. This function consists of the following components:
(a) inflation of the lungs with oxygen,
(b) transfer of oxygen across the alveolar membranes into the circulation and elimination of carbon dioxide from the circulation into the expired
(c) Cardiac contractions of sufficient strength and regularity to
distribute oxygenated blood to tissues and organs throughout the body, and to eliminate organic acids from those tissues and organs.
(2) Neurologic regulation of the components of the cardio-respiratory perfusion function, of the capacity to ingest nutrients, and of spontaneous and reflex muscle movements.
There is nothing in the list of physiological functions that you list above that says they may NOT require to some medical assistance to continue....NONE. If there are then show them to me !
And why do you conveniently leave off this which is directly from your link and right above the list of function you just mentioned :
"This development must be independent of any connection
with the mother and supported only by generally accepted MEDICAL TREATMENTS."
Here's more from your own link :
"Whatever the boundaries are for viability, there is always a chance that a viable infant may be born after a prediction of nonviability by gestational age.
When this occurs, the premature infant clearly must be cared for in accord with accepted medical practice."
See that stupid ? A VIABLE infant born MUST be cared for with accepted medical practice. But according to you if it needs medical asistance it is NOT viable.
And STILL more from your own link :
"Further, these criteria for viability are based on
CURRENT TECHNOLOGY, which is subject to change. Accordingly, the criteria should be reviewed periodically"
And yet STILL MORE from that same link :
"Thus, the determination of viability is influenced by whether the fetus is inside or outside the uterus, and by the TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE FOR SUSTAINING LIFE"
Your own link is swarming with evidence that refutes your definition and backs up mine.
You continually provide links that prove you wrong.
How stupid is that ?