Do you need me to read it to you as well?<quoted text>
No it hasn't ya pea brain. Never assume. Of course if the medical technology that will enable a fetus to survive does not exist then the fetus is not viable. There are prematurely born fetuses that are born today that are physiologically identical to those born 100 years ago that were not considered viable then but are today because of the medical technology thet exists today. Just how stupid are you ?
Really ? Not dependent on medical technolgy ?
Then where does this MEDICAL definition come from genius ?
Neonatology An infant who is likely to survive to the point of sustaining life independently, given the benefit of available medical therapy
This is from a legit medical dictionary ( McGraw Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine )
Your turn now.
You come up with a medical definition of viability that defines it exclusively WITHOUT medical assistance.
"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.