Cargando…

Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction

In 2002, in a judgment relating to the use of the morning-after pill, Mr Justice Munby held that pregnancy begins with the implantation of an embryo into the uterus of a woman. The case involved a large body of expert witness evidence including medical and physiological details of human reproduction...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Jarvis, Gavin E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224477
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22655.1
_version_ 1783610746042580992
author Jarvis, Gavin E.
author_facet Jarvis, Gavin E.
author_sort Jarvis, Gavin E.
collection PubMed
description In 2002, in a judgment relating to the use of the morning-after pill, Mr Justice Munby held that pregnancy begins with the implantation of an embryo into the uterus of a woman. The case involved a large body of expert witness evidence including medical and physiological details of human reproduction. Munby J. emphasised one particular aspect of this evidence: namely, the developmental failure rate of human embryos after fertilisation. Under natural conditions, embryo loss is approximately 10-40% before implantation, and total loss from fertilisation to birth is 40-60% (Jarvis, 2016). By contrast, and based on expert witness testimony, Munby J. stated that not much more than 25% of successfully fertilised eggs reach the implantation stage, and that fewer than 15% of fertilised eggs result in a birth, figures that do not accurately represent scientific knowledge regarding human embryo mortality and pregnancy loss under natural conditions. Rather, these figures were derived from experimental laboratory data and clinical outcomes from in vitro fertilisation treatment. Testimony provided by other expert witnesses directly contradicted these specific numerical claims. In emphasising these figures, Munby J. gave the impression that human embryo mortality is substantially higher than available scientific evidence indicated. In this critique, all the scientific expert witness evidence is presented and reviewed, and an explanation provided for why the emphasised figures are wrong. Whether there are implications of Munby J.’s scientific misjudgment on the legal outcome is for others to consider.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7670474
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76704742020-11-19 Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction Jarvis, Gavin E. F1000Res Opinion Article In 2002, in a judgment relating to the use of the morning-after pill, Mr Justice Munby held that pregnancy begins with the implantation of an embryo into the uterus of a woman. The case involved a large body of expert witness evidence including medical and physiological details of human reproduction. Munby J. emphasised one particular aspect of this evidence: namely, the developmental failure rate of human embryos after fertilisation. Under natural conditions, embryo loss is approximately 10-40% before implantation, and total loss from fertilisation to birth is 40-60% (Jarvis, 2016). By contrast, and based on expert witness testimony, Munby J. stated that not much more than 25% of successfully fertilised eggs reach the implantation stage, and that fewer than 15% of fertilised eggs result in a birth, figures that do not accurately represent scientific knowledge regarding human embryo mortality and pregnancy loss under natural conditions. Rather, these figures were derived from experimental laboratory data and clinical outcomes from in vitro fertilisation treatment. Testimony provided by other expert witnesses directly contradicted these specific numerical claims. In emphasising these figures, Munby J. gave the impression that human embryo mortality is substantially higher than available scientific evidence indicated. In this critique, all the scientific expert witness evidence is presented and reviewed, and an explanation provided for why the emphasised figures are wrong. Whether there are implications of Munby J.’s scientific misjudgment on the legal outcome is for others to consider. F1000 Research Limited 2020-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7670474/ /pubmed/33224477 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22655.1 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Jarvis GE http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Opinion Article
Jarvis, Gavin E.
Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title_full Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title_fullStr Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title_full_unstemmed Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title_short Misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
title_sort misjudging early embryo mortality in natural human reproduction
topic Opinion Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670474/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224477
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.22655.1
work_keys_str_mv AT jarvisgavine misjudgingearlyembryomortalityinnaturalhumanreproduction