At the present time (2017) there are approximately 200 medical schools in the USA. However, only about 1/3 of those schools have a credit-bearing course in their curriculum, of Human Embryology.
Undoubtedly, this can account for misstatements by sources who have no or little background in embryology and allow those who are miscreants, to continue the false statements so prominent today.
What follows is a short listing of the more prominent errors made in Human Embryology since Roe V. Wade (1973).
In 1973, the Supreme Court adjudicated Roe v.Wade.
This case legalized abortion. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the majority opinion, and in that opinion made an astonishing statement: "the beginning of life cannot be determined."
Every justice has, at his or her disposal, clerks, orderlies, and others to seek out information about virtually any topic for their edification. This includes the human embryo. Blackmun either did this and kept quiet about this information or found what was there and was silent because he had an agenda.
At the time, 1973, there were several sources available to Blackmun and his associates. One such source was a textbook: Human Embryology, authored by Bradley Patten, 3rd edition, 1968. [The First two editions were published in 1946 and 1952.] At that time there were available magnificent illustrations in the Carnegie Collection of Human Embryology. In Patten's third edition, heading this introduction is a sub heading, "Development of Embryology as a science." (page 1)
On page 41 under the sub heading of fertilization it is stated: "in this supreme event all the strands of the webs of two lives are gathered in one knot from which they diverge again and are rewoven in a new individual life hitory . . . and are reversed in a new direction. The elements that unite are single cells, each on the point of death, but by their union, a rejuvenated individual is formed, which constitutes a link in the eternal process of life." (Cited from F.R. Lillie in "Problems of Fertilization.")
There it is! The beginning of life, described with such eloquence that not even Blackmun nor others on the Supreme Court could misunderstand it. Their error strongly suggests the court had an agenda.
Thus it is clear that the continuum of life is activated by fusion of sperm with oocyte and that what follows is the life history of the new individual, but the supreme court refused to cite what was readily available.
In 1979 a frog biologist authored an article in American Scientist. In this article Grobstein coined the term "preembryo" and claimed it to be a pre - person, or even pre - human.
This term has no authenticity and has been rejected by the international committee on nomenclature for the anatomical sciences.
I wrote to Grobstein three times, challenging him to a debate. I received no response. This term continues to be used by biologists as though it has certification which is not the case.
Richard McCormick, SJ, wrote an article, in the Kennedy Institute for Ethics Journal called "Who or What is the preembryo" The editor of the Journal is Renee Shapiro. Acting as a disciple of Grobstein, Renee Shapiro would not consider my critique of the article by McCormick.
The fallout from Blackmun's declarations has been widespread and even more bizarre. Bill O'Reilly, when on Fox News, had repeatedly said the life of a new individual was "potential" life. This was first stated in Blackmun's majority opinion. However, he has never explained when "potential" occurs, or what it means.
When she was on Fox News, Megyn Kelley also used the phrase "potential life" when describing the embryo.
Maureen Condic, neurologist at Utah Medical Center, has written many times about Human Embryology, but persists in claiming the zygote as the beginning of human life. This is not so. Carnegeie Stage 1a marks the beginning of the individual human life. This is important because if the zygote marks the beginning of the individual human life, stages 1-a and 1-b are available for experimentations, which have been done for many years.
Such procedures have been done unprofessionally and have given rise to followers of Condic such as Cassandra Hackstock. Hackstock appears to have little or no background in embryology. She along with many others repeat what their mentors, such as Maureen Condic, say. Thus, the error Condic commits is perpetuated through others such as Hackstock. Such an error is even committed in medical schools because Human Embryology is not part of the medical school curriculum in about 2/3 of them nationwide.
Miscreants show themselves in many different ways. In the spring of 1994 I approached the president of the AAA and proposed a symposium for the next meeting of the AAA on the problem of distortions of Human Embryology terms, particularly the case of "pre-embryo". At first, he was supportive and directed me to write up the schedule of such a program. I did. I was in constant contact with Dr. Slonecker. I recruited speakers for the proposed symposium. Slonecker was very slow in responding and did not seem supportive. Nevertheless, I proceeded as though my proposal was or would he approved. The "pre-embryo" has been the bane of Human Embryology and it should have been challenged in its use in Human Embryology.
I wrote up the proposed symposium with all of the proposed speakers and submitted all to Slonecker. I received no reply and my phone calls went unanswered. After many weeks went by, I finally received a short note from Slonecker with a rejection and no explanation. Unfortunately, the term "pre-embryo" is still being used in various ways.
I believe Slonecker to have been negligent. The term "pre-embryo" continues to be used in the biological literature.
The year before I retired I was awarded the annual writing award by the Linacre Quarterly Journal. This journal is the official organ of the Catholic Medical Association.
My paper was titled "The Big Lie in Human Embryology: the case of the pre-embryo."
I placed a copy of this paper in the mailboxes of the medical students.
Shortly thereafter, my department head, Dr. Robert McCuskey, called me into his office and threatened me with being arrested, sued, or both, saying that he had been on the phone with the administration's lawyers virtually "all morning". It seems my error was violating the privacy of the mailbox of the students. After hearing threats a second time, I got up and said, "I've heard enough", and left. I heard nothing more. However, it became known that two or three "pro choice" female students had complained to McCuskey about my paper.
A South Korean Constitutional Court ruled on May 27th, 2010, that frozen human embryos are not living and prior to 14 days of development an embryo is not a human being.
Mary Hendrix, as a member of FASEB and a member of AAA said in her testimony before Senator Harkin's Committee, "this very early embryo, called the blastocyst, is so small it could fit on the tip of a sewing needle. (18 July, 2001). Also cited in The Linacre Quarterly, 69:338-343, 2002, Kischer, C. Ward, Cloning, Stem Cell Research and Some Historic Parallels. Her quote also appeared in FASEB News, 351, 1-4.
Dr. Hendrix was trying to emphasize that the size of the embryo was insignificant and therefore not important.
This has been just a few of the many examples of miscreants who seek to change truth into lies.
"It is always best to tell the truth, unless, of course, you are an exceptionally good liar". {Jerome, 1892}.