"Love is one big illusion I should try to forget."
Posted 17 August 2012 - 05:18 PM
OverSword, on 17 August 2012 - 03:42 PM, said:
An old girlfriend of mine claimed that when she was 15 she had an abortion and said that she was a virgin at the time. There was male involvement. She said her boyfriend ejaculated on her crotch after they had been messing around and apparently that's all it took. So virgin pregnancy?
Seriously? Shows how determined sperm are.
Wishing you peace, love and happiness, brother/sister.
Interesting read. May I add there are some females that have both X&Y , they are the genuine genetic normal looking females but still hermorphadites internally. Very few case studies have even been able to have healthy births. I think it might be possible if they had their internal male gonades were very close to the uterus and stimulated hormone levels. Very likely a tubal conception if it happened by some miracle. But in these instances I think fetus would still be genetically different. Some of these xxy type of women are theorized to have been conceived as a twin but combined some of the genes of a deceased male twin not necessarily an identical twin. Their mothers had periods during pregnancy because it was actually residual of a deceased male twin. Weird stuff could happen but proving a virgin birth would still be unlikely. I believe it is an impossibilty for a normal xx female, we're not guppies.
Now, this seems impossible for human beings, but as a topic I tried to examine the thought from an objective point.
For those of you who do not know parthenogenesis, also known as virgin birth, is the ability some species have which allows the females to have offspring in the absence of males.
In order for such a thing to happen in a human, the egg, haploid or half the chromosomes, would need to spontanously duplicate itself to be diploid for the correct number of chromosomes.
The article was published 1955. Given the level of science then I question the validity of the screening.
"As Spurway knew, a normal, unfertilised egg only has one set of DNA. This means that any offspring produced through parthenogenesis could never have features that its mother did not. That, Spurway thought, was the key to proving a case of true virgin birth in a human."
Spurway assumes that the egg stays haploid, which is inviable. If the Chromosomes duplicated then you may not get all the traits you see in the mother.
For example: B=Brown eyes (dominate), b=blue eyes (recessive). If The mother Has brown eyes, but carries the gene for blue eyes, she can have a child with blue eyes.
Bb=Mother ---> miosis --> B or b. --> duplication --> BB or bb
If one set of a haploid cell duplicated this person could have only the genes for brown eyes or only blue eyes.
The assumption about parthenogenesis is that it is complete cloning. There is evidence that this may not be.
Many of us have heard about parthenogenesis in snakes. What is interesting is the sex chromosomes for snakes is ZZ - males, and ZW - females.
"Essentially they are half clones of their mother," says Dr Booth.
Half-clones DOES NOT mean Haploid.
The article examines the snake's fatherless offspring and discovers that all of them were WW. This seems to point to the concept of hapliod duplication into diploid embryos.
I don't think that they had the proper technology to evaluate genetics. They assume that a half-clone would be the exactly the same as the mother. They also do not acount for any possible mutations. Mutation occur, in the gametes which result in small variation which the parent(s) did not have. Any mutation could cause a problem.
We don't seem to want to explore the possiblity of virgin birth. This is most likely the result of fear; Imagine: Only abstainance is 100% effective There is no guarantee to aviod pregnancy!
There is a well known mistranslation in the bible with reference to the Messiah's origins. As best I recall, Isaiah, in the original Hebrew, refers to the Messiah who would be conceived by an almah or young woman. But, the later Greek translation in the Septuagint version of Isaiah refers to a parthenos or virgin.
Emmimarie Jones knew her daughter had been conceived without a father; in 1956, she almost convince the world she was right.
On November 6 1955, a story appeared on the front page of the Sunday Pictorial that was to double the newspaper’s circulation in a single day. Sporting the headline, “Doctors now say it doesn’t always need a man to make a baby”, the tabloid shouted that virgin births were no myth, and that there was a scientist who could prove it. The rare biological process which would enable this to happen was known as parthenogenesis, the paper informed its readers.
But the Pictorial’s editors didn’t stop there. Halfway down the page appeared three words, in bold block capitals: “Find The Case”. Sensationally, the paper was inviting women to come forward if they believed their daughters were the result of a virgin birth. If any woman’s case was proved correct, by a panel of leading doctors, she and her daughter were set to make medical – indeed, human – history. For the next year, the search for a virgin mother would grip the nation, and the world. The paper’s circulation figures, meanwhile, grew to an unprecedented six million.
Its is when aspirations come in toe with destiny, are great men manifested
Posted 18 August 2012 - 12:25 PM
This seems absolutely impossible. If at any point of time, it really did happen, a haploid set of chromosomes in an individual will produce not humans but something else.The only possibility I see for the person to assume a complete human form, but at the same time being a virgin is for the ovary to develop coenocytic condition (One cell with two sets of DNA content) and then carry over regular mitosis, however it feels that something like this is highly impossible, because an ovary analyses the basic signature of the baby only after fertilisation and only then will it continue with mitosis.
If this fertilisation fails to happen, the layers around it called zona pellucida and related layers will prevent any chances of a normal baby beacuse of its crucial role in geenral development of the life systems of the baby.At this point of the time, I think the only possibility we have so far is , as the newspaper suggested, she could have been used at her time in the hospital after sedation.
The genes that control child development usually go wrong with no male input but there is a small chance of a child making it to the live birth stage and coming out not deformed.
I would appreciate if you can validate this?
Edited by behaviour???, 18 August 2012 - 12:26 PM.
of course it is possible, invetro fertilization. nowadays you don't need a guy to be pregnated. stay a virgin and just go to the sperm bank and presto, no chance to catch any kind of sexually transmitted diseases.