It's the consensus among biologists.
I honestly hope you have something reasonable that supports your view.
Originally Posted by Insane Sith
Your own link disagrees with you.
It's not self-sustaining, it requires the mother's assitance in it's own growth. Without the mother it'll never become a full-fledged human life.
What I said was that it does not require the mother to process the nutrients. You might say, that since you cannot make nutrients into edible food for yourself, you therefore not alive. Is that true? You depend on the plants to process the energy from the sun into something you can use. Are you somehow less human because you depend on the plants? I'd say that dependence on outside food sources is part of the human condition; it's just how we're made. We're not capable as a species
of processing direct energy into something that our bodies can use. Saying that's a criterion for being human is assumed, because no humans exist (or have existed, ever) that can. Every person uses their mother's body in such a way; it's also part of the human condition. I can guarantee you
that no human has been born without nutrients processed by plants, then by the mother. This may change in the future, with artificial wombs for example, but they will still depend on something that processes their food for them.