Dear david f,

I did read what you posted, and did not misread or misunderstand, however, you appear not to understand my response.

> However, a sperm is not only a human cell. It is an entire individual.<

You have stated the above a number of times, and in respect of both a sperm and an ovum.
But, you fail to accept that a sperm (or an ovum) contains only half the mitochondria necessary to undergo cell division/replication and cell differentiation to form a living human being. Therefore it follows that neither a sperm or an ovum, individually, may be considered to be 'an entire individual' - as, individually, neither is capable of becoming 'an entire individual'.

If you have some information which demonstrates otherwise - and therefore contradicts accepted science - I wouldn't mind being pointed to an appropriate reference.

(Or, are you merely playing with words, and meaning only that a sperm, or an ovum, is an entire living individual 'cell', and nothing more? I could agree with that.)

Dear Saltpetre,

A sperm is a haploid individual. An individual does not have to be diploid in either plants or animals.

Fascinating discussion full of philosophical complexities...

As far as I can remember, rather than haploids or diploids, I am more concerned with my amyloids.

If an individual is characterised by a complete set of chromosomes, then isn't a somatic cell twice the individual of a gamete? In any event, aren't they then equivalent to the individual human who produced them?

It occurs to me that I could be accused of committing suicide millions of times...

Just as well we don't have to have a funeral each time one of these individuals dies.

Every sperm is sacred.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk