Logical fallacy - “is” doesn’t mean “ought.”
And you’re factually wrong. Unless the oocyte is stimulated to divide and create an embryo, as it is in these experiments, there’s no loss. Regardless, what happens in nature does not mean that it’s permissible - that we humans ought to purposefully set out to do the same.
In nature, more boys are the result of natural conceptions in humans, and more of them die off before reaching a year old. Does this mean that we can kill off neonatal boys if we find that it’s useful to harvest their body parts?
Is there any way to tell if the cluster of cells that is procured in this fashion is or could ever be an embryo at all? Are there analogies in other species?
These folks are talking about harvesting stem cells from embryonic clones produced in “unfertilized” eggs. Unfertilized eggs which would be flushed away once a month in any event.
Is there a reason why I should not harvest and use embryonic stem cells from my clone to save my own life?