In a May 23, 2016 National Catholic Register article ” Contrary to Reports, There is No Flash of Light at Conception”, writer Stacy Trasancos takes some people who wrote about the amazing research article and video to task  for exaggerations:

“At conception, there is no flash of light, no burst of fireworks, no sparks flying, no fiat lux, no scientific proof of ensoulment, no vindication of doctrine by this research. There is a misunderstanding.”

She is right that claims of ensoulment  or actual “fireworks” in the mother are wrong and inaccurate.

But while I understand Ms. Trasancos’ point about  the over excitement by some writers, the phenomenon itself actually is a pretty big deal.

I am a nurse, not a scientist, but I read the scientific article myself  before I wrote a recent blog on the research.

The researchers were not trying to make a theological or philosophical point but rather reporting a testing phenomenon:

“We monitored calcium and zinc dynamics in individual human eggs using selective fluorophores following activation with calcium-ionomycin, ionomycin, or hPLCζ cRNA microinjection. These egg activation methods, as expected, induced rises in intracellular calcium levels and also triggered the coordinated release of zinc into the extracellular space in a prominent “zinc spark.”

The truly relevant point is that there IS a moment of  “human egg activation”. Using fluorescence to show a chemical reaction accompanying that moment of activation enhances the reality of  when life begins-a fact that Justice Blackmun in the Roe v. Wade abortion decision said was unresolvable because so many people disagreed.

As I wrote about years ago,  the photos of the “sperm injection” mode of IVF  (in vitro fertilization) developed over 20 years ago and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)  before implantation of the new life back into the mother should have been proof enough of when life begins, even for a Supreme Court justice.

No fluorescence or sparks necessary.