This paper presents an analysis, in relation to the in vitro fertilization (IVF) debate held at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, of a specific naturalistic fallacy (EBN): Extrapolation of certain biological data (embryo physiology) as if they themselves entailed certain normative decisions (legal prohibition of IVF procedures).This paper presents an analysis, in relation to the in vitro fertilization (IVF) debate held at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, of a specific naturalistic fallacy (EBN): Extrapolation of certain biological data (embryo physiology) as if they themselves entailed certain normative decisions (legal prohibition of IVF procedures).Se procede a examinar, en relación con el debate sobre fecundación in vitro (FIV) en la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, una falacia naturalista específica (EBN): la extrapolación de ciertos datos biológicos (fisiología de embriones) como si estos implicaran por sí mismos determinadas decisiones normativas (prohibir legalmente los procedimientos de FIV).This paper presents an analysis, in relation to the in vitro fertilization (IVF) debate held at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, of a specific naturalistic fallacy (EBN): Extrapolation of certain biological data (embryo physiology) as if they themselves entailed certain normative decisions (legal prohibition of IVF procedures).