What is the effect of section 29 of the California Civil Code on a plaintiff's right to recover for prenatal injury?

"We begin with an examination of the two statutes. Civil Code section 29 was enacted in 1872. (Deering's Ann.Civ.Code (1971 ed.) 29, p. 93.) It then read: 'A child conceived, but not yet born, is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.' The enactment abrogated the common law rule that a child has no legal existence independent of its mother prior to birth (Scott v. McPheeters (1939) 33 [140 Cal.App.3d 785] Cal.App.2d 629, 632-633 [92 Cal.Rptr. 678] ) .... and provided specific statutory authorization by which a child born alive can recover for prenatal injury. (Ibid.) Apart from the statute there is no cause of action for the child in such circumstances. (Justus v. Atchison (1977) 19 Cal.3d 564, 578 [139 Cal.Rptr. 97, 565 P.2d 122] ....)