Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Quirks of Human Anatomy

sdbonline.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 109 posts

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#41

Post by mbivert »

roenxi wrote: post #37
mbivert wrote: post #15

> f. Nipples are useless in human males (cf. Ch. 5). When I was a kid, I got my tonsils removed "because they were useless and a source of illness". I've recently heard that tonsil removal is now more disputed: it may collect filth, sure, but it may also prevent it from going deeper into the body, which may cause more serious illnesses. Given its vast complexity, and the timeline of its creation/evolution, I remain s…

> I've recently heard that tonsil removal is now more disputed: it may collect filth, sure, but it may also prevent it from going deeper into the body, which may cause more serious illnesses. Hasn't it been settled for a while that they're part of the immune system? Wiki is clear [0] on the subject; they're there to repel bacteria. They're quite important and removing them, unless there is no other choice, seems like…

Happened to me in the 90s (France). Seems to still be practiced regularly [0].

A 2022 article [1] quotes an ENT advocating it for kids with frequent (3 to 4) bacterial throat infections in winter.

It's often difficult for new ideas to get through people who have upheld the same point of view for decades though. Especially for "selective" fields like medicine (ego issues are probably more developed than in less selective fields). Let alone in fields strongly impacted by money or politics.

[0]: https://www.idref.fr/234378662

[1]: https://www.santemagazine.fr/sante/maladies/maladies-infanti...

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#42

Post by wat10000 »

amelius wrote: post #29
mbivert wrote: post #15

> f. Nipples are useless in human males (cf. Ch. 5). When I was a kid, I got my tonsils removed "because they were useless and a source of illness". I've recently heard that tonsil removal is now more disputed: it may collect filth, sure, but it may also prevent it from going deeper into the body, which may cause more serious illnesses. Given its vast complexity, and the timeline of its creation/evolution, I remain s…

> Who would let a junior dev trim bits, or boldly modify a decades old codebase? "Chesterton's Fence": you shouldn't tear down a fence (or a piece of code) until you understand exactly why it was put there in the first place.

Chesterton’s Fence is a thing because a fence is something that was definitely placed with intent. It’s possible the intent is no longer applicable or was just plain stupid, but it didn’t happen by chance, so you need to make sure the original reason no longer applies.

Nothing in the human body was placed with intent. It’s still important to understand what it does before you go messing with it, but it’s a very different sort of thing.

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#46

Post by amelius »

wat10000 wrote: post #42
amelius wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who would let a junior dev trim bits, or boldly modify a decades old codebase? "Chesterton's Fence": you shouldn't tear down a fence (or a piece of code) until you understand exactly why it was put there in the first place.

Chesterton’s Fence is a thing because a fence is something that was definitely placed with intent. It’s possible the intent is no longer applicable or was just plain stupid, but it didn’t happen by chance, so you need to make sure the original reason no longer applies. Nothing in the human body was placed with intent. It’s still important to understand what it does before you go messing with it, but it’s a very diffe…

Can you explain the fundamental difference between our intent and the intent of, say, a molecule in our chain of evolution? Is it free will? Because that debate hasn't been sorted out yet.

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#47

Post by dennis_jeeves2 »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #38
dennis_jeeves2 wrote: post #34

>The common crowding of human teeth—especially "wisdom" teeth, which erupt last >is traceable to the evolutionary shortening of our jaw. Complete baloney.

Teeth are easily lost, so wisdom teeth are nature's backup plan, or so I heard.

Could be the case.

But the explanation of crowded tooth being ascribed to evolution is completely false. If one dug around literature even a teeny bit one realizes that many hunter gather groups even today have a a full set of tooth perfectly aligned in the jaw. Dentists, Weston A. Price about a century back and more recently John and Mike Mew (father/son so the same last name) come to mind who tell a different story from the mainstream evolutionary explanation for crowded tooth.

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#48

Post by wat10000 »

amelius wrote: post #46
wat10000 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chesterton’s Fence is a thing because a fence is something that was definitely placed with intent. It’s possible the intent is no longer applicable or was just plain stupid, but it didn’t happen by chance, so you need to make sure the original reason no longer applies. Nothing in the human body was placed with intent. It’s still important to understand what it does before you go messing with it, but it’s a very diffe…

Can you explain the fundamental difference between our intent and the intent of, say, a molecule in our chain of evolution? Is it free will? Because that debate hasn't been sorted out yet.

The difference is intelligence, which might be a better word than “intent.” A fence was built by someone with some measure of intelligence. An evolved feature is randomness combined with selection pressures, and sometimes it’s only there because it’s not sufficiently detrimental to be selected out.

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#49

Post by hermitcrab »

amelius wrote: post #31
josefrichter wrote: post #10

What about testicles outside the body? Every man has a painful story why it’s not a good idea..

Yeah, it makes more sense to put all the fragile body parts in one place. For instance, the face.

I think I prefer the solution evolution came up with!

Re: Quirks of Human Anatomy

#50

Post by hermitcrab »

volemo wrote: post #9
ivanb wrote: post #6

It would be nice to refactor some of these. Vas deferens and laryngeal nerve look like easy pickings. Leave me my ear-wiggling. Any last bit of expression matters. I'm dreading the horror of genetic manipulation it would open. The gene editing craze feels like it is right around the corner.

I cannot wait for the second pair of arms. :D

it has been suggested that a human genetically-engineered for a life in zero G would be better of with no legs and extra arms.
Post reply on HN