91–100 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true, but inactive nipples don't cost anything, which certainly isn't the case for an inactive uterus. I don't know how it works, but I assume that such developments follow some kind of cost-benefit function.
Not nipple related per se, but males do get breast cancer.
> 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 suspect the next round of backpedalling will be around the current wisdom teeth removal fad.
There are occasional cases of male lactation reported in humans. Very rare though. In the guinea pig, the large head at birth is provided for by the carteliginous symphysis joint in the hips detaching. However unless the animal gives birth early enough (which always happens in the wild), they lose this capability and die if impregnated later. Some doctors thought it a good idea to try to emulate this in humans by cut…
> The hole in the retina is sizeable (~9 full moons in the sky), but we don’t notice it because [...] (2) our brain automatically fills in gaps in our visual field by interpolation I still remember this bit from school and various pop-sci book, but is it actually true? Is there really some group of neurons in the brain somewhere that actively tries to restore the "raw" visual information that was blocked by the blind…
> The process would be safer (and less painful) if the path mimicked a caesarean section, with the baby exiting through the navel. Prenatal development research posits that natural birth is a required “early training experience” and that a lack or disruption of that collaboration between mother, environment and (already conscious) baby during pregnancy and during birth (like cesarean) may result in various psychologi…
Second link is pretty dated and I wonder if more recent studies back this finding.
> The hole in the retina is sizeable (~9 full moons in the sky), but we don’t notice it because [...] (2) our brain automatically fills in gaps in our visual field by interpolation I still remember this bit from school and various pop-sci book, but is it actually true? Is there really some group of neurons in the brain somewhere that actively tries to restore the "raw" visual information that was blocked by the blind…
I've read a number of consciousness books and this idea that the brain is inpainting the blind spot. I know Dennett in his "Consciousness Explained" book of 30+ years ago did his best to debunk that idea. The problem with inpainting is that it suggests there is a generator that knows how to fill in that spot before the "witnessing" part of the visual system then gets to work. This is perhaps best thought about from a…
Fascinating, I didn't know that. Thank you!
> 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…
"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, "I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away." To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: "If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.""
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's also a difference between having no immediate use, and having no reason to exist. From what I understand, sexual differentiation works by having the Y chromosome act as a switch, and both sexes have to share the same blueprint with hormones guided the development of their organs. For males not to have nipples, they'd need to be actively destroyed, which poses a risk for females to also not have nipples, which…
It doesn't seem like eliminating nipples should be any harder than eliminating the uterus...
Mammalian fetuses all start out the same and sexual dimorphism happens several weeks into development. The same structure that eventually develops into a uterus can instead develop into a penis/prostate. Testicles and ovaries are the same tissue early in development, just like the glans and clitoris.
Biology doesn't generally suppress one entire set of organs in favor of another. They're built from the same precursor tissue and only diverge after sex hormones are activated. Biology and evolution modify existing structures, it does not typically erase one structure and replace it with another.
In addition, intersex humans exist. There are documented incidences of males born with uteri, external genitals can form halfway between male and female. Biology can get very messy sometimes. Sex is not a hard binary switch, it's a sliding scale just like most biological features. Only most individuals are at one end or the other, there's a lot of room between.
> 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 narrowly avoided tonsil removal as a child and I'm glad I did, it sounds like the science rotated around to them having a rather important immune function after all. I suspect the next round of backpedalling will be around the current wisdom teeth removal fad.