Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Yeah, I wish it made more sense too.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                               

Body part removal

Just in case
  (+1, -10)(+1, -10)
(+1, -10)
  [vote for,
against]

There are several body parts that some say are not required: tonsils, foreskin, appendix, even the gall bladder.
So why not remove them all at birth and be done with it?
Ling, Mar 16 2005

Tails for all Tails_20For_20All
Body part addition [nineteenthly, Mar 16 2005]

Gills for people Gills_20for_20people
I should've known that would be here somewhere. [nineteenthly, Mar 16 2005]

[link]






       I can walk on my hands, lets lop my legs off.
skinflaps, Mar 16 2005
  

       Let's take this to a macro scale and just remove all non-essential people. Imagine the efficiency improvements! Imagine the improved conservation!   

       And all those stars out there ... they'll have to go.
Soterios, Mar 16 2005
  

       //So why not remove them all at birth…// But leave the umbilical cord which might come in handy later.
FarmerJohn, Mar 16 2005
  

       the tonsils help prevent throat infections for one thing.
po, Mar 16 2005
  

       Then, just your luck, some halfbaker invents a use for the gall bladder when you're 35.
wagster, Mar 16 2005
  

       The gall bladder and appendix can be used to store batteries (in the future, when humans become partially computerized)
phundug, Mar 16 2005
  

       No, no,no. More on gyroscopes, please.
bungston, Mar 16 2005
  

       What's a moron gyroscope?
contracts, Mar 16 2005
  

       Sit in one at 100rpm for half an hour and you'll find out.
wagster, Mar 16 2005
  

       Seriously, I find my foreskin to be an erogenous zone. And it's a protection device. I do not want to part with it.
zeno, Mar 16 2005
  

       Too much information, [zeno]!. Time Out! Time Out!.   

       To answer the question [Ling]: //So why not remove them all at birth and be done with it?// I suspect that areas of your discourse include invasive surgery that cannot safely be performed on a newborn and the remainder are a matter of religious choice. No need to standardise it!.
gnomethang, Mar 16 2005
  

       sorry
zeno, Mar 16 2005
  

       The idea of organs being unnecessary is fallacious. Tonsils and the appendix guard against infection and the gall bladder enables partly digested food to be emulsified more efficiently. The coccyx is there as an attachment for various muscles and there are many other examples. People may be able to survive without these organs but they provide a safety net and reserve capacity for the body. For instance, the foreskin, apart from its erogenous value, can be used for skin grafts. If they were truly unnecessary, they wouldn't be there. Most people have no traces of gills, for example, even though these could be potentially life-saving in some situations , and of course most people have no external tail at all, even though lots of people here wish they had.
nineteenthly, Mar 16 2005
  

       Nineteenthly - whilst agreeing 100% with the general tone of your annotation, I cannot reconcile myself to the notion that my foreskin (whose continued presence or absence I will leave as a mystery - Zeno take note) evolved as a pre-adaptation to allow skin grafting.
Basepair, Mar 16 2005
  

       Come on, there must be plenty of bits and pieces that are just hanging about, waiting to cause misery in later life.
Just think: "You are a proud father of a 7lb baby boy"
"Is that net or gross?"

Anyway, what's wrong with my gyroscopes?
Ling, Mar 16 2005
  

       Those baby teeth are just gonna fall out anyway, might as well remove those too.
jaksplat, Mar 17 2005
  

       I didn't mean it was actually there as an adaptation for skin grafting. I just meant it could be used for that purpose.
nineteenthly, Mar 17 2005
  

       Nineteenthly - ah, I see, in which case we are as one on this matter.
Basepair, Mar 17 2005
  

       I wonder if you could make an external ear or an eardrum out of a foreskin.
nineteenthly, Mar 17 2005
  

       (waits patiently for the punchline)
Worldgineer, Mar 17 2005
  

       It might make a nice coat for a mouse. Or you could sew a lot of them together and make a lovely soft pair of gloves...
zen_tom, Mar 17 2005
  

       ...or if you rub it, it becomes a suitcase.
gnomethang, Mar 17 2005
  

       I'm sorry, I must've come here by mistake. <rushes out red-faced>
Machiavelli, Mar 17 2005
  

       "Doctor, there's a problem with my face burn skin graft. When I feel horny the blood rushes to my cheeks."
FarmerJohn, Mar 17 2005
  

       Ha!
skinflaps, Mar 17 2005
  

       The ear mouse wasn't actually a GMO was it?
nineteenthly, Mar 17 2005
  

       <refrains, with great difficulty, of making more comments about his foreskin>
zeno, Mar 17 2005
  

       nope, [nineteenthly], it was just a masterful bit of grafting, which is reasonable since apparently there's evidence of skin grafts occuring as far back as 3000BC.
zen_tom, Sep 27 2005
  

       What about the pinky toes? Do they really do any good? Oh...and don't forget there are people who have no arms or have no legs...they get along nicely...and what about politicians with no brains...they do great in the Democrat Party. There are an entire host of parts we could do without.
Blisterbob, Sep 27 2005
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle