Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Pretty interesting read.

From our narrow birth canals to our bad backs, there are some glaring structural issues with the human body.

http://io9.com/the-most-unfortunate-design-flaws-in-the-human-body-1518242787

We're a work in progress!

+1 on the spine. Damn spines... <.<

 Tyr13 wrote:
+1 on the spine. Damn spines... <.<

The older I get, the more I have to crack my back. Lol.

The point on the feet is one I hadn't thought about personally. Its totally true though, I used to sprain my ankles constantly doing martial arts. Sometimes the idea of what life must have been like for protohumans and primitive man (IE walking around with no shoes and no modern medicine) is pretty humbling.

Nipples on men!

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

The need to sleep.

Is it a design flaw? Well I suppose not really. However imagine what humans could do if sleep could be done away with? The time we will have (assuming we all dont work more hours as a result) and what we can accomplish.

Again, not really a flaw because sleep does good things for us, but it's like imagining a phone that never runs out of battery etc.

 Swastakowey wrote:
The need to sleep.

Is it a design flaw? Well I suppose not really. However imagine what humans could do if sleep could be done away with? The time we will have (assuming we all dont work more hours as a result) and what we can accomplish.

Again, not really a flaw because sleep does good things for us, but it's like imagining a phone that never runs out of battery etc.

Very solid question!

I don't think that can be classified as a design flaw. I can't think of any mammalian life that doesn't have a "sleep" period, and there are plenty of quadrupeds that spend more time sleeping or at rest than humans.

Sleep is the body's "repair and clean" process.

You can try playing around with your sleep patterns though. It worked for DaVinci!

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

A flaw with a reason is still a flaw.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I can't think of any mammalian life that doesn't have a "sleep" period, and there are plenty of quadrupeds that spend more time sleeping or at rest than humans.

As an interesting aside, dolphins can put half their brains to sleep at a time while remaining otherwise active - they never "fully" sleep (or they'd drown).

I wish we could consciously control our metabolism.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

A flaw with a reason is still a flaw.

Since it is consistent across mamallian life, you can't honestly refer to it as a "flaw."

The structural issues referenced in the article have to do with our transition from small brained quasi/bipedal arboreal critters into a large brained fully upright animal. There are no other fully bipedal mammals on the planet. See what I'm sayin?

The circle of Willis is a huge design flaw. Very common (and bad) place to have a stroke.

NSFW
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--5iJjPu7w--/19ez3uwfmgf82png.png

In a similar vein I've often wished we were the pinnacle of creation (in God's image) some people believe we were. Not in that we had no flaws, but in that we were actually the best. I'd love if my eyesight could match that of a falcon for distance or the nightvision of a cat. Wouldn't it be neat if we simply regrew lost or damaged teeth? Or could regrow limbs? The animal kingdom has so many tricks we could benefit from. I suppose thumbs and giant brains are good but still...

 Kojiro wrote:
In a similar vein I've often wished we were the pinnacle of creation (in God's image) some people believe we were. Not in that we had no flaws, but in that we were actually the best. I'd love if my eyesight could match that of a falcon for distance or the nightvision of a cat. Wouldn't it be neat if we simply regrew lost or damaged teeth? Or could regrow limbs? The animal kingdom has so many tricks we could benefit from. I suppose thumbs and giant brains are good but still...

We have the unique ability to use our brains to find alternatives.

How many animals can see planets? How many animals can simply replace arms or organs or recycle other humans to save a life etc. We can create our own new teeth.

We get the best of both worlds because our we have the perfect brain and social behaviors to replicate nature. Obviously this takes time but if nature can do something we have the amazing ability to replicate it to a lesser degree.

To put it simply, an eagle might be able to see super good, but we can simply get a camera and see just as well but at the same time we can fly faster, higher and so on and then we can do things eagles probably cannot imagine on top of that... because of our one big trick.

 Swastakowey wrote:

We have the unique ability to use our brains to find alternatives.

In modern times and in the first world we can find suitable alternatives. Historically our brains haven't done a lot for us medically- no ancient Egyptians were running about with painlessly, perfectly fitted ceramic teeth. But I'd take a perfect hawk vision over my glasses any day and I'd gladly wait for my leg to regrow over any prosthetic.

 Kojiro wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

We have the unique ability to use our brains to find alternatives.

In modern times and in the first world we can find suitable alternatives. Historically our brains haven't done a lot for us medically- no ancient Egyptians were running about with painlessly, perfectly fitted ceramic teeth. But I'd take a perfect hawk vision over my glasses any day and I'd gladly wait for my leg to regrow over any prosthetic.

I think wooden teeth have always been common...

But regardless, like I said it takes time. I think you will be surprised at how well people of the past did for themselves too. I would rather glasses because I can't think of how useful eagle vision would be. Without flying and most so on eagle vision would hardly be used.

Also if your leg grew back, like most animals with the ability to grow bits back, it will come back stunted. I think you will find your fake leg does it better for you. Thats why im so careful around my lizard, if his tail comes off it wont come back looking nice and doing its job properly.

Regardless many things animals could do would be very situational for us. Having a brain that does it all over time is better than having specialization and then being stuck doing a specific set of tasks to live like an eagle has to.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

A flaw with a reason is still a flaw.

Since it is consistent across mamallian life, you can't honestly refer to it as a "flaw."

The structural issues referenced in the article have to do with our transition from small brained quasi/bipedal arboreal critters into a large brained fully upright animal. There are no other fully bipedal mammals on the planet. See what I'm sayin?

Re: Nipples on men: Its not really a flaw. Its a feature. Theres no downside to having them, but theres a couple of (potential) upsides. Its technically possible to lactate, for instance.

Re: Only bipedal mammal... I think kangaroos might count? Theyre technically bipedal. Giant Pangolins. A couple of species of rodents. Mind you, were the only ones who use an upright gait.

Biggest design flaw: tiny tiny ducts between the bladder and kidneys, which are sometimes prone to creating sharp horrible stones made of pain and hatred of humanity.

But yeah, totally the nipple thing. Total flaw that, that thing with no downside whatsoever.

 Tyr13 wrote:

Re: Only bipedal mammal... I think kangaroos might count? Theyre technically bipedal. Giant Pangolins. A couple of species of rodents. Mind you, were the only ones who use an upright gait.

First off, I'm gonna give you props for bringing up the Giant Pangolin. Thats a damn good critical observation.


Buuuut, those animals mix bipedalism with quadruped movement. Think about a bear...fundamentally a quadruped, but can operate a bipedal mode for limited amounts of time. There is also the issue of "upright" meaning a vertical spine. A Pangolin most assuredly does not have an "upright" spine.

But yah, very good points. Nature is pretty diverse.

I'm pretty sure Kangaroos are fully bipeds. They do often use their front legs, but its usually only when they are scrounging around for food or only moving a short distance. But humans do that too if we're looking for stuff in the dirt.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

A flaw with a reason is still a flaw.

Wouldn't it have to be detrimental to be considered a flaw?

 Grey Templar wrote:
I'm pretty sure Kangaroos are fully bipeds. They do often use their front legs, but its usually only when they are scrounging around for food or only moving a short distance. But humans do that too if we're looking for stuff in the dirt.

Bah, I hate you.

I can't argue with the correctness of your statement.

People complain about our eyes, but they are the only type of animal eyes that don't reflect light when shined upon.


It doesn't help that we have artificially extended the human life by roughly 100%. We shouldn't really be hitting fifty, yet we have managed to push it to 100 if we are lucky.

 welshhoppo wrote:
People complain about our eyes, but they are the only type of animal eyes that don't reflect light when shined upon.


It doesn't help that we have artificially extended the human life by roughly 100%. We shouldn't really be hitting fifty, yet we have managed to push it to 100 if we are lucky.

In fact a man here in the states just broke 5 world records in his age bracket for senior Olympics and he is 100.

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Nipples on men!

That is because every fetus starts out as female, structurally. The male structures develop later during gestation.

A flaw with a reason is still a flaw.

Since it is consistent across mamallian life, you can't honestly refer to it as a "flaw."

The structural issues referenced in the article have to do with our transition from small brained quasi/bipedal arboreal critters into a large brained fully upright animal. There are no other fully bipedal mammals on the planet. See what I'm sayin?

Just going by the meaning of the word "flaw", not what the article refers to as being a flaw.

Having nipples is a disadvantage as they provide a sensible spot to your body that might cause pain. Ask a runner how much he loves his nipples!

Nah, thats a flaw of wearing clothing. Cant blame nipples for that, theyre *meant* to be sensitive.

Saying nipples are a flaw because they are sensitive is like calling your balls a flaw because sometimes you scrunch them when you sit down.