http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/sc...ngier.html?hpw
I thought so many of the points made in this article were relevant to the circumcision issue, in which the foreskin is treated as an evolutionary deadwater, and totally disposable.
I thought so many of the points made in this article were relevant to the circumcision issue, in which the foreskin is treated as an evolutionary deadwater, and totally disposable.
Quote:
| “Often, if you come across something in the body that seems like a big deal, you think, ‘Why didn’t anybody check this before?’ ” Dr. Nahrendorf said. “But the more you learn, the more you realize that we’re just scratching on the surface of life. We don’t know the whole story about anything.” |
Quote:
| The latest work also sounds a cautionary note against underestimating a body part or dismissing it as vestigial, expendable or past its prime. In an accompanying essay, Ting Jia and Eric G. Pamer of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center admit that “the spleen lacks the gravitas of neighboring organs” like the liver or the stomach “because we can survive without it.” |
Quote:
| “Evolution has an edge on us,” Dr. Nahrendorf said. “I would be very careful about saying, ‘You don’t need this organ, get rid of it.’ ” |









