What are terrible design choices in the human body?
183 replies, posted
[QUOTE=SuperDuperScoot;42590713]Why must teeth all be separate? Why can't it be one large piece of sturdy enamel?
We'd all have teeth that resemble anime characters, but at least food would be a lot less likely to get stuck, and the probability of misaligned things needing correction is lowered massively. Brushing would be a lot easier, too.
Not to mention it would also be less likely to break.
I just can't see the benefits of having multiple teeth instead of a singular piece.[/QUOTE]
Different types of teeth for different functions, that's why. Front teeth are flat-headed, for pulling at food, canines are pointed for tearing into meat or harder plants, molars are for crushing food into digestible slurry, and incisors are the middle-men for canines and molars.
If you had a single tooth on each half of the jaw, it'd have to be either an entire single shape like in cartoons/anime, which'd be absolutely shit for eating excepting specific foods the shape could grind down, or have all of the various tooth shapes in one tooth.
Also, separate teeth help to mitigate the damage of a tooth cracking, breaking or being knocked out. With a bunch of teeth, if one cracks, falls out, or gets chipped, the rest of your tooth assortment is generally okay. If you had a single mass instead of a row of teeth, a crack or chip would fuck up literally half of your jaw, possibly even down to the bone if the single tooth was part of the actual skull's/jaw's bone rather than a semi-separated mass. And if one of the two teeth breaks apart/falls out, congratulations, you can't eat like you're supposed to (going by evolution's "in the wild" standpoint) and will likely starve to death.
On top of all this, I doubt that a single mass would be more damage-resistant, since it'd likely be made of the same material with the same sturdiness as separate teeth, and any impacts would have a larger surface area to smash into.
Lastly, there's the issue of a child either having two masses of bone in their mouth that either would stay small or start out fuckin' huge. That, or the issues of losing baby teeth that huge and trying to get them out of the mouth rather than choking on them, as well as the issues of eating in between teeth growing in when nursing is likely not an option anymore.
Maybe I'm just bitter about separate teeth because I had braces and fucking hated them, and now I have permanent retainers which are a pain in the ass to clean (as if food getting stuck without them wasn't bad enough)
You all win, I'm fucking retarded with awful ideas v:v:v
[QUOTE=SuperDuperScoot;42591230]If bones don't have to do that, why must teeth? If bones can grow in a single piece, why can't teeth? v:v:v[/QUOTE]
Tooth grow in a single piece. But ey, our rib cage is also made of several individual bones. And it works.
Evolution got it right this time.
one-sided stuffy noses was a really big FUCK YOU
What is the point?
[QUOTE=xZippy;42591262]Having those removed wasn't that bad for me. I absolutely loved the nitrous oxide.[/QUOTE]
most people are just sissies and make the pain and "Agony" up in their head
[editline]21st October 2013[/editline]
why 2 brains like serious i can't even raise my left brow what is this shit
step it up
Brain tissue being too specialized to regenerate was THE WORST IDEA in the evolutionary toolbox.
[QUOTE=flayne;42587193]But...but I like body hair...[/QUOTE]
have mine.
The spine not being to regenerate is pretty bad.
For an organ that is almost vital, it would make sense to have some sort of maintenance going on
Why do we still have separate toes? One toe-thing probably would suffice for walking
[editline]21st October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;42588214]
But my biggest annoyance from an evolutionary standpoint is social awkwardness in its entirety. Why is this a thing? It serves NO purpose, no matter how hard I think about it.[/QUOTE]
that isn't an evolution thing, that's a social thing
[QUOTE=Ridley;42592545]one-sided stuffy noses was a really big FUCK YOU
What is the point?[/QUOTE]
this too, it's like saying a tumor is a bad desigh choice
I just remembered something I read a while ago regarding teeth regeneration:
[URL]http://www.newsmaxhealth.com/Headline/tooth-loss-regrowing-teeth-stem-cell-technology-/2013/07/08/id/513890[/URL]
Suck it evolution.
[QUOTE=J!NX;42590620]no i think u dont know how evolution works!!!
evolutions a dick
evolution got up one day and said "lol I'm going to fuck them over in the worst possible way BAM appendix BAM wisdom teeth BAM butthole hair"
I'm suing
[sp]I'm simply going with the name of the thread :U "Design CHOICES"[/sp]
[editline]20th October 2013[/editline]
braided nipples
jesus christ my sides[/QUOTE]
There is no "Design", evolution is just natural changes, and if those organisms are successful with those changes they live on, if they aren't they die.
[QUOTE=SuperDuperScoot;42590713]Why must teeth all be separate? Why can't it be one large piece of sturdy enamel?
We'd all have teeth that resemble anime characters, but at least food would be a lot less likely to get stuck, and the probability of misaligned things needing correction is lowered massively. Brushing would be a lot easier, too.
Not to mention it would also be less likely to break.
I just can't see the benefits of having multiple teeth instead of a singular piece.[/QUOTE]
What happens when it gets shattered or broken?
I would rather lose one tooth instead of ruining my entire method of eating.
[QUOTE=Harpie;42595253]There is no "Design", evolution is just natural changes, and if those organisms are successful with those changes they live on, if they aren't they die.
What happens when it gets shattered or broken?
I would rather lose one tooth instead of ruining my entire method of eating.[/QUOTE]
The point never was to think of evolution being a person as reality, it just gives a perspective on the topic. Like what if our bodies were designed by someone to be as they are today with all of their properties, good and bad. It's more about finding flaws, not as much about necessarily thinking of a solution.
[QUOTE=Harpie;42595253]There is no "Design", evolution is just natural changes, and if those organisms are successful with those changes they live on, if they aren't they die[/QUOTE]
you aren't getting the jokes are you?
don't be a debby downer and continue going "no no its not that way" every other post
of course it's not that way do you really think we are that stupid?
that plus literally in the OP
"Let's...[B]let's just assume evolution was a person.[/B] Mr. Evolution here started from ages yonder, thinking to himself:"
I thought the point of this thread was to get mad at stupid bodily functions
Earwax sucks. I wouldn't be near as bad if it didn't constantly overproduce and mess up your hearing. Then cleaning it with a swab is risky and I never really know when to clean my ears.
[QUOTE=Ridley;42595478]I thought the point of this thread was to get mad at stupid bodily functions[/QUOTE]
You're not far off, really.
[editline]21st October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Combat Wombat;42595664]Earwax sucks. I wouldn't be near as bad if it didn't constantly overproduce and mess up your hearing. Then cleaning it with a swab is risky and I never really know when to clean my ears.[/QUOTE]
You're half right. Ear wax can be beneficial as small amounts actually protect your hearing.
Why do our orgasms only last for such a short time. Fuck, we live with basically no predators or anything, anymore, why can't you ramp it up to half an hour or something, evolution?
Even pigs get it better than we do.
[QUOTE=Doom14;42595788]Why do our orgasms only last for such a short time. Fuck, we live with basically no predators or anything, anymore, why can't you ramp it up to half an hour or something, evolution?
Even pigs get it better than we do.[/QUOTE]
Encourages you to reproduce more.
Its like a community suggestion thread for a video game.
Next patch better fix the stubbing your toe hurting worse than torture bug.
[QUOTE=a dumb bear;42587150]Asshole hair[/QUOTE]
Why have 5 people rated me disagree
Which freaks think ass pubes are a good thing to have
do you not shit or
The fact that small, chronic pains like little cuts or headaches are actually deliberately amplified by the central nervous system to make sure the brain recognises it as possibly detrimental which is bad for everyone except for the inventors of paracetemol which blocks and reverses this amplification process
[QUOTE=qwerty000;42593726]Why do we still have separate toes? One toe-thing probably would suffice for walking[/QUOTE]
Somehow I doubt one massive toe-like thing is very neato when it comes to walking or standing.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;42596389]Somehow I doubt one massive toe-like thing is very neato when it comes to walking or standing.[/QUOTE]
Considering most people don't even have enough control over their toes to wiggle them separately, I think it's safe to assume that merging at least the four smaller ones wouldn't change much. If anything, it'd decrease the amount of dirt you'd get in there. Besides you wear socks that make your feet basically toeless, but it doesn't impede your movement.
[QUOTE='[Green];42596436']Considering most people don't even have enough control over their toes to wiggle them separately, I think it's safe to assume that merging at least the four smaller ones wouldn't change much. If anything, it'd decrease the amount of dirt you'd get in there. Besides you wear socks that make your feet basically toeless, but it doesn't impede your movement.[/QUOTE]
Toes actually are surprisingly useful, since they help you keep your balance on uneven terrain. Even if you can't control them separately (which makes sense considering they're basically a downgrade of primate hand-feet), they can still typically move together and curl, which would let you dig in just enough into softer dirt in the wild in order to stay balanced. They can also generally adhere to terrain better than a solid mass since they're separate masses, which also improves traction. Granted, another set of hands like primates have would be much more useful, but at the same time even more sensitive to injury, though our current feet aren't exactly durable as-is.
[QUOTE=TurboSax;42596774]though our current feet aren't exactly durable as-is.[/QUOTE]
And this is exactly why we don't need them. While not a flaw, they are outdated you could say as we now have an invention called footwear which gives us better grip on the environment than our bare skin would. Sure, with this logic you could say that we don't need lungs either since we can inject oxygen into our blood with devices but you get my point. Toes are moot and null of purpose today.
Still, it's not exactly a flaw so I give you that.
[QUOTE='[Green];42587144']
Why do we have an entertainment complex in the middle of a sewage system? [/QUOTE]
Not really sure why you say the "entertainment complex" and the "sewage system" are mutually exclusive
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;42596389]Somehow I doubt one massive toe-like thing is very neato when it comes to walking or standing.[/QUOTE]
why have arms
why can't we telepathically just move shit
gay as fuck
Not being able to regrow limbs, especially things like fingers/toes that wouldn't take that much extra energy or materials.
Carotid artery could be protected better, it kind of just sits out in the open.
A better system of managing cholesterol and fat in the bloodstream would be quite useful.
Allowing bloodclots to form in a limb that sits still too long is terrible, especially when they break free and go to your lungs, heart, or brain.
Mitochondrial death signals can be quite finicky and go off at some of the worst times like when oxygen is reintroduced to an organism after a period of oxygen deprivation.
Hemhorrhoids.
Lack of a redundant DNA system or a backup. Since DNA is essentially code it makes sense to have some sort of recovery point to fall back on or a set of basic redundant code in an individual organism to use as a comparison point during cell division and respiration. Seems like that would be a great system to fight against diseases like cancer, autoimmune disorders aging, and premature cell death. This would of course require a secondary mechanism that would continually check the DNA within cells and repair damage based on the base code, but such systems do exist in nature.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.