English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2 answers

The problem with naming things as 'vestigial' organs is that it assumes that we know the biological purpose of everything in the body. Past medical science has shown fairly often that even we think we know everything about the body, it turns out to be more complex than we assumed.

For many years, doctors assumed that appendixes (appendices?) and tonsils were completely vestigial, and removed them willy-nillly at the slightest provocation. We now know that these organs actually function to some extent as part of the immune system, and it is often detrimental to remove them because they seem to have become swollen and infected (it's kinda what they're supposed to do).

So about the only one I can think of that I would be comfortable labelling as completely vestigial is the muscles that some people still possess that allow them to wiggle their ears. Even those might prove beneficial in some circumstances though, so I'm hesitant even there.

2007-03-26 05:31:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't know any,

2007-03-26 04:35:50 · answer #2 · answered by Grant d 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers