Comments on: And the "most useless organ of the human body award" goes to...

Question: And the "most useless organ of the human body award" goes to...

JaySunSee — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:33:13 -0800

StupidQuestionFilter: What is the most useless organ in the body?

I mean, if I had to have an organ removed, and I could choose which one, and wanted to maintain optimal health, which one should I choose?

By: greta simone

greta simone — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:34:14 -0800

appendix

By: greta simone

greta simone — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:35:26 -0800

It's named so for a reason

By: annaramma

annaramma — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:36:23 -0800

tonsils

By: 0xFCAF

0xFCAF — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:37:44 -0800

I believe you can lose one testicle/ovary without actually affecting the total hormone output. But don't take my word on it.

By: susiepie

susiepie — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:39:15 -0800

Perhaps the gallbladder or the spleen.

By: Razzle Bathbone

Razzle Bathbone — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:41:48 -0800

Useless body parts anyone?

By: burnmp3s

burnmp3s — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:41:51 -0800

Yes, the appendix is the quintessential useless human organ. Oddly enough scientists found out recently that the appendix actually does do something, though. It turns out it's a good place to store all that bacteria you have lying around.

By: cmiller

cmiller — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:42:07 -0800

Doesn't the word "organ" sort of mean something that is (or was once thought to be) necessary for life and very useful? The criterion is not size; the pituitary is the same size as an earlobe, but we call one an organ and the other we don't.

If you have to choose: appendix, spleen, one kidney.

If you're looking for organs that suck and generally act as a counter argument to (soi dissant) "Intelligent Design", then consider then prostrate. If you don't want kids, then you may be safe (and better off later in life) having it removed.

By: Steven C. Den Beste

Steven C. Den Beste — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:44:46 -0800

That's "prostate", and I like having mine, thank you very much.

Without a prostate, a man can't get an erection or have an orgasm.

By: docpops

docpops — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:48:56 -0800

Man can have both erections and orgasms sans prostate, SCDB, as long as he has the nerves intact and functional testes for hormones. Though his ejaculate may be less voluminous.

By: docpops

docpops — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:50:46 -0800

I'd vote for the thymus. Once you bust out into the world it's mostly just potential trouble.

By: ikkyu2

ikkyu2 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 15:54:38 -0800

Without a prostate, a man can't get an erection or have an orgasm.

Completely false. (Maybe you should stick to CDMA2K protocols, SCDB?) The nerves coursing in the capsule of the prostate are important - but not strictly necessary - for these functions, but the entire prostate gland can be removed without damaging these nerves, making it a moot point.

I think if I had to pick, I'd ditch my gallbladder first, then my appendix (if you consider it an organ of its own and not part of the colon.) The gall bladder (and probably the appendix also) are relics of a way of life that modern human beings have long since left behind.

The seminal vesicles are also pretty useless and I'd sure ditch them before I tossed out my prostate gland. The spleen is next on this list, but it does have some important immune functions; even though total splenectomy is generally fairly benign, you are more likely to die of serious infections (i.e. pneumonia) without your spleen.

There are a lot of women who do not want to bear children. For those women, one way of looking at it would be to say that their uterus was not particularly useful.

By: rocket88

rocket88 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:02:20 -0800

If you ignore your personal feelings toward having children, you'd have to agree that both the prostate and the seminal vesicles are damned important to reproduction and survival of the species.

By: Daily Alice

Daily Alice — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:11:39 -0800

I've gotten along pretty well without a gallbladder for the past 6 years. (Appendix is probably still less useful though.)

By: Rumple

Rumple — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:19:09 -0800

The male breast.

Wisdom teeth (are the teeth an "organ"?)

Do humans make any use of their vomeronasal organ or is it completely vestigial?

By: scody

scody — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:27:30 -0800

You can live quite easily without your thryoid as long as you take thyroid hormone replacement (which is generally inexpenive and readily accessible).

By: scody

scody — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:28:12 -0800

guh, THYroid. I had mine out 10 years ago; you'd think I would have stopped making that typo around the same time.

By: cobaltnine

cobaltnine — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:33:11 -0800

Lots of people function well from a youngish age without tonsil, adenoid, or appendix. When you get older, gallbladder, uterus/prostate, one kidney, and frankly, chunks of various organs can all go. Now, if you want to get tricky, technically, can you go without one eye, one ear? That's sensory impairment, which can suck, but I'm pretty sure eyes are organs and lots of people get along okay with one these days.

Of course, IANAD but I'd listen to the resident one and go with gallbladder. (Actually, I'd dump my uterus myself, but only half of us can choose that.)

That being said, people survive without random organs all the time. I know a kid without a diapraghm (his is made of Teflon or Kevlar, I can't remember which) and I have a family member who had her large intestine removed over 20 years ago and has no problems.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:35:37 -0800

Male nipples.

By: Steven C. Den Beste

Steven C. Den Beste — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:36:49 -0800

Ikkyu2, you're the doctor. But your comment doesn't seem to address what I was told about.

It isn't a question of nerves. It's a question of plumbing. What I was told was that the blood supply runs through the prostate, and it controls the "valve" which results in an erection.

Ejaculation is certain not possible without a prostate, but of course it's possible for a man to have an orgasm without ejaculation -- though I think it would feel a bit weird. On the other hand, orgasm is caused by a hormone released from the pituitary (or so I was told) and isn't that hormone processed and used by the prostate?

By: gesamtkunstwerk

gesamtkunstwerk — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:37:06 -0800

The spleen is pretty useful when it comes to regulating your immune system and filtering red blood cells. Even the gall bladder has a function.

Appendix and then tonsils. Personally I want my appendix out. I have nightmares about appendicitis whenever I get ready to go camping or travelling to a country with shitty or insanely expensive healthcare.

By: weebil

weebil — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:40:17 -0800

A good friend of mine lost his eye in a childhood accident. Hasn't had any impact on his health, happiness or success. Plus, he gets to pop his prosthetic out as a joke.

By: mosk

mosk — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:42:02 -0800

>Male nipples.

Those seem less like an organ than a terrain feature.

By: clh

clh — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:43:50 -0800

I would go with wisdom teeth, since just their very existence can cause (orthodontic) problems.

By: unSane

unSane — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:05:51 -0800

Since when were wisdom teeth or nipples an organ?

By: konolia

konolia — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:10:09 -0800

I have done just fine without my gallbladder since the year 2000.

By: CrayDrygu

CrayDrygu — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:17:24 -0800

0xFCAF: "I believe you can lose one testicle/ovary without actually affecting the total hormone output. But don't take my word on it."

I can tell you from personal experience that this is true (for the testicles, at least).

By: ikkyu2

ikkyu2 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:22:41 -0800

SCDB, let's see if I can be more clear: you're wrong in every way on this topic. Fertile ejaculation is certainly possible without a prostate; a normal orgasm is not only possible but usual after total prostatectomy, unless the nerves running adjacent to the fibrous capsule of the organ are cut during the procedure; the blood supply to the penis comes via the dorsal arteries of the penis, which do not course through the prostate; and orgasm is not triggered by a pituitary hormone.

Sexual maturity requires testosterone, which is secreted by the testicles in response to pituitary hormones; and a normal orgasm requires sexual maturity; so in that sense you could say the pituitary gland is indirectly responsible for orgasms. (In the same sense, the food you eat is required as nourishment for your cells in order to live and not die, and you need living cells to have an orgasm, so therefore the food you eat is responsible for your orgasms.) Once someone has matured, the hormonal influences are less important.

It's actually pretty technically difficult to spare the nerves during prostatectomy - it takes some surgical skill - and a lot of urologists now practicing don't know how to do it, were never trained to do it, or can't perform that procedure reliably. I wonder if you didn't get your explanation from one of those urologists.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:30:22 -0800

"Since when were wisdom teeth or nipples an organ?"

Male nipples, if you include the milk-producing tissue, are both an organ and a totally unnecessary one.

Wisdom teeth, not so much.

By: deadmessenger

deadmessenger — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:00:46 -0800

@cmiller: Any male who enjoys receptive anal sex would argue pretty vehemently that the prostate is useful.

By: Steven C. Den Beste

Steven C. Den Beste — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:20:01 -0800

Ikkyu2: Fair enough.

By: acoutu

acoutu — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:30:12 -0800

Actually, recent research shows that male nipples were/are useful as pacifiers. And, if there is enough estrogen, men can potentially lactate.

Actually, I'm not from Boston

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:39:43 -0800

I say the tonsils and appendix tie, as they both act as petri dishes too often overgrown.

By: ubiquity

ubiquity — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:01:15 -0800

I second CrayDrygu on the effectiveness of a single testicle or ovary. In fact, you can pretty much lose one of anything you have two of (except maybe a lung) without serious long-term ill effects. However, as bones are considered organs, I will nominate the last segment of the coccyx as the body's most useless organ (OK, I really agree it's the appendix, but I hate to see anyone running unopposed).

By: docpops

docpops — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:21:38 -0800

Something even more obscure, and possibly not-critical:

The left atrial appendage.

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:28:10 -0800

It'd have to be the appendix or the male nipple, for me.

Also, /chatfilter

By: Cool Papa Bell

Cool Papa Bell — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 19:36:26 -0800

Hair. Is hair considered an organ? Or part of the skin (which clearly is necessary)?

By: JaySunSee

JaySunSee — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:47:36 -0800

Rediculously good answers. Thanks everyone.

By: JaySunSee

JaySunSee — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 03:50:47 -0800

It's 6 am and my spelling is "ridiculously" bad.

By: nursegracer

nursegracer — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:23:12 -0800

ubiquity: I wouldn't let anybody near my coccyx. There are nerves very close to there! Spinal nerves! (like the ones that control bladder, bowel and other stimulation down there).

I don't think removing one piece of skin would count, cause don't they say that skin is the largest organ? Thus it is one whole bundle. I'll keep mine, thank you very much.

If we're counting a single bone as an appendage, I would offer up the tip of one of my smaller toes.

I definitely wouldn't part with a kidney. I've seen 'em fail, so it's nice to have a backup. Dialysis sucks.

If we're talking internal organs, appendix or gall bladder, cause you can get them out laparoscopically. Hysterectomies are far too involved for my taste.

By: jamjam

jamjam — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:41:54 -0800

Male nipples are by no means necessarily useless; if you are a male who has some problem with your nipples, a female looking at you as a potential sex partner would do well to choose someone else because of the strong possibility you could pass that on to your daughters (their potential daughters if they have sex with you), making that daughter less attractive and desirable, and possibly less able to nurse.

Whether this is reflected in women's visceral reactions to bare-chested males, I don't know.

By: Monday

Monday — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:17:30 -0800

From the article Razzle Bathbone linked:

"MALE NIPPLES

"Lactiferous ducts form well before testosterone causes sex differentiation in a fetus. Men have mammary tissue that can be stimulated to produce milk."

Just because we don't use it that way doesn't make it useless, ala ikkyu2's argument about a woman's uterus above.

It is important to consider if we were to take a useless organ away from a person (even their genes somehow), would it immediately affect their ability to attract a mate? That can be most important of all. It doesn't matter if you have Superman's genes if you don't pass them on.

By: humannaire

humannaire — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:36:08 -0800

Strangely enough, I have known several men in my life who lactate. So I always knew that about us. That we could, and all.