25 ms·
The appendix is not, in fact, useless
- lo_zamoyski 3y agoNatura nihil frustra facit.
- quickthrower2 3y agoIs an assumption. There is no evidence to say we are 100% optimised . Although I think it is likely.
- maxbond 3y agoWhat about vestigial stuff, like leg bones on whales? https://www.icr.org/i/stage_248/whalelegs_stage.jpg https://www.icr.org/i/stage_248/whalelegs_stage.jpg Similarly, what about things like congenital diseases? Why does sickle cell anemia seem to be an imperfect answer to malaria? Etc. My suspicion is that evolution satisfices rather than optimizes, because once a trait which is in the process of changing ceases to be the limiting factor in reproduction it ceases to change rapidly. So unlike an optimizer, evolution often doesn't take free variables to extremes (eg remove the leg bones entirely) and doesn't find a global minimum, it finds a satisfactory location in phase space close to it's previous position. Or maybe it optimizes on a higher level, and satisficing is more advantageous because optimizing to local conditions will leave you unprepared for future environmental changes, and tolerating things like vestigial traits creates opportunities for advantageous mutations. I think both explanations could coexist. This is all speculation, to be clear.
- ho4 3y ago[flagged]
- VoodooJuJu 3y ago[flagged]
- robbiep 3y agoI don't think any surgeon in the industrialised world is removing an appendix or gallbladder today because they think it's useless, they're removing them because they're trying to kill the patient
- XorNot 3y agoThe other reason is if you're going to Antarctica (you can't go if you still have your appendix, because if something goes wrong there is very likely no way to casevac you fast enough that you won't die from it - same applies to astronauts).
- reducesuffering 3y ago> if something goes wrong there is very likely no way to casevac you fast enough that you won't die from it There is one other option that's been tried... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Rogozov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Rogozov
- mauvia 3y agoThe ambiguous they makes this half as likely to read "They're (the surgeons) are removing them (the appendices) because they're (the surgeons) trying to kill the patient. It's funny.
- agos 3y agoinflamed appendices, sure. gallbladders are removed with a lot less care
- msla 3y agoWhile you might reliably survive attacks of biliary colic, you'll greatly wish you didn't have to. (I had my gallbladder removed many years ago.)
- ho4 3y agoNever implied that they did. However there are several common mild conditions to which the only option you'll get is removing them. For instance, a single gallbladder stone (instead of trying to dissolve it) or a mild state of appendicitis (the body can manage).
- SuperNinKenDo 3y agoEven when I was a kid they were starting to understand this. I'm old enough to remember people believing it was useless, maybe even I was told it from a figure of authority at some point, but definitely as a child my memory was "people used to think it was useless, but now we know it isn't ". It's kind if interesting to me that I continually see stories titled like the article over the years. It goes to show that undoing incorrect common knowledge is a long process that isn't really ever completed, because an editor somewhere decided that a title like this would grab people's attention, but to someone like me, this is like a headline that reads "brushing your teeth confirmed to be effective treatment in fighting tooth decay". I've noticed a surge in articles letting me know that the appendix isn't useless, so I assume we figured out a bit better what it actually does, but to me the most interesting part is about knowledge dissemination.
- Talanes 3y agoI had a similar thing with whether Giant Pandas were actual bears or not when I was a kid. The genetic tests that determined they were definitely bears happened five years before I was born, but I still got taught the "We used to think they were bears, but they're actually more closely related to raccoons" version until high school.
- readthenotes1 3y agoIt was a weird article. The latest study date was 2007. Maybe since then they found the c. Difícils difference??
- tamaharbor 3y agoJupiter used to “have” twelve moons.
- taeric 3y agoTo this day, I still have family that think ulcers are strictly a stress and diet related thing. I also get a bit of a smirk out of the example you use. Brushing teeth is almost certainly effective at fighting tooth problems. However, I have grown wary of it as a goto example, as I think it has long been assumed as the only thing of note there. It seems far more likely, to me, that diet and genetics play far more of an active role in tooth health. Maybe I've just had bad luck with dentists, but I swear my tooth woes only ever get significantly worse every time I see one. :(
- RandomLensman 3y agoAppendicitis was around in ancient times, too, so I am not sure I understand the reference only to industrialized nations in that respect.
- readthenotes1 3y ago"Appendicitis is predominantly happening in the industrialized nations of the world — areas where fiber content of the diet tends to be lower. " I saw it as a reference to fiber poor diets....
- RandomLensman 3y agoPerhaps, but I am somewhat surprised to see rates of appendicitis lower in the US than in Europe, for example.
- xbar 3y agowhile gnoshing on a French prune Me too.
- nerdponx 3y ago"nosh" is a loanword from Yiddish, definitely no silent "g" prefix there. Unless you're experiencing gnosis while noshing, in which case carry on. I've had prunes that good before. If you're experiencing gnashing while noshing, then I suggest taking a break and changing to a different activity.
- quickthrower2 3y agoThe last one might be gnarly.
- posterboy 3y agognash (one's teeth) and German knusen ("to chew") ought to be related with nosh and German naschen, seeing that snack in the same sense may be derived from some onomatopoeia meaning "bite". It's a non-trivial problem since these onmnomnom forms are thought to escape regular sound change. However, you may be right that silent g is inserted by mistake, but an archaic g-prefix which may be realized as /k/ is productive in Swabian, which might indicate a western Yiddish variety rather than the more eastern Ashkenaz.
- IAmNotACellist 3y agoStory begins: >The appendix is not, in fact, useless >It was the first day of spring break in 1992 in Phoenix, and 12-year-old Heather Smith was excited for her family's upcoming ski trip... Immediate skip.
- notfed 3y agoThis is why many of us are excited about LLMs. This.
- knodi123 3y ago"Finally, I'll be able to automate turning a short science paragraph into a 10 page story with human interest content!"
- lobsterthief 3y agoYep, it goes both ways.
- delfinom 3y ago* with additional fluff content because Google mandated it to show up in search results. Seriously, the reason why all recipe sites online suddenly became autobiographies was a policy change by google prioritizing such.
- quickthrower2 3y agoUntil Google uses an LLM on every indexed entry. Then people might start writing stuff for that which might correlate more with what users want to read!
- avg_dev 3y agoI wish an LLM had obviated this thread from the discussion
- leptons 3y agoSo you won't have to write 10 paragraphs of inane filler, a computer will do it for you?
- lapetitejort 3y agoI remember two or three times in my early life where I felt appendicitis-like symptoms only for them to go away after a few hours. That was until one night when the pains persisted past midnight. My roommate insisted on taking me to the ER. After several hours there I finally got checked in, had a CT scan, and prepped for surgery. The docs said I did indeed have appendicitis, and in fact had scarring from past episodes. Before the surgery the pain actually started to subside. I wonder if I could have moved past that episode, and if it would have hit me years later.
- cyberax 3y agoYes. Appendicitis can go away on its own, and it can also be treated with antibiotics. Doctors prefer surgery because it's a definite cure, without negative effects of a long antibiotic course.
- maximinus_thrax 3y agoYes, it is possible but not likely for appendicitis to go away on its own. I mean the idea here is the likelihood of it going away on its own vs the possibility of it to burst and cause peritonitis. Doctors prefer surgery because peritonitis has a mortality rate of ~13% for < 50yo and ~30% otherwise, assuming immediate medical care and of course the surgery to clean up the burst organ. Appendicitis going away without surgery is a common trope I heard from antivaxxers over the years. It's a very dangerous train of thought. (someone who no longer has an appendix)
- cyberax 3y ago> Yes, it is possible but not likely for appendicitis to go away on its own. Yes, that's correct. I should have specified that it's rare, and it's extremely dangerous to leave appendicitis untreated. I was morbidly curious about how appendicitis was treated before the advent of aseptic surgery, and apparently it was mostly "just let the patient die". But several treatments seemed to help, including _massage_ of the area along with a kind of yoga-like contortions. Apparently, it sometimes could "unclog" the swollen appendix and let the pus drain into the colon. Here's an article in JAMA that describes it: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/447654 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/44765... from 1896, no less (sidenote: and you have to pay to read it). Another side note, I used to be a professionally certified masseur (about 20 years ago) and we were trained to recognize the signs of appendicitis. It can be almost completely asymptomatic until the appendix is almost bursting.
- whoswho 3y ago[flagged]
- cogman10 3y ago> It turns out that the appendix appears to have two related functions. The first function is supporting the immune system. The appendix has a high concentration of immune tissue, so it's acting to help the immune system fight any bad things in the gut. > The second function that it serves is what we refer to as the safe house. So this was a hypothesis that was put forward by a team from Duke University in 2007. And they argued that the appendix may serve as a safe reservoir for the beneficial gut bacteria that we have. I have to question if the first function is valid. How can the appendix "help fight bad things in the gut" when it's basically a minor piece hanging off the large intestine. It's not like a lot of stuff passes through it or that it really secretes anything (AFAIK). In fact, wouldn't it make a little more sense that the high amount of immune tissue is there because of appendicitis? After all, people that don't die from sepsis tend to have more options to procreate and a less infect-able appendix would tend to make people live longer. The second thing is pretty interesting though. Sort of makes sense. Though I'd imagine that more often than not the "bad bacteria" is going to infest the safe haven and kill the good gut bacteria. I can't see how that wouldn't often happen.
- ramraj07 3y agoThe immune system in the gut has a complicated roll: it doesn’t just find bacteria and yell “bacteria! We have an infection!” Thus it needs to be able to tell the good bacteria from the bad. How does it? It constantly surveils the gut flora and builds a tolerance to the regular players. When something changes then it has the opportunity figure out if this is worrisome. Thus you can see how the appendix could be part of this surveillance mechanism. Of course we still don’t fully understand this entire system so this is all hypotheses at best.
- alan-hn 3y agoBacteria need to compete for resources, usually when a new bacterial strain is introduced to an environment where there's already a ton of different bacteria, the ones that are already there have adapted to live in balance with the nutrients available and the other members of the community. A new bacterial strain must either find an open niche in that community or somehow outcompete what's already there. The ones already there generally outnumber newcomers to a significant extent. There is no "good" or "bad" in nature, those are words that describe the human perspective and there aren't necessarily bacteria that could come in with small numbers and somehow wipe out an existing population. Its all about competition and resources
- Sovann102 3y ago[flagged]
- killjoywashere 3y agoOnce you understand the embryology, there are actually a variety of things like the appendix: they're just the ends of things that come together. The uvula is a great example: embryologically, the two sides of the face separate very early as an opening, then develop a lot of complicated anatomy and fuse back together. The uvula is where that fusion completes and the fusion process completes (returns 0) when the microenvironment variables get to a certain state. The vermiform appendix is where the three tiniae coli come together. Unsurprisingly, the other, rectal, end the tiniea coli don't so much end as they spread out into the longitudinal muscular layer of the rectosigmoid. And of course the wall of the vermiform appendix is full of lymphoid tissue. The whole colonic wall is full of lymphoid tissue! Source: I'm a pathologist. I have looked at way too much colon. And uvula, and pretty much every other bit of tissue you can imagine, under gross exam, under a microscope, and in situ (live in ORs and dead in autopsy suites). This idea that the vermiform appendix is some deep evolutionary mystery is sort of a low point of medicine that occasionally pokes its head up. It ranks up there with male pregnancy, and various birth defects that have given rise to stories of monsters, like Cyclops. Fun stories, completely useless. Please don't invest in anything related to any of those. If you have money burning a hole in your biomedical investment pocket, feel free to reach out.
- ProjectArcturis 3y agoI believe Cyclops myths were inspired by the skulls of dwarf elephants who lived on the island of Sardinia. https://greekcitytimes.com/2023/01/28/cyclops-ancient-greeks-myth/ https://greekcitytimes.com/2023/01/28/cyclops-ancient-greeks...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- adolph 3y agoAt first I thought the dwarf elephants would have come as a result of the Zanclean megaflood [0] of 5m years ago, which did cause some odd sized animals like the small dog sized rabbit Nuralagus [1], but the Mediterranean dwarf elephants did not appear until 2.5m years ago [2]. 0. https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/the-zanclean-megaflood https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/the-zanclean-m... 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuralagus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuralagus 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_elephant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_elephant
- forgotmypw17 3y agohttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.h... Date: October 8, 2007 Source: Duke University Medical Center Summary: Long denigrated as vestigial or useless, the appendix now appears to have a reason to be - as a "safe house" for the beneficial bacteria living in the human gut. The gut is populated with different microbes that help the digestive system break down the foods we eat. In return, the gut provides nourishment and safety to the bacteria. Parker now believes that the immune system cells found in the appendix are there to protect, rather than harm, the good bacteria.
- feedsmgmt 3y agoA reserve of good bacteria to repopulate your guts in case you consume something bad that needs to get flushed out. Aren't tonsils something similar?
- forgotmypw17 3y agoYes, tonsils are another organ that was at one point declared useless but proved to be important.
- Dylan16807 3y agoFor some definition of "important".
- looping8 3y agoIt fits "important". It is not essential like some organs but if it protects immune system and bacteria, it is definitely important.
- forgotmypw17 3y agoWould you call helping fight infection and condition the immune system is "important"? I would.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wly_cdgr 3y agoWell yeah. Half the time that's like, the best part of the book.
- dinkleberg 3y agoHaha that is how I interpreted the title too. Was thinking who in their right mind would question the value of an appendix?
- kmoser 3y agoIt took me until the third paragraph to understand the actual topic.
- jongjong 3y agoI heard that tonsils also have an immune function.
- stubish 3y agoYes, last I heard they seemed designed to catch infection and be a training ground for the immune system, so it can deal with the issue faster if that particular pathogen infects a more critical organ. Also similar to one of the reasons babies stick everything in their mouths, so they get samples of pathogens while they are healthy and can deal with it, rather than getting exposed later when they are sick and their immune system already stressed.
- ornel 3y agoPrimary source here: https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.24917 https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.2...
- jojobas 3y agoThe immune role of the appendix has been known for decades.
- aaron695 3y ago[dead]
- cryptonector 3y agoI wonder whether exploratory surgery to try to "squeeze clear" any blockage might be a good idea, though it could easily be a terrible idea, no doubt.
- fargle 3y agoit is, in fact, usually the most interesting part of the document
- denton-scratch 3y agoWhat purpose is served by the little toe? I suspect it provides some (very) marginal help with balancing, at the cost of a microlimb that is particularly exposed to breakage by stubbing. Having broken each of my little toes by stubbing (on different occasions), I can attest that a broken little toe definitely makes it harder to balance. Hell, it makes it hard to stand. I seriously doubt that there's enough strength in a little toe to provide much help with balancing. So given its propensity for injury, why have little toes not evolved away in large bipeds? (I don't think birds or quadripeds are prone to toe-stubbing)
- Ekaros 3y agoIt is probably linked to fingers in some gene expressions. And 5 fingers I would say is more effective than 4. So changing of number of toes might also affect fingers. So better just to keep the extra. After all it is marginal.
- lloeki 3y agoDoesn't necessarily need to be effective motor function: it's a probe that provides tactile feedback, both for posture and balance, as well as being the one who gets hit often - being on the outer edge - possibly saving more critical foot areas from irreparable damage. By way of consequence it's helpful when fully functional but not essential as you are prone to hit it by "design" and make it temporarily nonfunctional every so often, all without impairing the whole foot function critical for bipedal walk as humans do it. Also, redundancy: when you break some other toe you're super glad there's a pinky, however comparatively small and weak. Anecdata: as a skateboarder it's obvious (sometimes painfully so) how every toe matters to get the most information from beneath one's feet.
- adammarples 3y agoLittle toes significantly widen your base. Yours probably don't because you've forced them into shoes your whole life and they are crushed against the others.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y agoWhen I used to windsurf, it was pretty obvious how important the little toe is for balance, it drives where to push. I can't tell you why, but it was the toe that gave back the most feedback and told me how to push with my feet
- searchingalways 3y agoI really thought this was going to be about a book appendix.
- ArunRaja 3y agoMy theory: Appendix acts like a fuse in an electric circuit. As we get appendix infected, gotta iron out the root cause, it's a doorway to finding the lifestyle problem. Instead getting it removed (unless rarely necessary) means, certain first line of defence is taken away.