Several years ago I read an article in National Geographic titled "The Downside of Upright" written by an Md whose name I do not remember. Its tone struck me as extremely egotistical. The article was about how our current physical habit of walking 'upright' had contributed to our 'flaws' as a species. Flaws? Yes, that was his word for how our species had 'adapted' to walking on two legs. The outrageous lack of humility before nature was highly offensive and based more on opinion than actual knowledge or thought. Of course that is MY opinion. Here is a man, a product of nature or a creation of God, dissing the very intelligence that made his existence possible.
One of his suggestions was that our upright walking 'habit' was bad for our discs. That we as a species suffer from abnormal disc degeneration as a result of our walking upright. Nothing was mentioned about the fact that our 'social' habits have more to do with that particular problem. What habits? Sitting is extremely bad for our species because sitting compresses our discs for hours at a time and our discs are not being pumped as a result. Not only this but when we drive we are in a seated position and the micro trauma of the motion of the car wears at our discs and muscle tissue even more. So our species, as a result of our social habits of late, does have a problem with premature disc degeneration, caused by our social habits not our structure.
He suggests also that our Pelvis is all wrong. That giving birth was more of a hardship now that we walk upright. In his example a picture of a skeleton with the head of a baby inside the pelvis was an example of how we have devolved and now 'need' medical intervention with child birth. What he failed to mention is that the skeletal structure of a fetus is designed by 'nature' to fold over itself to make it fit through the birth canal more efficiently. The picture he used to illustrate his argument was the skull of a toddler not the skull of a new born. So the visual effect was to suggest he was correct. He also seemed to forget the fact that when a child passes through the birth canal the amniotic fluid that fills our lungs while a fetus is squeezed out which also releases a hormone that enables the lungs to inflate with air...more efficiently. So there is an actual physiological need to pass through the canal and actual purpose for the 'hardship'. He also forgot to mention that most of the difficulties encountered with child birth are caused by the fact that the mother was most often on her back during the process which made birthing more difficult. The thought process behind a woman lying on her back is solely for the convenience of the assisting doctor...nothing to do whatsoever with making child birth more efficient or comfortable. Of course this makes it much more dramatic for television moms to scream, push...and sweat..their way through a soap opera birth scene.
In fact we are designed to give birth in the upright position, go figure. Not only does the tissue of the birth canal stretch..more easily gravity plays a role in aiding the process. Hmmmm sounds like intelligent design to me. The article was a nauseating example of intellectually induced egotism. No doubt the man was intelligent but the use he put that intellect to was not only self serving but highly ignorant.We are a highly specialized living, breathing entity with the God given brain power to figure out the problems of the world..and also the capacity to screw things up. However, we usually screw things up when we put ego before intellect.
Enuf Said
Dr. B
No comments:
Post a Comment