This was posted by James Hughes to the World Transhumanist Association list:
Science Redesigns the Human Body
Some scientists, engineers and designers gripe about Nature’s
masterpiece and suggest a few improvements.
By Lester David
ON A golf course last Fall, a New York accountant took a healthy
swing at the ball, fell to the ground- and couldn’t get up. He spent the
next nine weeks in a hospital. Slipped spinal disc.
A mailman in Philadelphia was forced to turn in his resignation when
fallen arches made walking unbearable.
In Chicago, an office worker running for a bus suddenly crumpled to
the ground. He hobbled to a stoop and sat until help arrived. Dislocated
knee, the doctor said.
Multiply each of these instances by several million and you will get
a rough idea of the number of bad backs, sore feet and trick knees which
abound in this country alone. It all adds up to the fact that, while the
human body has never been equalled from the standpoint of all-around
master engineering, a number of glaring weaknesses do exist in man’s
basic equipment.
Listen to Dr. Wilton M. Krogman, professor of physical anthropology
at the Graduate School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania: “It has
been said that man is ‘fearfully and wonderfully made.’ I am inclined to
agree with that statement especially the ‘fearfully’ part of it. As a
piece of machinery we are such a hodgepodge and makeshift that the real
wonder is we get along as we do.”
How would scientists go about redesigning the human creature in
order to get the most efficiency out of him?
MI tossed the intriguing problem into the laps of anthropologists,
physiologists, engineers and industrial designers.
We got some fascinating answers!
Perhaps the most unusual came from George M. Rowland, Jr., president
of Burdick-Rowland Associates, a nationally prominent firm of industrial
designers.
“From the standpoint of load-bearing over a long period of time,” he
asserted, “a basic weakness exists in man’s spine.” Many doctors and
anthropologists agree, pointing out that man’s spine was fine when he
was getting along on all fours a million or so years ago, but the
upright posture puts an undue weight on it. “The result,” Mr. Rowland
stated, “is that the spine now curves and sags and frequently gets out
of kilter. From a designer’s point of view, I see no reason for a
disjointed spinal column. Why not encase the spine in a tube of
semi-flexible cartilege? Thus man’s spine would be a solid column, with
a greatly increased load-carrying capacity. In addition, the vital
nerves in the spine would be more fully protected against injury. Man
would not be able to twist and turn as he does now but the
semi-flexibility of the cylinder would allow enough bending for every
ordinary purpose.
“And why,” asked Mr. Rowland, “couldn’t the brain be situated in the
chest cavity, near the heart? Nearness to fuel supply is a fundamental
principle in industry, so why not here?” There is another factor-if the
brain were in the chest, it would be far less vulnerable to injury.”
Man’s shape, then, would be altered rather drastically: The head
would be a mere conning tower, probably be cylindrical, and the chest
would have to be bigger. While redesigning the thorax Mr. Rowland
brought forth another fairly radical suggestion: “Why is it necessary to
have individual ribs? Why can’t man’s internal organs be protected with
a device resembling a giant clamshell which can be opened easily for
surgical purposes, be flexible enough to permit breathing and which
would protect the vital organs a good deal better than the present
lattice-work arrangement?”
Robert M. Wolff, an engineer and vice president of the Wolff
Appliance Corp. of New York came out for an extra set of eyes in the
back of the head.
“At present,” he said, “a human being’s range of vision is at most
180 degrees and it’s often much less than that. Why shouldn’t man’s
vision be increased to a full 360 degrees?”
Ben Fromkin, a designer with the Burdick-Rowland firm, points out
that man has trouble picking up small sounds emanating from the rear.
Thus footpads, automobiles and falling objects may strike from behind
without warning.
Why, asks Mr. Fromkin, couldn’t antennae be concealed in the head?
These could pick up sound waves, lights and shadows, and relay them to
the brain. The suggestion is not plucked from the blue-grasshoppers and
other insects have them.
Professor John L. Landgraf of the New York University anthropology
department would like to see additional muscle strength across the lower
abdomen to support the weight of the internal organs. This, he declares,
might result in a thicker waistline, a fact which might dismay the
girls, but it wouldn’t be too thick, and there would be no more pot
bellies.
Another anthropology professor would widen the pelvis considerably,
creating an anatomical construction something like the bustle of the
last century. Powers models wouldn’t care for it, but the wider base
would eliminate the present strain and the risk of hernia. And
childbearing would be immeasurably easier, he asserts.
How about teeth? Declares British biologist Haldane: “Our teeth
suffer from overcrowding, and that is one reason why they so often
decay.” Haldane points out that man is probably evolving toward fewer
teeth. “A good many people,” he says, “never cut their wisdom teeth and
perhaps none of our descendants will.” Dentists consulted by MI agreed
that 20 teeth would be an improvement over the present 32.
How about hair? Dr. Marion B. Sulzberger, one of the world’s
foremost dermatologists, wrote recently that the “cost of upkeep of a
nation’s hair may perhaps rival that of a nation’s army.” Some
scientists believe that man is gradually evolving toward baldness
anyway, as indicated by the gradual disappearance of hair on the rest of
the body. Therefore, they say, why not get rid of the useless stuff now?
How about feet? Much too weak to support the rest of the body. Mr.
Contini of N. Y. U. says the human arch could stand redesigning for
added strength and durability. Mr. Rowland doesn’t see any need for the
little toe and even for toenails. Originally they were claws, he says,
but now they serve no purpose and often cause trouble.
How about knees? Doctors assert that something should be done about
the knee’s habit of slipping out of whack, but anthropologists said
there was no simple solution. Several suggested additional, stronger
muscles. Most agreed that tampering with the knee joint might give it
greater strength but would restrict its present freedom of movement.
In addition to these suggestions, the interviews resulted in a wild
assortment of other ideas, many meant frankly for fun: Why not wings to
enable man to get around (or over) the miserable traffic situation ? Why
not protective covering for the eye, containing substances which would
screen out harsh ultra violet rays? Why not built-in pockets, such as
kangaroos have? Why not a small food storage compartment like the
camel’s? Why not design the neck so that a human being can turn his head
completely around?
From Raymond Loewy, the world-famous industrial designer: Not long
ago, Mr. Loewy recalls, comedian Tom Ewell launched in a series of beefs
about the body’s inadequacies. He suggested certain improvements, such
as an eye on the end of the finger for looking over the heads of crowds.
Mr. Ewell thereupon challenged Mr. Loewy to add other features and the
designer and his staff took up the gauntlet. Reports Mr. Loewy: “We put
hooks on heads for straphangers on subways who wanted to read the papers
and we tried an extra pair of hands coming out of ears to hold hats in
high winds.”
From an architect: “Man’s nose is a weak point. Air going into the
lungs must make a hairpin turn in the nostrils; the results are several
kinds of sinus troubles and what-have-you. So why not a long snout to
help do away with this awkward turn and the resultant ills?
From a radio engineer: why not folding ears something like the
old-fashioned ear trumpet to catch low-pitched sounds? We called a halt
to the investigation when one famed designer came up with this: “Why not
detachable arms so that you can sleep in comfort, a spare, smaller-sized
head in case your hat shrinks and a small hand in your back so that you
can scratch hard-to-reach itches?”
~~~
This reminds me of my “List of Human Problems” post from a couple years back.
Man, what would Greg Egan say to people if they made up the word “transhumanist” all the way back in 1956? It would suck to be a crackpot for 52 continuous years.