Quote:
|
Originally Posted by billege
You do realize that at this point you are literally making things up to support your stance, right?
The statement I quoted above is literally made up "logic" that you're pretending means somthing when it does not. The idea that "logically" nerves that were located in a cut off section of flesh will decide to regrow in another part of the body is laughable. In fact, it makes clear that you're not even trying to discuss this in a reasonable manner, or perhaps you just can't see how foolish you're making yourself sound.
You either know nothing about human biology, or are hoping we don't. Or, you're so willing to think your wild assumptions can be labeled "facts" and then be treated as such, that you spill things like this in an attempt to keep your "discussion" going. Either way, I think you've made clear that you can not support your position rationally.
The idea that you've just magically decided, based on whatever little you know of biology, that nerves will just regrow elsewhere on the body...and that it'll happen faster to this magic nerve relocating baby...is foolish and absurd.
That you've attempted to label it "logic" and use it to "tear apart" (as you put it) opposing arguements is clear evidence you're unable to discuss this with any manner of sense.
|
Not to be rude here, but you did exactly what you criticized xepherys for doing. In your entire post you didn't reference anything or point to any location with some reading about the topic of nerve regrowth. It was simply a lengthy nuh-uh. You're relying on your personal credentials to make the point, just as much as xepherys was in the original statement.
Now in terms of neural growth, It has been shown that peripheral neurons(sensory and motor neurons) can grow. They are perfectly capable of growth toward reattachment when severed, thus it is possible to reattach limbs and regain both feeling and control of that limb as long as the two severed ends of nerve are close enough together to facilitate regrowth. If they are too far apart the nerve will permanently lose function and the entire limb will probably die off. I have seen nothing in my searches to indicate this process to be better achieved by the members of any given age group.
So, in terms of comparing a hand loss to foreskin loss - there are tons of sensory nerves in your hands/fingers, if you lose your hand the nerves aren't going to grow out into the stump that is left and give a comparable sensitivity to what your fingers had. But if the hand is reattached something comparable to original function can be reached. Now applying this to the foreskin it would seem(to me at least) that there is no reason to believe that the nerve endings removed by circumcision are going to regrow into the glans to increase sensitivity. However(for the sake of completing the comparison) if the foreskin were reattached shortly after removal partial function/sensitivity could be restored to it.
In case you were wondering:
Makwana, Milan; Ravich, Gennadij. “Molecular Mechanisms in Successful Peripheral Regneration”
The FEBS Journal. Vol 272. Issue 11. Pg 2628-2638. 2005.
Terenghi, Giorgio. “Peripheral Nerve Regeneration and Neurotrophic Factors”.
Journal of Anatomy. Vol 194. Iss 1. Pg 1-14. 1999.
I would offer a link, but I accessed these through a subscription my college has, so unless you yourself have the same subscription or access to a uni that does a link won't do you any good.