The appendix serves as a safe haven for the good bacteria that live in the human intestine, and can protect the intestine after severe intestinal diseases
Image: The appendix, as it is described in "Grey's Anatomy"
The appendix (appendix) has long been considered a vestigial, or useless, organ. But now it has been discovered that there is a good reason for its existence. The appendix serves as a safe haven for the good bacteria that live in the human gut. The good bacteria in the supplement can aid digestion, like their relatives in the intestines. After a series of experiments and observations, researchers at the Duke University Medical Center claim that the bacteria in the appendix can remain in the body even after an attack of diarrhea. The attack also empties the intestines of the good bacteria, but the bacteria in the appendix remain and can repopulate the intestines. The theory was published online in the journal Theoretical Biology.
"It is difficult to find clear and absolute evidence, but there is a large amount of circumstantial evidence that points to the beneficial role of the appendix: to be a place where the good bacteria can live safely and comfortably until the body needs them," says Dr. William Parker, professor of experimental surgical medicine. Parker conducted the analysis in collaboration with Doctor R. Randall Bollinger, Emeritus Professor of General Surgery.
The appendix is a narrow pocket 5-10 centimeters long, located near the meeting point between the large intestine and the small intestine. Doctors are still debating its exact role in humans, but it is known that there is immune system tissue within the appendix.
The intestine is inhabited by various bacteria that help the digestive system break down the food we eat. In return, the intestine provides the bacteria with security and food. Parker believes that the immune system cells are in the appendix not to harm the good bacteria, but to protect them.
For the past ten years, Parker has studied the way the bacteria in the intestines work. During this time he was able to discover that in the intestines there is a thin membrane known as a biofilm. This thin and delicate layer consists of many bacteria, mucous and molecules of the immune system. All these live together on the walls of the intestines.
"Our studies indicate that the immune system protects the bacterial colonies that live in a biofilm and nourishes them," explained Parker. "Because it protects these good bacteria, the harmful bacteria have no place to live. We also showed that the biofilms are especially present in the appendix, and that their frequency decreases as you move away from it."
Parker said that it is possible to understand what the true function of the appendix is if you think about a world without modern medicine and hygienic conditions.
"In countries without modern medicine or hygienic practices, you can find many cases of diarrhea. In these cases, often the entire contents of the intestines, including the biofilms, are emptied and washed out of the body,” said Parker. "Once the intestinal contents have left the body, the good bacteria hidden in the appendix can emerge from it and repopulate the intestinal wall before more harmful bacteria can colonize there."
In industrialized countries with modern medicine and hygienic practices, maintaining a pool of beneficial bacteria is not necessary," Parker continued. "This diagnosis is consistent with the fact that in modern society, removing the appendix does not cause visible problems."
Several decades ago, scientists suggested that people in industrialized societies might have a high incidence of appendicitis because of the "hygiene hypothesis," Parker said. This hypothesis suggests that people in "hygienic" societies have a higher incidence of allergies and autoimmune diseases because they - and their immune systems - have not been exposed to the variety of parasites and other disease agents found in the environment. As a result, when their immune systems are faced with a new challenge, they may overreact.
"This immune system, which overreacts, may lead to inflammation associated with the appendix, thus causing intestinal obstruction and acute appendicitis," said Parker. "So it is possible that modern medicine and our hygiene manners lead not only to the fact that we do not need the appendix, but also to a significant part of the problems caused by the appendix in our society."
Parker conducted a study based on implications and conclusions because testing the functioning of the appendix can be particularly difficult. The only mammals other than humans that possess an appendix are rabbits, opossums, and wombats, and their appendices differ considerably from those of humans.
Parker's research on the existence of the biofilm and its role is funded by the National Institutes of Health. The other members of the research group at Duke University are Andrew Barbes, Errol Bush and Xu Lin.
52 תגובות
I was surprised when I saw that this article has over 50 comments (the record of knowledge?) while usually there are at best a few comments. How is it that the appendix, the wretched of the organs, gains such popularity, I wondered.
It didn't take long for me to realize that the hero of the discussion is not the catcher but something else entirely, although there are also differences of opinion regarding him as to whether he is unnecessary or not.
Michael, the very fact that you were a commander in the wretched army of this country means that I am you poor person who needs therapy/brain surgery to expand your knowledge in life
Yael:
Google search (keywords APPENDIX PARKER)
Gives the website of researcher Parker, the owner of the theory.
http://sciences.surgery.duke.edu/research/institutes-and-labs/parker-lab
You can probably download the article from there.
How can I get the full text in English?
I got to the "abstract", and although a link appears
I can't find the full article on EBSCO.
Thanks.
Comment regarding the fish:
As for that "marine creature" named "Shtink's Marines" -
MONOPTERUS CUCHIA Come again to see how the wonderful truths of God's teachings are revealed, against all the "findings" of science!
that the ancients from 350 years ago wrote that some Viennese doctor claimed to have found this poisonous marine animal that had 4 legs and had scales without fins, and one judge, the "Kreti Vaphalit" said that this shows that there is an exception for the sages, and others added that since it is an animal with legs , and not a fish, and it is also poisonous, therefore this rule of the sages does not apply to it, or it had fins and fell.
But see it as a wonder, that the writer who already signed the treatise of Chulin, page XNUMX AB, claimed that he had inquired from experts that there had been a scientific error on the part of the Viennese doctor, and that the "Stinkus marinos" is not a marine animal, but rather grown on land.
And here, a year ago, they discovered, as always, the truth of the Torah in an absolute way: there is no "Shatin's marinos" but a lizard called Scincus scincus, which is called "the sand fish" because it appears to "swim" in... the sand of the desert, and it does not grow in water at all!
And now that it has finally been discovered that there is no such fish or sea animal, it has become clear that all the fish and sea animals in the entire world, without any exception, stand in this amazing rule of the Sage! How did they know what all the sages of the world did not know until now?!
I built a time machine and I'm going to kill Moses, Muhammad and Jesus. Basically, Jesus can be left, without his predecessors he would just be a socialist.
See you in a better world, without idle chatter in talkbacks.
In my opinion, whoever wants to believe that "by the way, 1+1 is not always equal to 2" is his right.
But on the condition that he does not preach to others about it.
Michal, shameless!
Maybe you would be a murderer if you weren't religious, but I'm not religious and I don't even kill animals.
It is clear that those who do not understand how not to kill without religion do not understand anything.
If you tell me to worry about the criminals before I worry about the ultra-Orthodox, you are bringing things to the right level.
In my opinion, apart from the criminals, there is not a single citizen who can be compared to the ultra-Orthodox.
Sweet dreams
"Thou shalt not murder" is not valid without having the religion to prevent it. Again, the Nazis considered themselves very moral. And they murdered our people for the sake of morality.
Well done for being a commander in the army. You didn't answer me about the "equipment completion" that goes there. Honest people who also happen to steal here and there...or leave weapons behind...or fall asleep while guarding...not to mention sexual harassment in the army...
I was also a soldier and I know very well what goes on there! And of course it's not just their fault, the army doesn't know how to use the human power it has, there are thousands of servicemen who eat McDonald's for lunch and aroma coffee, while the fighters are being ground in the territories. First the army knows what to do with the force it has, then see if we really need to recruit more people. Just so you know, ultra-Orthodox who cannot study in a yeshiva and want to enlist - they are not accepted. Why? Because the ultra-Orthodox are "making problems", kosher is not good, Sabbath observance is canceled, etc., etc., so the army in advance does not bother with them.
Before you resent the fact that you "have to support them" - why don't you resent the fact that you are supporting criminals in prison with your taxes? People who murder and rape - yes, yes, you support them too, and why is no one protesting about that? Because everyone perceives the ultra-Orthodox as parasites that are not needed, and it's not your fault. Simply confusing our minds in a secular school, where they teach about everyone and their success, that there is no value in learning Torah, and as a result, who needs them anyway? When the state will truly be a Jewish state, meaning that it follows the laws of Judaism, then they will understand the value.
Now tell me they also fought in the Bible. Right! Obviously! But did you know that among the 3000 warriors who went into battle, there were 3000 Torah students who stayed in the tents and studied while their brothers were fighting? The borrowers did not participate in the wars, because without their prayers - what are all the missiles and artillery worth?
The Six Day War - it does not have a book about war tactics - because there were no war tactics!!! The whole nation was euphoric about "my strength and the strength of my hand made me this brave" - and the reaction was no different when the Yom Kippur war came. Do you think you can manage on your own? forward! We saw horrific results that hurt the entire nation.
We saw the performance of the army in the Second Lebanon War. All the technological innovations really helped us.
Understand, I'm not attacking here because I don't think anyone has the right to hurt and insult any Jew under any circumstances! That's why I'll also ignore the derogatory nickname you applied to me.
I was exactly in the same head and therefore I understand where this concept comes from. There are many things that are not told in school... it's time for you to stop quoting the same slogans of "they don't enlist" and "they don't work" and research a little more about the population before you fight against it. Come on, maybe they have an explanation? Maybe listen to them once? You might ask why they are dressed differently, and dedicate their lives to the Torah? Maybe they really have answers too!!!
But what to do, you don't want answers. So it's a shame. You will continue to resent something that has a reason, you just can't understand the reason. Again not your fault, secular education is responsible for the glory of Jewish youth who do not even know what Judaism is. And don't tell me that lighting candles on Hanukkah and eating matzah on Pesach is the only characteristic. There is more nuance beyond superficial customs, and if you are open to hearing I would be happy to talk a little about it.
I don't want to have an aggressive and angry discussion, but an intellectual one. If you're not into it and just want to get on my nerves - then have a wonderful life!
Michal the liar:
Show me where I wrote how a religious person is defined.
Show me where I mentioned the word clothing or the word cap!
You have no answers to any of my claims, so you are trying to create a misrepresentation as if I made other claims.
And please do not mix religious morality with morality.
Religion did not invent morality - it only invented the one that invented morality!
When a religious person comes to convince a secular person that religion invented morality, he not only lies (which is immoral in itself) but he uses demagogic arguments (like - where do we have the law "thou shalt not kill"?)
The argument is demagogic because the questioner knows that the questioner knows by himself and without the help of religion that the law "thou shalt not kill" is a moral law. If he had not known this himself, this whole "rhetorical" question would not have achieved its goal because the person asked would not have seen this law as an example of a moral law!
This is also the reason why a religious demagogue never cites as an example of religious morality the law "murder the homosexual" or the law "murder the Sabbath breakers" or the These laws.
He knows that if he mentions all of this he will achieve exactly the opposite goal of what his lies were intended to achieve
I don't need to ask military commanders anything.
I myself was a commander in the army and I know exactly what the situation is.
I know that the ultra-orthodox hardly ever enlist.
I know that the students of the Hesder yeshiva serve a mandatory service that lasts exactly half the time that honest people serve.
I know that all the rebellions organized within the army were organized by religious hands.
And as a citizen, I encounter the lack of religious morality all the time - including the fact that the ultra-Orthodox consider it self-evident and absolutely moral that I have to provide for them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM1WED6daEg
The phrase has a 'role' suffix is inappropriate. One should say 'survival advantage' and of course this advantage can be a secondary product that develops alongside other roles that have become redundant and therefore degenerated.
If you read in the Khazari book, there is an explanation of how to make golam. Successfully.
Dear Camilla,
A human cocoon - meaning a human body functioning in all its organs and sinews, except that it has no soul inside (therefore it cannot speak) - as the name suggests, it is a cocoon. Raw, raw material without spirit. He has a soul - because he can move, etc., but the soul can only be brought from above.
Just as God created man - first he created the goch from the earth, and only finally "he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life" and the translation of Onculus means "a whispering spirit" - which means that the power of speech is given only to man. Animals communicate with each other, it is true, but this is not the definition of speech.
Today it is impossible to produce a golem, because today there are no people in the rank of the Maharal, there is currently a situation called the decline of the generations, which means that from a spiritual point of view there is a deterioration in this area, and you can see for yourself by all the discussions that are up here.
By the way, 1+1 does not always equal 2. Look at vectors. And have you heard of the vertigo phenomenon? It happens when a person in the plane feels, ready to give his life for that - now he is in a balanced state to the ground. So that's it - if he looks at the devices - he will see that he is in exactly the opposite situation. So what? He feels with all his heart that now he is fine, but without assistance from the side he will not make it through the flight safely. This is why human morality cannot come without guidance from someone who understands human nature, because then with every small deviation, we will feel as if everything is fine, until we reach a state of "I saw an upside down world", and the whole world is convinced that it is fine. Why? Because like everything, there must be a scale even for so-called more spiritual things. In Paris there is a meter that measures exactly the length of a meter. Why? Because if we ever make a small change, it is possible that in the end the measurements will not match the absolute truth, and a meter will become half a meter or a meter and a half. The same is true of society and good. Who decides what is good? Is it good to kill an old woman, who is about to die anyway, in order to sustain the life of a healthy young man, who can contribute to society more than her? See the book "Sin and its Punishment". After all, rationally one can find a reason why it is indeed good for society that he lives and she does not, and morality works according to what is good for society, doesn't it? So why is it wrong? because! Because it is written "Thou shalt not kill" - and it means in any condition (except the next to kill you) and in any situation and for any person. So! And the Nazis could not accept that.
And regarding robots - you can give me a whole book about robots and how they work, but it doesn't come close to the human body. They haven't even invented an artificial eye yet, or even more simply - an artificial nose that can smell. When they invent a device that can approach the function of a human eye, then we will talk more.
Dear Michael:
A) A religious person is not classified according to clothing/society or the whole list you wrote. A religious person is a person who follows the laws of religion. The religion strictly forbids crimes and all other things that are harmful to society. In the same way that when a person plays a role in a show and wears clothes that represent a certain character, so does a person who dresses like an ultra-Orthodox and does not follow the laws of religion, and it is absurd to think that only external clothing characterizes religion. Like the same actor who wears a costume, so is the same criminal who commits crimes disguised as an ultra-Orthodox. Do you think the way to gauge a religious person or not is before the color of his suit?
Secondly, please do not mix "religious morality" of other religions together with Jewish religious morality. The fact is that Christianity advocated peace, accepted the love of humanity, and in practice massacred anyone who went against the church. See entry Inquisition. And Islam enacts on its banner hatred of Jews and.. there is no need to detail their moral values..
The Jewish moral values are completely different from the moral values of other religions, because people did not invent them. Morality - the intention to live in a way that does not harm others, right? If so, you will be surprised that according to Jewish religious laws, if a person calls from his office at work for a private conversation at the company's expense, this is considered robbery, theft in broad daylight. Why? Because you are using money that is not yours for private needs. Downloads from the Internet - as above, and who among you does not use EMULE and all kinds of other download software? The state itself goes against this and openly says that it is forbidden - and who really listens to it?
How many times have you "completed equipment" in the army, because everyone does it that way? Or disposing of a weapon - and as long as you weren't caught, everything is fine? How many times have you driven after "one glass of beer" - mental control!!
So don't preach to me about immorality that religion has caused her! Ask commanders in the army which soldiers can be trusted more to guard equipment or not be late for guarding, causing their friend to lose precious sleep time? The Jewish religion is the morality of the world, and that's why the Nazis wanted to kill us - because our religion made them understand that there is a conscience - and of course having a conscience is not pleasant...
Where do consciences really come from? Does a cow also have remorse if she eats her friend's food? Or does Arya have qualms about preying on a mother of six? I suppose that the way of evolution somehow landed on us from an inner feeling - which comes from a chemical action that happens in our developed brain and causes electrical pulses that make the heart feel a little pinch as soon as we do something wrong.
And as for the fish - Khalas with the nonsense. His name indicates that he has a fin, and he is up to 10 days old, what do you keep digging? Degenerate/non-degenerate, white/black. The fact that it is written that every fish has a scale has a fin and this fish meets the condition.
Please don't respond to this anymore because I no longer have a way to convince you and you don't me so it's a waste of energy.
Because you are not ready to admit that the fish MONOPTERUS CUCHIA
Container,
The cocoon is very intriguing to me. What can you tell about the golem? I am ready in return to tell you a little about robots, so that we can compare who reached more impressive achievements, science with the robots or the Maharal with the golem. What is the best evidence that such a thing took place? And is it possible to create such a cocoon even today?
Another thing,
Since we are talking about people who are lawyers in essence (as opposed to scientists), all the discussion about fins, raising a ger, and the formation of lice from sweat and mice from mold, etc. are completely unnecessary, because a lawyer will do the simple thing of changing definitions (sometimes they call it simple vs. ). This is how they will change the definition of a fin so that it includes a fold of skin without rays that is not used for swimming (which they themselves demanded should exist and does not exist), this is how they will change the definition of the act of raising sweat, perspiration and lethargy in general will become something else and only fools like us mistakenly thought that sweat = Zeh, but it turns out that's not the case, oh and the big alligators are actually dinosaurs (why? G-d!)
As befits lawyers, there is no problem writing contradictory sentences one after the other until it seems as if they were written specifically for a satirical sketch, for example this:
"Read in the Torah a few passages about a man who was sold into slavery, and what his rights are, and what the idea of being a slave actually is. Who do you think invented equal rights? That a man loves to love his wife as his body and to respect her more than his body?"
The connection between the rights of a slave (who even if he has any rights, by his very status there is no equality of rights at all between him and, for example, his owner) with attributing the invention of the value of equality of rights to the same source in two consecutive sentences is a wonderful laugh of common sense.
Ignoring all the "moral" horrors that religion allowed and in some cases still allows today, while waving a fig leaf of moral values that were and still are secular people or from other religions who advocated the same values for other reasons is similar to that polite rapist who made sure to drive the victim home so she wouldn't have to walk around alone in the dark The Jewish religion boasts moral values that are found, and in abundance, in other religions as well and surprisingly even in complete secularists and even atheists, but makes sure to ignore the terrible moral values it holds. The answer to this in terms of religion is that the secular (as well as other religions) have examples of immoral behavior. The fact that even among religious people there are examples of immoral behavior of the very same types (drugs, violence, sex crimes, acts of cheating and theft, and much more) is completely ignored at best or at worst one of the most idiotic arguments is presented that goes something like - yes, he grew up in a religious home , he is brought up in religious institutions, he lives among the religious society, dresses like them, wears a kippah, puts on a tefillin, goes to synagogue... But if he raped then he is not religious, because a real religious person would not act like that, because a real religious person is moral. This works great even if that person is a certified rabbi who has satisfied one of the things mentioned before. So here is proof that religion is the most moral because all religious people are moral and those who are not moral are necessarily not religious and therefore the first argument continues to be valid. parable
Michael,
She already proved to us that: 1 = 0
"You don't believe in miracles - so read providence stories, which I'm sure you also had and just didn't see. The Gulf War - dozens of missiles were fired at the most densely populated city in Israel and not a single person was killed (one - from a heart attack!)"
So I guess she will prove the rest by induction 🙂
And of course, Michal, you will find me "proof" that the Euphrates and the Tigris come from a common source, and also "proof" of your fish lie, and also "proof" of the trachea of the cow, and also "proof" of the lice that are created from human sweat, and also "proof" of the mice that are created from the withered
And of course, since out of the thousands of existing proofs I brought you 6 and you want to lie and claim that I didn't bring any proof, then "prove" to me that 6=0
Michal:
The rabbit does not rummage.
It is impossible to bring proof of something wrong, but it is clear to me that you do not understand this either.
I have just brought you proof that a rabbit does make a noise, contrary to what you think. So what facts are you talking about???
You didn't bring me one proof, and I'm the dreamer? Get out of the movie
Michal:
Already at the beginning of my previous response I said that you should not let the facts confuse you and it is clear to me that it is not possible to have a discussion with you.
So continue to dream gold
As for the rabbit, you should read it.http://tora.us.fm/tnk1/tora/wyqra/tm91.html And the fish, many discussions have already been held and it has already been proven that this fish, whose name indicates that it has a fin, has fins, one in the tail and others that come off after 10 days.
Sticking to nonsense for religious morality - without the Torah there is no morality. Who do you think invented morality? The Greeks? Who threw deformed babies off the cliff because they weren't perfect enough? Maybe the Egyptians? That they slaughtered 100 babies every day to make Pharaoh baths? Maybe we will go further, Russians, French, Italians, Germans, communists, anti-Semites, fascists and Nazis. Do you think the idea of rehabilitating prisoners is new? Who do you think were the first to do this? Read in the Torah a few passages about a man who was sold into slavery, and what his rights are, and what the idea of being a slave actually is. Who do you think invented equal rights? That a man likes to love his wife as his body and respect her more than his body? Exactly the case deals with the daughters of Zelophehad, who inherited an estate in the Land of Israel because there were no sons at home. In Europe, a daughter was never an heir, the estate would go to a close/distant family, until a hundred years ago in total.
I'm not the opacity, you haven't yet brought a single proof that refutes something from the Torah, because you don't know enough to refute. First of all, those who do not study Torah cannot understand what is written there. You take a verse, take it out of context, interpret it the way you see fit, and claim that there is no truth in the Torah. Secondly, you again ignore what science cannot explain.
I'm not the one living in the imagination. I live in the real world. Today's reality is like in the Matrix, you think that what you touch and taste is reality - and it's not. You want the here and now, and who cares what happens after you die - so that's it - that there is something after you die and of course you don't consider it because it's easier to live without commitment.
And one last thing - the test of the result shows the amazing results of religious morality, compared to a society that lives without religion, and in practice without morality. Teenagers who on summer vacation throw off the yoke and go down to the lower ranks, at the age of 15 already have relationships, think only about money and not to talk about the treatment of their parents. And look at the society that lives with religion and Torah. The test result speaks for itself.
Michal:
It is clear in advance that you will not let the facts spoil your delusions.
In the Torah it is written that the hare gives birth to live, and in the hare it is written that it does not.
In the Torah it is written that the Euphrates and the Tigris come from a common source and on Earth it is written that they do not.
There is a lot more nonsense in the Torah, yes - including nonsense about the fish, but, as mentioned, it doesn't bother you.
The fact that it is permissible to lie is not written in the Torah, but it is part of the religious culture, and therefore you will certainly not be impressed by the fact that the Sages said that lice develop from human sweat and mice from mold, or that a cow's trachea is divided into three parts, one of which reaches the liver, and another huge and entertaining variety of nonsense
And what's funny?
that you accept all these nonsense claims only to justify your adherence to religious morality, that if anyone is looking for a sample of his laws, he is welcome to read this cluster
You are cornered and therefore you run away to your jobs. The truth is that I also have papers to submit, but I don't mind postponing them for two minutes in order to talk to a Jewish person who made a bit of a mistake along the way.
In any case, you didn't really address any claim, you dismissed everything with "malicious intentions", etc.. When you have real answers, I'd love to hear, as I said before - you have proof, show me.
And who exactly were our ancestors 50000 years ago, do you have proof that there were people then? Our ancestors are the ones who were in Egypt and Mount Sinai and built the first house and the second house and went into exile for 2000 years and returned to their border..
Am I living in an imaginary world? You don't know the history of your people!!
Are their minds closed to reality? You don't see reality as it is! That there is a reason and a purpose for everything, nothing happens without a reason, there is reward and punishment, and private supervision.
Nor did you refer to circumcision. Is yours correct? And did you do for your son? Why? Where does this strange custom come from? from our ancestors
Michal, if you believe in superstitions, you are not on the right site, and forgive me, but I have work to submit. I am ready to explain to people with an open mind, but to people who seal themselves off from reality and live in an imaginary world, it is difficult for me to explain.
And besides, just asking, are you saying that until 100 years ago God was a fact, do you have any idea what our ancestors believed 50 thousand years ago?
On the contrary, the fact that God exists was a fact that no one argued with until the last hundred years. The burden of proof is on the one who refutes a claim! You claim that there is no - and this is a theory. Come on, prove to me that there isn't.
And exactly - "When a certain phenomenon has no scientific basis, it's a waste of time to argue" - and explain to me again about clinical death. After all, there is no scientific proof for this and yet there are 8 million proofs of the phenomenon. And you ignore it the third time.
And you didn't tell me if you made a covenant with your son, probably yes, and probably he will also make a covenant with his son, because it is already known in prophecies from thousands of years ago that this will be the only commandment that the people of Israel will perform in these times. But of course it's also nonsense, isn't it, it's easy to predict exactly what will happen and exactly what mitzvah the people of Israel will observe and in what years...
When a certain phenomenon has no scientific basis, it is a waste of time to find out. But if you insist, there was a very long discussion between a commenter named Shalom and other commenters, and he claimed proofs that were refuted one by one by the others. People even went to the trouble of napping and watching the identified YouTube videos he pointed to.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/does-evolution-disprove-god-0711
And besides, tomorrow someone will come and say that little sprites half a meter long with four wings and a stick are a scientific fact and I have to prove him wrong? The one who makes an extraordinary claim is the one who bears the burden of proof and does not disprove the legend.
post Scriptum
Father, you did not refer to clinical death. Do you have an explanation? If so, I'd love to hear, maybe I'm really living a lie, but like you, I did some research and this is the conclusion I came to. This and of course many private miracles, if you want to hear I'd be happy to tell, but if you want to respond in a serious way, treat everything that is said and don't dismiss it with "all the converts say that" - on the contrary, if a lot of people say it, it's probably based on something. In the discussion, do not answer what is convenient for you. And if you don't know, at least be humble and say "I don't know, I'll find out".
And dear R.H. The fish you brought me has a small fin in its belly. Do you think you are the first to find it? And what is this site "for liberation from religion and the enlightenment of the Haskalah". Enlightened? Study some Gemara and see what wisdom is. You know, don't go far, learn from the Khazarian book, and see what enlightenment is, what true philosophy is. We saw where the secular enlightenment brought humanity, very enlightened people were the Nazis, lovers of music, dance, morals. Yes, they also had morals. and education? Since the development of education, people only get more complicated with life. And the wisdom that you claim that the education brought, is again already known about. Today people don't have an education, they have more knowledge and that's a huge difference. The Jews were always considered educated even before the universities.
Plato was also very enlightened, spoke very nicely about how noble a person should be and an exemplary example, until his students saw him eating like a pig in a luxury restaurant. Really enlightened.
And no, my religion is not based on a fish, but it is a mini-alef example of the truth of the Torah, and that everything written in it is true. What about an animal that spreads its hooves and doesn't raise a leg, have you found it yet? And what about prophecies that are coming true now?
I have a question for you, and no offense, but will you do/have you circumcised your child?
Father, what do you compare between producing a human with a robot? It will take another thousand years before we invent a machine that even approaches the sophistication of the human body. Maybe if you learn a little about him you will appreciate it more. Do you even know what procedure it is to digest the omelet you ate in the morning? Do you even know how the circulatory system is built? Do you know how the human brain works? A little modesty sir, professors who have learned a little about the subject admit that we are still not close to understanding these things, and you are talking to me about robots...grow up.
Container,
All your faith rests on one fish?
You write: "Find one fish in the world that has scales and no fin - and you can disprove the entire Torah - because if one thing is not true in it, nothing is true."
So why don't you check the fish - MONOPTERUS CUCHIA and come back with the question?
Did the Maharal from Prague know how to make a golem?
400 years before robots were invented.
Well, this is just one example.
And if you claim that all of your text is self-produced, do a Google search and you will find many things from it in the mouths of the current generation of rabbis.
We do not see ourselves as unbelievers, indeed it is very difficult to deny the existence of an imaginary friend as you defined yourself.
To quote pan clichés...malicious intentions...a random sample of creatures that survived the entire chain...tell me, what exactly malicious intentions do you mean? Is Judaism a missionary religion? With all due respect to the celebrated scientists of all kinds, their knowledge does not reach the end of the sages of Israel, and I am not talking about the sages of our generation. If you ever read about the first ones, the Maharal from Prague who knew how to create a human puppet, you will understand that you are not dealing with children who claim that they have a cool imaginary friend to Allah, but with Torah sages who know that the human mind of today is not developed enough to understand. Do you know the parable of the orchard? The four who entered Pardes and only Rabbi Akiva left. It is about wisdom that has not yet been discovered in the world, with all due respect to sending a spacecraft into space.
"A random sample of creatures that survived the entire chain" - is there a possibility that a nation that for 2000 years was in exile, numerically less than half a percent of the Och, was trampled and humiliated and murdered throughout the generations, and yet still lives and exists today? A case that they survived and the chain lasted so long? Huge giants fell and disappeared, while a small nation survived everything, when the whole world still wants to destroy it? case? Give me scientific proof that such a thing is possible, without someone protecting and guarding the people, as it is written in the Torah that this will be the case. Also, why do they hate us so much? There is a rational explanation for this phenomenon, that in every society they have found reasons to hate us - whether we are rich, poor, successful, unsuccessful, mixing or separating from society, dressed differently or dressed the same, speak Yiddish or speak the local language, blond, brown-haired, beautiful Ugly... what is the scientific explanation for this? But it is already written in the Torah that it will be so, because Mount Sinai is called that because of the hatred that descended upon the world against us the moment we received the Torah and became a different people, with a different purpose in the world.
You don't believe in miracles - so read providence stories, which I'm sure you also had and just didn't see. The Gulf War - dozens of missiles were fired at the most densely populated city in the country and not a single one was killed (one - from a heart attack!), by chance right? By chance, dozens of missiles went astray...do me a favor! If you want to believe in science - go with it to the end and you will find conclusive evidence for everything that happens in life, don't fixate on evolution - go with your truth to the end and explain phenomena that science does not know and cannot explain. For example - clinical death. If you claim that there is no soul, because there is a sign that there is something beyond matter - how do you explain a phenomenon that 8 million people experienced, tell about the same experiences, describe the same things, know how to remember what the room in which they died looked like even though they were unconscious. There is no hormone that can make people who were blind at the time of their death know exactly who was in the room at the moment they died, a sign that something else, not the eye, predicted what happened there.
If the Torah was not given from heaven, you can disprove it in a very simple way. Find one fish in the world that has scales and no fin - and you can disprove the entire Torah - because if one thing is not true in it, nothing is true. But you won't find it, because God said there is no such animal, and even if you search all the lakes in the world you won't find it. And how can "the one who wrote" the Torah know this? He was an expert on all the varieties that exist?
Or more simply, if you don't want to go swimming all over the world - find an animal other than a pig that spreads its hoof and doesn't raise a pig. just no? There are a million types of animals in the world, so there must be another such animal. So that's it - no! Good luck in your search.
Look, faith is not a spiritual, emotional thing based on "one day I felt" - as members of various sects will tell you. The verse says "And you knew the name and the return on your heart" - first of all you need to know and then believe. As I said earlier - unlike other religions that are based on nothing - imitations of Judaism from which all the great religions grew - Judaism is based on deep knowledge and strong foundations - so science is not scary Rather, they only strengthen it.
But the truth is that it doesn't matter what I say here, because before the Parsha of the week from two weeks ago, "black" they learn that "in the way a person wants to go, they lead him" - that is, whoever chooses not to believe - will not believe because this is the free choice that a person has. Even if the truth is placed in front of the eyes they will not see. Example - a person who is informed that he is sick and chooses not to believe, even if they show him all the test results - can continue to live a lie.
Therefore, the discussion is essentially meaningless. You are not the first heretics, the truth is that you are not even heretics because to be a heretic a person must know what he is a heretic. A heretic is a person who has studied the Pentateuch, Mishnah, Gemara and Zohar and then can decide that he does not believe. Our generation is not a heretic - just a baby who was captured. That's why I don't judge their concept, I just pray that the people of Israel, who were willing to die for the truth that they knew like sunlight until a few generations ago, will wake up.
Good luck
Hello Michal, do you have any answers or do you only know how to quote clichés from mahbatim.
Evolution is the basis of all life sciences. It is impossible to develop a medicine without considering evolution and this is just an example.
Darwin did not regret it, read his autobiography - it was also published in Hebrew about two years ago. This is another action.
Intermediate creatures - go and see in any nature museum, I was for example in the New York Museum of Nature and there is a demonstration of the evolution of horses and man.
The scientists who disapprove of the theory are scientists in fields other than biology, in which case their opinion does not count any more than the opinion of other private individuals.
Randomness is not the main factor in evolution, for example the inheritance of traits to the next generation is not random and heredity is the basis of evolution, because it creates a pool of traits from which the survivors of the next generation will emerge. It is true that afterwards there are also random factors that will cause a certain creature to live or die, there is also an effect of the environment - changes in the environment cause that a feature that was previously neutral suddenly becomes vital.
Therefore, the example of the Boeing plane is simply delusional, and the fact that it is repeated only shows that they do not understand how evolution works, not to mention the malicious intent that most of the haters (both Jews and Christians) have.
And most importantly - 99.99999% of the creatures that lived until today have already become extinct, what you see today is a random sample of creatures that survived the entire chain. Even man causes the extinction of other creatures due to environmental changes so that evolution continues to occur even today because the niches that become vacant will be occupied by other animals, initially less suitable for them and later they will adapt to them.
In conclusion, if you wish to examine Zamir Cohen's scientific knowledge, you are welcome to enter the following link
https://www.hayadan.org.il/zamir-cohens-changeover-blofs-140908/
to my father,
The difference between the struggle between Galileo and the church and between the struggle between evolution and Judaism - that the church was not ready to accept a proven fact that could contradict the shaky principles on which it rests. Contrary to that - Judaism is not against science - on the contrary! Science confirms what is already known in Judaism from 3000 years ago. You are invited to read the published book "The Upheaval" by Rabbi Zamir Cohen, where there is wonderful detail about modern scientific discoveries, and how they already knew about it in the Torah. You are also welcome to take a look at the following site which contains many films on the subject and see why we do not struggle with science, as it only confirms the truth of the Torah.http://hidabroot.org/Search.asp
Evolution is not science. This is a theory like millions of theories that have risen and fallen throughout history. Even Darwin himself admitted at the end of his days that his theory was unproven and retracted it. Of course the book was censored, because otherwise it would oblige scientists to admit that there is a G-d - and of course you are not ready for that yet...if there is indeed evolution: how come they didn't find the intermediate creatures? Scientists today themselves disapprove of the theory, as it does not have a single conclusive proof. Theory is not science. It's time to open your eyes and see the one who created the world. To say that the world was created randomly is like saying that a Boeing 707 was created by a tornado that hit a junkyard.
Michal, science has a mechanism to correct itself as apparently happened in the case of the appendix, although this also needs to be confirmed, religion does not have similar mechanisms. See the persistent struggle of the church in Galileo and the struggle today against evolution.
When I was a student in high school, I majored in biology. When we got to the class about the digestive system, I was intrigued to know what the function of appendicitis actually is. I was intrigued because a few years before it had been surgically removed, and I wanted to know what was the organ that caused me pain then, and was removed without batting an eyelid when it was discovered to be inflamed. The teacher smiled and fired saying "Just an evolutionary remnant." He has no need" and continued the discussion about the intestine.
I wanted to tell her that nothing the Holy One, blessed be He, created was created without a reason, just as everything that happens to us in life does not just happen. But I kept quiet, because I really didn't know what its role was and why it was consumed.
I wanted to say thank you to the one who researched and discovered with God's help the role of the appendix, and gave me a crushing answer to that teacher who does not believe that everything in the world has a reason and a motive, and a purpose for everything.
And for all those without faith who still do not see the wonders of the Creator: it is easy to hide behind science and let it solve all your questions, but it is time for you to see that science does not contradict faith - it only strengthens it, as happened to me!
Regarding the fundamental question about the benefit of the appendix, it is worth noting that the damage and danger of the appendix is immeasurably greater than the benefit it brings us. Today, thanks to surgery, the threat of appendicitis has been removed, but "on the side of nature" before surgical treatments, there was a 1 in 15 chance of having appendicitis. And of the loci in this inflammation, the mortality rate was over 20%, which is a lot. So to say that there is no need to jump and remove the appendix because it is useful is one thing, but still from the point of view of evolution versus creation, the appendix is a clear example of a degenerate and harmful organ, a relic of an ancient past, and not a symbol of planned creation. The information according to Coyne's book (why evolution is true), pp. 66-65.
It's fun to find out what anti-elegant people there are in Israel
What else is being cut for us without us knowing that it is useful
Here I wrote.
Most mammals have an area corresponding to the appendix, which is actually the end of the intestine. In many mammals this area has a structure and shape similar to the human appendix, it is in the same place as in humans, and is rich in lymphatic tissue as in humans. Thus, it is a homologous structure to the human appendix.
According to an article by Shoshani from 1998, the appendix in wombats, opossums, various rodents and rabbits is very similar in structure to that of humans. However, it seems to have evolved differently than humans, so comparing the two is like comparing the wings of a bat to the wings of a bird. Especially in the rabbit, it is clear that the appendix has a very different role than in humans.
It is hard to say whether this is a mistake in the article or not. I guess after ten years of research in the field, Parker knows what he's talking about. I cited the source there, which is Parker's university and his research, and apparently they are referring to some feature shared by rabbits and humans.
or not. You are welcome to send an email to Parker and ask him about this point.
Anyway, thanks for the attention and corrections.
to David Nice for noticing.. just that there is a mistake in the article
The truth is that most great apes, for example gibbons, chimpanzees, gorillas, have an appendix.
post Scriptum
You don't seem to be one to have theories, and the facts don't interest them.
To the best of my memory, the number one cause of death in koalas is appendicitis, so the claim that - in addition to humans - only rabbits, wombats and opossums have an appendix is a bit strange (especially since all primates have one).
Williams and Meyer published an article in 1994, according to which the removal of the appendix is not accompanied by any side effects on human health. There are also many testimonies about people who are born without an appendix and this does not affect their health. I can't find the full article at the moment, but if anyone wants to look, the name of the article is:
Williams, RA and Myers, P. (1994) Pathology of the appendix. Chapman and Hall Medical: New York, NY.
By the way, another theory about the appendix is that it serves as an organ of the immune system. The immune system tissue within it is used to create white blood cells that are used to protect the body. In 2004, it was also claimed that it produces hormones during fetal development, and that it 'trains' the immune system, by exposing the body to risk factors, so that the body produces antibodies against them.
Who is right? No one knows.
Regarding the biofilms -
I'm not an expert on them, but it sounds strange to me too that the entire biofilm would detach from the intestinal wall. I am willing, however, to accept the claim that parts - big or small - of the biofilm are 'lost' during the intestinal disease, and as a result there is a higher risk of the multiplication of harmful bacteria in the intestines.
Following on from Peretz's answer, I think it is possible to reach conclusions by examining the health of those with appendices to those who lack an appendix among humans. The conclusions could be more accurate than raising a hypothesis as was done in the article.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
The conclusion from this is to test a sample of a population that had their appendix removed and check how much it affected their digestive capacity compared to what it was before the appendix was removed!
It seems elementary to me..and if they did it..then what were the results?!
I enjoy reading Ami Bachar who is not afraid to admit the limitations of human memory! A real scientist unlike the others who are confident that they have all the answers!
I heard about this study a few days before it was published in Science. To the best of my recollection, the authors also claim that this is only a hypothesis and that they have no evidence for it. They suggest a mechanism and maybe ways to test it, but it's still not a real theory.
Referring to the respondents, I find myself once again agreeing with Mr. Sabdarmish regarding the emptying of the bowels after a diarrhea mask. It seems to me, and I'm not an expert on the intestines (but I am an expert on biofilms), that it would be difficult to impossible to clean the intestines of a certain bacterium(s) even if we use the peak of our medical technology there. Of course the key word here is "I think" and as mentioned I am not an expert on the intestines.
The idea of the appendix as a storage depot for "good" bacteria is an interesting idea, although it may be a bit forced. We may have organs that are simply not needed, but from an evolutionary point of view they have not yet disappeared. There may be no evolutionary need to eliminate such a mechanism even if it has no contribution to the need to provide fertile and competitive offspring. It is possible that the function of the appendix is completely different from anything we have ever imagined and finally - maybe it really is a warehouse.
post Scriptum.
At least with regard to rabbits, I think that their appendix is a very active area of digestion and if my memory serves me correctly (which is very likely to be the case) the caecum of the rabbit has the main activity of breaking down cellulose or cellulose in Hebrew.
It is said that the only mammals with an appendix are rabbits, opossums and wombats. It's strange that our ape relatives don't have…
Eli and Sabdarmish Yehuda -
I believe that Dr. Carter is referring to severe intestinal diseases that persist over a relatively long period of time, with frequent bouts of diarrhea. In these cases, it seems likely to me that a large part of the bacterial population in the gut is indeed depleted. Maybe not all the bacteria, but probably enough bacteria are lost to clear the way for harmful bacteria that would love to settle there.
In our modern society, there are not so many cases of severe and frequent bouts of diarrhea, so the appendix is probably not necessary to the same extent.
I find it hard to believe that after diarrhea the intestines remain without bacteria.
I have another idea, perhaps, and the appendix was only given a role and importance in the last decades, when the antibiotic drugs, and also others, which when ingested usually destroy bacteria indiscriminately, began to enter medicine.
The bacteria hidden in the appendix are probably less vulnerable than antibiotics and other drugs. It could be an interesting study to check if this is so.
Have a good day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
P.S. And for anyone who asks what my medical knowledge is, then, I don't have any.
What happens after diarrhea, in the case where the appendix was removed?
Who repopulates the intestinal wall?