Dr Rick

You do not appear to be educable.

<strong> You are the unqualified person who started questioning my background; that was a foolish move that left you wide-open for criticisms about your own ignorance. It is disingenuous to now whine about about an off-topic ad hominem issue that you introduced in the first place.

Your strawman arguments about surgery and endoscopy have nothing to do with fetal circulation, moving the umbilical vessels would not pose any problems with access or pressure as you have wrongly asserted, and your questions about "pressure management" have been answered: they are irrelevant.

<strong> You are wrong, and your answers and concerns are invalid. Circulatory fetal pressures are not driven by either placement of the umbilical vessels or the placenta. You asked me to educate you, so read the following carefully: placing the umbilical vessels in the thorax instead of the abdomen would have no affect on fetal circulatory pressures. There would be no change in the pressures, which are driven by a pump (the heart) whose effectiveness would not be compromised by moving the umbilical vessels into the thorax.
Thoracic umbilical vessels could access the thoracic vasculature by several different routes.


<strong> How would a fetus ever use its circulation "out-of-specification.?"
If there is some circumstance that the fetus encounters that was foreseeable, failure to intelligently design the system for that foreseeable circumstance is a design flaw.

<strong> You're deluded.

Rick

Babylon Sister

VanderZ: What color is the sky on your planet?

Vanderzyden

Mere claims, Rick. Claims, not explanations. You do not explain.

Here is a characterization of our exchange:

V: Explain, explain, explain....

R: Wrong. That's it. Goodbye.

V: Explain, explain...

R: You don't know what you're talking about.

V: Tell me specifically what's wrong.

R: How dare you question me? I am a surgeon. I cannot possibly be wrong on this.

V: Explain more. Indicate that doctors are not divine.

R: No, you don't understand, you are "unqualified". You are "beneath" me.

V: Explain more...

R: You are "deluded".

I thought we could have a discussion. Instead, I'm told that I have no business questioning a medical authority.

So, what's the use of proceeding?

Vanderzyden

Dr Rick

I've explained in very simple terms, despite your assertions to the contrary, why it's not hard to access the thoracic viscera and vasculature, why there would be no problems with pressure changes and reversed flows, why the fetal circulatory system does not appear to be intelligently designed, and why your objections to potential improvements if there was intelligent design to the system are groundless. I've also explained my background because you asked me about it and wrongly asserted that I don't know this subject, an ironic accusation, to say the least.

I can not more simply explain to you why you are wrong when I have employed such simple and straight-forward explanations already. There's no more simple explanation needed than that the thoracic innards are easy to get to (you claimed they are not) because the thorax is not solid, and the ribs and clavicles are easy to get around. I provided simple examples of how it is done every day. How can this be beyond your comprehension?

You have been repeatedly advised that the pressures in the fetal circulation would not be altered by moving the umbilical blood vessels because the pump that drives the pressure would not be affected by such a shift (you claimed it would be).

Here is a characterization of our exchange:

V: The proposed improvements to the fetal circulation wouldn't work for a bunch of reasons that make no sense.

R: They would work; your objections are not valid for the following reasons....

V: You're not a surgeon, you're not qualified to argue with me, and you're going to hell.

R: I'm a very specialized surgeon, in fact, and I know exactly what I am talking about, but you do not.

V: I'm shocked! What an unfair thing to do! How dare you question my qualifications?! You're going to hell!

R: You don't know what you're talking about.

V: Tell me specifically what's wrong.

R: One more time, here's why the thorax is easy to access, the circulatory pressures wouldn't be altered, and the design would work...

V: Explain more. Indicate that doctors are not divine.

R: No, you don't understand, you keep making spurious claims, and I never claimed to be divine: you're the one that first bought an ad hominem challenge. There is no reason that the proposed mechanism wouldn't work and prevent some of the problems that accompany the evolutionarily derived fetal circulatory system we now have.

V: Explain more...oh, don't bother: you're going to hell.

R: You are "deluded".

<strong> You had no business launching an ad hominem attack upon my qualifications. You should have stuck with the issues and tried to learn something rather than make a fool of yourself

<strong> You tell us: are you educable?

Rick

RufusAtticus

Vander,

Is the reason why you're ignoring this thread: <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001553" target="_blank">Evolutionary Theory and Medicine</a>?

Vanderzyden

Rick: That was your last chance. You refuse to address my main concerns, and you again fail to justify your position on anything more than your credentials.

Rufus: You're right I should not get hung up on this topic. However, I won't be contributing to that thread any time soon, since I have several other requests pending.


Vanderzyden

[ October 21, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]</p>

Doubting Didymus

Darn, rick, you blew it. Here you had a chance to explain something to vanderzyden, who only wants to be educated, the dear, and you had to go and COMPLETELY ignore ALL of his points. Why couldn't you have adressed such points as the difficulty of navigating the thorax or why there would be no problems with pressure changes and reversed flows? Why didn't you point out that the new proposed system would iron out some existing flaws? I can't see you doing any of that, anywhere in the thread. This, however, could be due to the fact that my eyes are atrophied.

[ October 21, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]</p>

lpetrich

What other requests?

Like trying to invent some Panglossian explanation for these early-embryo circulation features:

Fishlike multiple aortas and aortic arches
Vitelline blood vessels for the yolk sac

MrDarwin

Vanderzyden, I'm still waiting for explanations of a couple of your own claims.

Can you tell me why blood coming from the placenta is under "higher pressure"? Higher than what? Precisely where and how is this pressure being generated?

Could you please point out in precisely which "many places" this mixing would occur?

And you still haven't answered my question about childbirth and doctors. Will you and your wife depend on this system running smoothly and optimally--dare I say flawlessly--when the time comes, or will you have a doctor on hand, just in case?

Devilnaut

I really wonder if Vander thinks he has anyone fooled. I can't imagine so.