Science desk
< March 7	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 8[edit]

If IVF plus embryo selection for desirable genes will eventually become a reality, would it be practically possible for someone who previously got a bilateral epididymectomy to likewise engage in this?[edit]

If IVF plus embryo selection for desirable genes will eventually become a reality, would it be practically possible for someone who previously got a bilateral epididymectomy to likewise engage in this--specifically in IVF plus embryo selection for desirable genes?

Basically, I'm thinking of screening embryos' genes to determine which embryos have genes that indicate a greater likelihood of them developing desirable traits if they will be subsequently implanted and born. I am well-aware that this currently isn't a reality but that it probably will eventually become a reality. I am simply curious about whether, once this actually becomes a reality, someone previously having a bilateral epididymectomy (but not a bilateral orchiectomy) would in any way create an obstacle to this person doing IVF plus embryo selection using his own sperm and someone else's egg.

Based on the information here, the more embryos that one would produce through IVF, the more potential that one would have in selecting embryos for traits such as intelligence/IQ (based on these embryos' genes) due to the fact that, with more embryos, one would have a larger number of embryos to choose from and pick the best one(s):

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B0VFZjPIQAA7ok1.png

Specifically, though, I'm wondering if previously having a bilateral epididymectomy done would in any way prevent or interfere with a man's ability to create a large number of (implantable) embryos through IVF. Again, if there are less embryos to choose from, the potential gains from embryo selection for traits such as intelligence/IQ would be less than if there are more embryos to choose from. Also, again, I'm well-aware that this isn't actually technology that's fully developed right now, but this technology might nevertheless be successfully developed and commercialized, say, 20 or 30 years down the line. 68.96.93.207 (talk) 01:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Futurist is editing logged-out again. In any case, read Eugenics. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is wrong with eugenics if it is actually done non-coercively, though? I mean, when someone looks for a sperm donor or egg donor based on various desirable traits (such as intelligence/IQ, lack of criminality, great personality, lack of mental illnesses, et cetera), wouldn't they also be practicing eugenics? I mean, they're choosing whom to reproduce with based on various desirable traits because they want to increase the odds of their children having the same or similar traits. 68.96.93.207 (talk) 02:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're assuming that those traits are at least significantly genetically encoded. Also, define intelligence. And "great personality". And what counts as a mental illness? --Khajidha (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence would presumably be whatever IQ tests measure. As for "great personality", that's up to the beholder, but it could certainly include things such as no criminal record. As for mental illness, there's anxiety, ADHD, schizophrenia, paranoia, depression, suicidal thoughts, et cetera. Futurist110 (talk) 01:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I was asking about the logistical and practical feasibility of this following a bilateral epididymectomy. I consider the morality debate over non-coercive eugenics to already be settled as a result of people choosing their sperm donors or egg donors based on desirable traits. 68.96.93.207 (talk) 02:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly the kind of thing that creeps me out with IVF. (Also the math in your link is bad, the high IQ gains will be much smaller.) 93.138.43.92 (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is the math in my link bad? Futurist110 (talk) 01:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me you're needlessly bundling two independent questions: whether fertilization in vitro + embryo selection can be used for eugenics, and whether viable sperm can be obtained without a working epididymis. Given that you start by assuming that the answer to the first question is yes, why not ask the latter more simply? —Tamfang (talk) 09:04, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know not only whether viable sperm can be obtained without a working epididymis, but also whether the amount of sperm that I would obtain in such a way would actually be enough to do IVF in such a way that procedures a lot of embryos. As I said, I need a lot of embryos in order to choose for the best traits among them. Futurist110 (talk) 01:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Navel Orange with Soft Spot[edit]

I bought a bag of navel oranges and put them in the fruit and vegetable compartment in my refrigerator. I noticed that one of the oranges has a soft spot. Should I throw the orange away without peeling it, or is it safe to peel the orange and determine after peeling it whether the orange is fit for human consumption?

Robert McClenon (talk) 03:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If in doubt / Throw it out. Or, at least, ask the fruit guy at your grocery store. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Baseball Bugs - I can ask the produce person the next time I am at the store, but that isn't relevant to the situation at hand, which is that the oranges were in a bag, and I bought the bag and brought it home, and the soft spot was only in view when I opened the bag. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about returning it for a refund (a la Kramer) but just to get his expert opinion. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:53, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oranges are segmented under the skin. If you can peel the orange and determine which segments are soft and not nice to eat then discard those and enjoy the remainder. I say this as a person who eats overripe black bananas, bruised apples, slightly mouldy bread, cake and cheese and is still healthy. There is far too much food wastage already to justify throwing anything away because it is partially uneatable. Richard Avery (talk) 07:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Richard Avery - I am interpreting that as advice to go ahead and peel the orange and eat the sections that are good and throw out the sections that are questionable. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Precisely. Richard Avery (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but there is not enough food wastage in the world. I have often eaten slightly stale bread, however I totally subscribe to "when in doubt throw it out". Food "waste" is also known as "fertilizer". Fertilizer is not wasted food, but is part of the natural cycle of life. If there is not abundance in the human world, there is poverty. When the total amount of food produces a situation of hunger, inevitable shortage results in starvation. Abundance of food is possibly the most important thing in the world as far as humans are concerned. If you are running out of food, and the orange does not taste bad... eat it. If you've got no fear of running out of oranges... it will make a fine houmous. ~ R.T.G 17:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to cross the medical advice line but since the statement was made..... Although I dislike food waste as well, and often eat food well past its prime including part of the food where some is too bad to eat, I would urge caution with anything mouldy. The problem with fungi is the bit you see may be only be a small part of the whole. Depending in the type of food, there could easily be significant growth you cannot see. The general advice is it's fine to cut off the mouldy bits of most hard food albeit cutting off significant extra [1]. Further 'I didn't get sick after eating it, so I'm sure there was no harmful effect', is probably not a safe bet. A number of fungi produce Mycotoxins like Aflatoxin. While these can have acute effects, there is also evidence of effects from chronic exposure, particularly as carcinogens. So while it may not kill you outright, regular consumption may have an appreciable increase of your risk of liver cancer (as an example). The risks of chronic negative effects is probably not just from fungal growth either. Nil Einne (talk) 13:06, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have the orange still in the refrigerator. My thinking is that, at 4 C, any mold or whatever (and I don't know if it is mold at this point) isn't likely to spread to a neighboring orange, and that I can peel it when I get it out of the refrigerator, and see what it looks like inside. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My experience is that mould (BrE spelling) on fruit in a refrigerator does still spread, albeit more slowly than at room temperature. That said, a soft spot on an orange with no other aberrance doesn't necessarily indicate the presence of mould – it might just be where a recent inadvertant blow has softened the flesh. It may however provide an easy route for mould to enter. Why not just peel the orange immediately, inspect it, and eat however much of it appears wholesome? If in doubt, assign it to the compost. It's only one orange, after all. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.211.248 (talk) 23:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a kid, my dad had both a greengrocer's shop, and a hobby of making jam and marmalade. It was years before I realised you could get an orange that was intact around the whole surface - any soft or doubtful oranges left in the shop on a Saturday would come home, be sliced in half and then the good half went in the marmalade pan.

Oranges are segmented inside. If they suffer impact damage to the outside near the equator, this will affect a segment or two. It's a while before it spreads. If they're damaged at the ends, this can affect all the segments quite quickly.

The moulds on citrus tend to be quite specific: most moulds just won't attack fresh citrus, until the skin is damaged or the internal acidity is reduced. So mostly we see Penicillium sp., particularly P. digitatum (green mould) and P. italicum (blue mould). There are a couple of less-common others too: Monascus sp. (typically M. purpureus, which is traditionally used in China for food production) and (emerging recently in the US because of intensive farming and storage practices) Mucor sp., which never used to be an issue until we starting storing low-acidity citrus for ridiculous lengths of time.

So, don't eat citrus which tastes bad. But otherwise, get in there. Remove the affected segments, and don't expect a bruised orange to keep past a day (take the segments out and put them in the fridge). But if you're going to worry about moulds in food, don't start with citrus (you can eat a whole lemon that is covered with green mould and it won't harm you - in the Ukraine it might even be used to cure an infection). Worry about aflatoxins in nuts first. Be really wary around anything "pickled" in oil (you can't pickle stuff in oil). Never trust any food advice in the US, because the whole system is corrupted by the destructive influences of mega-scale farming. Certainly don't leave European regulation in favour of handing over national control to the US! But citrus really are the least of your worries. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, don't bother consulting your grocer face-to-face - just trust the unreferenced advice of a random internet user as to what's safe to eat and what isn't. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A grocer, whose livelihood depends on selling as much produce as possible, would of course never advise one to discard suspect but actually wholesome fruit and buy replacements (*cough*). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.211.248 (talk) 00:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why should OP trust the unreferenced advice of a random internet user as to whom to ask? 89.172.59.101 (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no substitute for a face-to-face with the grocer. At my store, I have often gotten good advice from the produce manager. That's why I'm telling the OP to do what I would do. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The unregistered editor asks, "Why not just peel the orange immediately, inspect it, and eat however much of it appears wholesome?" (And if you're an unregistered editor, you aren't previously known as anything, unless you are editing logged out, in which case you aren't an unregistered editor.) Because I wasn't hungry at the time, and was just putting the oranges in the refrigerator. (Yes, I could have peeled the orange anyway and left the good segments in the refrigerator for later in the afternoon or evening.) Robert McClenon (talk) 02:07, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is your health worth the risk of eating a possibly bad orange? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:39, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oranges should be discarded as soon as they start to become soft. Count Iblis (talk) 06:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Poop[edit]

What part of the brain causes the urge to poop in a human body? --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 03:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a leading question. The urge comes from one's gut; more specifically, from the nerves in the rectal muscles upon sensing rectal distention as caused by fecal mass descending from the colon. An alert signal is sent to the brain, which is helpful for exercising voluntary control, but not essential for the function. See further our article on Defecation. --Lambiam 09:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think his question was what part of the brain "receives" the urge to poop. 67.175.224.138 (talk) 15:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]

It depends on where your brain is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The gut has its own brain. Its relatively new or lesser known discovery. See Enteric nervous system and Intestinal epithelium, and maybe try some videos, [2][3][4] ~ R.T.G 21:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a more advanced complete walkthrough of the whole system... [5] ~ R.T.G 22:12, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Several parts of the brain may be involved. You might find Figure 1 in this source useful. It's a 2014 paper entitled "Brain and Gut Interactions in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: New Paradigms and New Understandings", but I think the same parts are involved in non-pathological cases. 86.157.60.106 (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]