Designs for the new body

Medical Matters: Did you ever wish that your body was designed a little differently? Say with an arm that could scratch all parts of your back? And eyes in the back of your head could come in handy at times.

Personally, I consider teeth to be a major design fault. I have had my share of dental abscesses, root-canal fillings and extractions. But rather than admit that many of my ailments may be due to poor dental care, I would rather consider teeth as poorly functioning entities, given our modern diets. Or, to put it bluntly, their design does not suit my propensity for sweet things!

In the British Medical Journal last month, a Maryland doctor, Paul Brown, wrote a "Letter to God" in which he respectfully suggested some anatomical modifications the Lord might make if He ever got around to "version two" of the human body. The quirky piece drew a large response in the letters' page; I'd like to share some of the suggested "improvements" in this week's column.

"Our perversity in wanting to walk upright, when it is clear that this was not Your intention, has led to some real problems with our spines and leg joints. Would it be possible for You to either fix the pelvis at a right angle to prevent us from this error, or strengthen our weight-bearing joints?" Brown writes. He also wonders if God could design smaller fingertips to allow us to operate the keys of portable e-mail devices.

There is some symmetry in the human body; we have two eyes and ears, two kidneys and two sets of limbs.

But Brown wonders if we could have a second liver (in reserve) and points out that if each side of the brain performed exactly the same function, then strokes and head trauma would pose less of a risk to human functioning.

While acknowledging that God did not intend us to discard our original diet of berries and nuts for fatty meats and pastries, he suggests that two hearts and a lipid-resistant lining to blood vessels would go a long way to solving our tendency to develop blockages in our coronary arteries, with sometimes fatal consequences.

Respectfully pointing out that some of the organs included in the original design have not turned out so well, Brown suggests we could do without tonsils and the appendix, noting they "don't seem to be especially useful apart from keeping surgeons occupied". And sinuses annoy him too; even though they are designed to lighten the head, they have a tendency to become infected.

Stronger neck muscles and no head sinuses might be a better option. Or keep the sinuses and fill them with a store of stem cells that we could tap into when we needed to regenerate some body tissue.

"Despite the beautiful symmetry and economy of design with which we are blessed, it has occurred to us that the placement of our genital and excretory organs in such close proximity was either done to remind us of 'original sin' or because there did not seem to be a satisfactory anatomical alternative. Could You think about this? No obvious repositioning arrangement comes to mind, but some kind of retractable underarm mechanism might be practical."

What ever about the practicalities of an underarm location, a male correspondent subsequently suggested he would like to see the testes "tucked out of harm's way inside the pelvic girdle".

Clearly remembering the last time his equipment was struck by a high-speed sporting projectile, the doctor helpfully points out that such a relocation would also allow the production of sperm at higher temperatures.

A Dr Kain from Leeds wonders if God could increase the density of scalp hair at the expense of body hair. "Although it is creating jobs for cosmetic surgeons and beauticians, body hair is unsightly, therefore please could You create the new version of a human body without the body hair?" And she wonders if some sort of internal bra for breasts in women could be created.

Dr Brown himself wonders if women could be given a fairer deal by a radical rethink of human reproduction. His plea for an alternative to the endless succession of menstrual periods and the hot flushes of menopause will certainly strike a chord among women.

A very sensible modification is suggested by an Aberdeen GP, who advocates a separation of the pipework for swallowing and breathing. This would greatly reduce the risk of choking and eliminate the aspiration of food into the lungs.

And in a final plea that suggests he has teenage children, Dr Brown writes: "We know You have a sense of humour, Lord, but could You please do something about adolescence?"

If you would like to share your own ideas about improvements to the human body, I would be pleased to hear from you at mhouston@irish-times.ie