Is it true that 'removing your appendix lowers your immunity'?

Yes, the statement that 'removing your appendix lowers your immunity' is somewhat misleading.

It is not entirely without basis, but medically speaking, it is almost entirely incorrect in the sense that 'immunity drops enough to interfere with daily life'.

I will explain this in detail below.

The appendix is indeed an 'organ involved in immunity'

The appendix, which is attached to the end of the cecum, was once considered a 'useless organ,' but a different understanding is now widespread. The appendix is thought to have the following roles:

• A 'safe haven' for storing good bacteria in the gut

• One of the lymphoid tissues where immune cells gather

• A function that regulates immune responses in the gut

In other words, the appendix certainly has 'functions related to immunity.'

So, what happens to immunity if you remove the appendix?

This is where misunderstandings often arise. The medical conclusions are the following two points:

1. Even without an appendix, there is almost no problem with overall immunity

2. There is no solid evidence that immune strength clearly declines in the long term

The reason for this is that the human gut has vast immune tissues, and there are many places other than the appendix where immune cells work. The roles that the appendix played are sufficiently compensated for by other areas.

Then why did the theory that 'immunity drops' spread?

There are several reasons.

• Because the appendix has lymphoid tissue, it appears to be related to immunity

• In the past, folk beliefs such as 'if you remove it, you will catch colds more easily' were widespread

• Animal experiments have sometimes shown mild declines in immune function

However, these do not directly apply to the long-term daily lives of humans. According to medical statistics, people who have had their appendix removed,

• Becoming more susceptible to illness

• Becoming weaker against infectious diseases

• A significant drop in immune strength

No clear differences such as these have been confirmed.

However, it cannot be said that there is 'zero impact' either.

I will explain this carefully as well. Since the appendix has an immune function, theoretically, it is debated that there may be very slight effects on things like:

• the recovery speed of gut bacteria

• reactions to specific infectious diseases

However, these are not 'statistically clear,' and it is generally considered that there is almost no 'impact that would interfere with daily life.'

Summary

The statement that 'removing your appendix lowers your immunity' is not accurate.

• The appendix is an organ involved in immunity

• However, even if removed, other tissues sufficiently compensate for overall immunity

• There is almost no medical evidence that long-term problems arise

• Most people live normally after surgery and do not feel a decline in immunity

Therefore, in general, “it cannot be said that appendectomy lowers immunity” is the current state of medicine.

That is all.

It is very natural to feel that there is 'nothing useless' in the human body.

However, biologically, while there are certainly few 'organs with absolutely no role,' it is believed that there are 'organs that were once useful but are now rarely used.' I will explain this by organizing it a little.

I will explain this by organizing it a little.

What does 'useful' mean for a living organism?

In biology, the criterion for being 'useful' is 'whether it contributes directly to survival and reproduction.' Viewed by this standard,

• things that finished their role in the process of evolution

• things that are less necessary for modern humans

Such organs are called 'vestigial organs.' This does not mean they are 'useless,' but rather that they are 'organs whose importance has decreased in the current environment.'

Examples of organs that were once necessary but now barely function

I will list some easy-to-understand examples.

1. Coccyx

Human ancestors had tails, but in the process of transitioning to upright bipedal walking, the need to use a tail disappeared. The current coccyx is a remnant of that.

However, it does have secondary roles, such as supporting the pelvic floor muscles, so it is not completely useless.

2. Arrector pili muscles

The reason we get goosebumps when we are cold is that the muscles used to make body hair stand up still remain.

However, because humans have thin hair, this no longer has almost any effect on maintaining body temperature.

3. Wisdom teeth

Modern human jaws are small, and because there is not enough space for wisdom teeth to grow, they actually become a cause of trouble.

It was necessary for eating tough plants in the past, but it is now considered to have little functional significance.

4. Appendix (a small projection at the end of the cecum)

It is said to be involved in immunity and the maintenance of gut bacteria, but because life is not significantly hindered without its function, it is sometimes regarded as an 'organ of reduced importance'.

'Useless' and 'low importance' are different

This is a very important point. The mechanism of evolution has the property of “if there is no problem, it remains as is” Therefore,

• was once important

• now of low importance

• however, no particular harm

Organs like this continue to remain. It is not that they 'remain because they are useless,' but rather that they 'remain because there is no burden significant enough to be eliminated by natural selection'.

So, do completely meaningless organs exist?

In modern biology, the general view is “there are almost no organs that can be definitively called completely meaningless” Even if their role has become small,

• secondary support

• part of the immune system

• remnants of the nervous system

• skeletal balance adjustment

and so on, they often have some kind of influence. Your opinion does not significantly contradict the way of thinking in biology.

Summary

• From an evolutionary perspective, 'organs of reduced importance' do exist

• However, there are almost no organs that can be definitively called 'having zero role'

• Many organs remain because, even if their role is small today, they have no negative impact on survival

• In biology, the concept of something being 'completely useless' actually almost never exists.

In other words, the view that 'there are almost no organs in the human body that are completely useless' is a perspective that is biologically well-founded.

That is all.

[PR] OCTOPATH TRAVELER 0 - Nintendo Switch

AI-generated, for reference only.