• Viking_Hippie
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because she’s a silly Billie that’s known to pull such pranks.

  • Technus@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What about people who have had limbs amputated?

    Do teeth count as part of the skeleton? If you’ve lost teeth do you only have 99% of a skeleton left?

    According to this, bones don’t start forming until the sixth or seventh week of gestation, so does the fetus technically not have a skeleton before then?

    So many questions

    • jettrscga
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the sake of this exercise we’ll consider skeletons rounded to whole integers. And air resistance may be ignored.

      • rmuk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Just goes to show how your prejudices affect your judgement without you realising. I just assumed everyone’s skeleton was a perfect sphere one unit in diameter and mass, at rest, on a perfectly level, frictionless, infinite plane and in a vacuum. Like mine.

      • BluesF@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well then the average is just 1 isn’t it. It doesn’t make any sense to integer-ise your inputs but leave your output rounded.

    • Sanyanov
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’d argue you still have one skeleton if you lose limbs or teeth.

      Amount of skeletons is an integer representing the anount of bone structures holding and protecting human body (or whatever’s left of it).

      The real question is, how much of which parts of skeleton can we lose with it still being skeleton instead of a set of bones?

    • jwhardcastle@dmv.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyone else is failing to count the number of babies (140 million per year) nearly all of whom have 100% complete skeletons and set that against the number of amputations of perhaps a few percentage points across a much smaller number of people annually (“more than 1 million annually”).

    • Instigate@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d argue teeth aren’t skeleton because they’re not made of the same substance as bone - the outside is enamel and dentin whereas bones are collagen, protein and minerals (mostly calcium). Kinda like how hair and nails don’t count because they’re made of keratin.

    • gnate
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Will no one bring down the average? I guess they won’t be stepping up …

    • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      so does the fetus technically not have a skeleton before then?

      The cartilaginous pre-bones would still be a skeleton. Sharks have skeletons, but don’t have any bones for example.

    • grayman
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      Less than that. There are more women than men and some men have less than 2.

        • grayman
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mentioned it because I say “The average person has less than 1 testicle.”… Also The average person has less than 2 legs… 2 arms… 2 breasts… etc. One of my favorite eye rolling stupid joke.

          • Rednax
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I have a ton of legs. Waayyy more than 2.

            What can I say? They were cheap, and I love chicken.

      • misophist
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are more women than men

        [CITATION NEEDED]

        Also, 1 is correct if we consider significant figures. It may be slightly less, but rounded to the nearest whole number is most certainly 1.

  • hobbicus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    this is bigoted propaganda against bonelessness

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wouldn’t it also be greater than 1 for the same reason as OP? I think there are probably more babies in mothers than people missing testes.

        • enkers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not their own, no, but the average number of testicles in a mother’s body is greater than 0.

        • MustrumR@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          But they have the testicles of their soon to be born sons.

          I would say whether it’s greater than 1 or lesser than 1 is inconclusive without accurate data .

          You would need to find out whether amount of men with removed testicles is greater than amount of women pregnant with a boy (after the average week when testicles appear). Also men to women ratio in global population needs to be accounted for.

          • Feyr
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s easy. The number of men missing testicles is not 50%

    • Rednax
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t believe that is true. It might surprise you how often testicles are eaten.

  • uphillbothways@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Aren’t babies cartilaginous at birth? Guess it’s still a skeleton as it is a structural frame, even if it’s not made out of bones yet.

  • ryan213
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Chances of getting Boneitis increases with every birth.

  • JustUseMint
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s scary enough that we have one skeleton inside and now I have to worry about the potential for two of them?! How am I supposed to sleep

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    That is clearly a ball of some sort, possible fairly heavy as she uses two hands to hold it in place.

    • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The article says the doctor was able to shake hands with the twin but didn’t confirm wether the twin was able to be saved or not?

      • grayman
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Saw a documentary a long time ago. He died within a couple days.