I guess it makes sense, but I've never thought of it like that before.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -10 points 5 months ago* (4 children)

I'm pretty sure that we cut the umbilical cord too short after a baby is leaving the mother's womb.

The umbilical cord's remnants kinda wraps inward into the body, and if it's cut short, it makes a hole later. Leaving it a bit longer would mean that it stays rather flat or sth.

also cats apparently chew on their children's umbilical cord after birth to sever them. which i think if pretty cool. so archaic.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    They don’t cut them too short. The rest of the umbilical cord, the stump part, naturally falls off of a newborn after some time. Bellybutton is a naturally formed type of scar.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    we also have cartilege inside us where blood vessels previously had bypasses, as blood kinda flows in reverse when the umbilical system is active.

    It's kind of insane, infants switch their whole circulatory system around at birth. Looking at it you'd think it's a horribly fragile system but clearly it's extremely reliable!

  • source
  • parent