Baby's second smiling head surgically removed
 

What this story makes me think, as a biologist, is just how arbitrary human nature is. We humans didn't not have to evolve the way we did. There were an unlimited number of possibilities. We think that our body form and our mind are somehow ideal or sacred, but in fact we could just as easily have evolved to have two heads, if it had been advantageous to have two heads (sexual selection, anybody ;) ) In a way it's a testimony to the unlimited possibilities the human species contains.

Be sure to check out the picture linked to this article. This girl had a separate head attached to her head, and this separate head could blink and smile.

UNBELIEVABLE.

This is one of those things you have to look at over and over again to make sure it's not an Onion article. . .

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../egypt_baby_dc

Omigod....of course the inevitable thought is, what would have happened to this child if she had been born 100 years ago or in ancient times? Would she have been able to survive with another head attached to her skull? And would that second head have it's own personality? Very very creepy.

I looked at that picture and just shuddered. Ew. Ew. Ew. It's so creepy. I really hope the girl makes it through her recovery. Wouldn't that be a hell of a story to tell people? "Oh, you think you have it bad? I used to have two heads."

With all the things that can go wrong during development, its amazing how often people turn out okay.

Oh, that was waaaay creepy. Even moreso by the fact that the second head could blink and smile.

*shudders

That's the first time I've ever seen photos for that condition. I've seen lumps and extra things, but never a fully formed second head. Now I have to show everyone I know....

Congrats on creeping me out :thumbsup:

I toally agree, one of the creepyest thoughts ive had all day

That starts to beg the questin, is the second head a separate life? Was it sentient? Is that the condition for life? Or was it sort of an anomolous appendage?

Weird.

Well fromt he picture it looks like it does have a brain from how much head there is. It wouldn't be able to talk since it doesn't seem tohave any lungs or really a neck for vocal chords so it wouldn't make any noise. It certainly wouldn't survive on it's own, it doesnt look like it has much of a system of organs. Then again even if it could survive what could it do. It would be like the robot head from lexx w/o the ability to talk rolling around on a little remote control car type buggy.

What are they going to do with the second head? It would make a pretty good childhood souvenir.

I'm assuming you think that was funny...

That's a really sad story and should give each of us a quick pause to be thankful for our own good health.

I read this earlier on CNN but it didn't have a picture, that was definitely creepy. I hope the little girl makes it through ok.

And how is this any different from abortion? The attached head might have (probably did) have it's own consiousness (sp). Where are all the pro-life'ers yelling "Save the head! Save the head for God's sake!".

Actually, yes, that head probably did contain another "mind", if you will. All a brain needs is properly oxygenated blood to function. Might have been a little rough on the host, what with sharing bloodflow and all, but if it was smiling and blinking it must have been doing alright. It may have perhaps shared a nervous system with the host as well, although those lumps dangling from the "parasite" head may have very well been a complete brain stem and some loose nerve endings. Weird, huh?

I'd like to see that kinda thing in my next human anatomy class. Today's dissection: A parasite head!

Wow that's kinda freaky yet incredibly interesting..

I am curious it looks like the twin probably had it's own brain but perhaps with the limited blood flow wasn't able to develop completely (which would be real freaky if you had conscious second head). As bad as it sounds it would be cool of the family let scientists study it before burial or whatever they plan to do with it.

I thought it was interesting how in the article on CNN they kept referring to the other head as a "parasite".

I really don't know how to feel about this. I mean it was smiling and blinking.....that is just so weird.

Welcome the new sideshow...


A tragic story but let's face it, the real reason that story gets reported and the reason *most* people look is the same reason people went to the freakshow in day past...

The ethics of this are facinating but I don't get the feeling most people really care...

It makes me sad... I feel sorry for the smiling baby that had to be killed, I guess you would say?

I am very thankful for the good health of myself and the people around me but I really do wonder what they'll do with the removed head =\

They called it "parasitic" which is the term used for when one thing is living off another by feeding off it in one way or another, which is basically a parasite yes. This second head couldn't survive on its own and was dependent on the baby for survival.

Yes it is indeed creepy. I agree with Painted that my first thought was where are the "pro-life" people jumping to stop this from occurring? Sad thing is, if this had been stopped, then both (and I use both rather loosely here) babies would have probably died.

Oh man, that just reminded me of that nurse from South Park. LOL
/going to hell for that

I don't know what to think about the fact that they went from "smiling blinking head" to "parasite" in a few paragraphs.

Strange. I'm curious to know how things were connected. Did the heads share a brain?? Was the 2 brains one big one? how would they know which parts of the brains to keep and which belonged to the second head. Just kindof wierd. I hope the girl comes out alright. With a surgery around the brain you wonder if she'll be able to function completely or have any paralysis.

As for the "pro-lifers" The second head had no "life" of it's own. I think that's what would make the distinction. I think that's probably where it stands. If it has life of it's own (even if it needs temporary assistance to exist) then it's abortion. This "head" would never be able to exist on it's own or grow into a human being in any form. It would just be an animate head.

Very strange - My heart goes out to those parents.

If they don't refer to it as a parasite, it makes it seem like it's inhumane to remove the other head. As to whether or not it actually was wrong to remove the second head, I can't even begin to form a real opinion... But CNN and other news organizations have to report on a subject without bringing any fire onto themselves, so they dehumanize the one head and, by so doing, make it seem more acceptable to remove it.

edit: Thinking on it again, how exactly is the second head a "parasite?"

Dictionary.com defines parasite as: An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

Wouldn't sentience, assuming the second head had it, be not only reason enough to keep it alive but a possible survival advantage? And if the second head was actually part of the first child, how could it be considered a seperate organism?

It is just very weird isn't it?? The problem I would have with taking it off was that I would still think of it as essentially being killed because it was blinking and smiling.

I just can't see it as a parasite but the definition you said does sound correct.

Actually the "pro-life" people were jumping up and down in a similar case that happened over on this side of the pond a few years ago. The sad thing was that the most vocal were the child's parents.
They were told - both of these children will die if left unaided, we can seperate the healthy one from from the parasitic one and the healthy one has quite a significant chance of survial.
The parents claimed that doing so would be murder, and instead they wanted to see both of the babies die? :confused: God's will at work apparently.
They brought the hospital to court to prevent them from saving the life of one of the children.

Interesting point about CNN's reporting but I think "parasitic" is the standard terminology for a twin of this type, isn't it? I'm too lazy to look it up right now but I believe that's the case. They were just using the medical/scientific terminology.

You know, the blinking and smiling could be "involunatary".

Also, could the head be construed as an appendage in this case or perhaps a large "tumor". Can it be actually defined as a head?

Or what if that was the head that was in control and the other head was "dead"?

How would they know?

P.S.- Why all the pro-lifer bashing? Just curious...

It was an under-developed conjoined twin. It was not literally a second head; it had its own very undeveloped body.

EDIT:
MSN has the story with the same text, but with a different photo.
http://xtramsn.co.nz/technology/0,,7005-4131549,00.html

You know after reading all the articles, I believe all the pro life people who are not jumping at the chance to save this other life are hippocites. Personally I am pro choice. For a very specific reason. Until the embryo can feel, and think for itself it is just an embryo, and not a life. Here was a life, it had a brain, and reacted to stimuli (i.e. blinked and smiled presumably at something which had stimulated it) which is enough to presume it was not brain dead. Abortion of an embryo, is not killing life, yet. It is a potential life. They keep saying the head could not live on its own, well neither can an embryo, or a baby. They all need help.
I can see removing this head to allow the other life to continue, however they have not stated that this was the case. They allowed it to continue for a couple of years to study the best way to remove it. I have seen conjoined twins, conjoined at the head, survive and live a fully functional life. They both learned to cope. When asked if a surgery could be done succesfully to seperate them, they both said no. They waited this long to see how to take them apart. They could have waited a little longer to see if they could live together. If not, seperate the two. I think they made this decision much to soon. But I am also not one of the parents. So my thoughts on the matter do not mount to much but a bunch of letters written into a cathode ray tube and posted in electronic ether.

looking at the pics...gut wrenching to say the least. You know it was al for the best, but then the ''what if'' hits you. Squishor touched on it, 100 years ago, this kids was destined for life in a freak show.

The second baby (or "the head") blinked and smiled, I assume in response to stimuli and not some random action. It seems obvious from looking at the photos that he/she/it was pretty much a fully formed head that was obviously lacking any type of body other then the small amount of growth below the chin area. Because the 2nd. baby, or "parasite" (a detestable way to phrase it) could not support it's own life due to no heart, lungs, kidneys, etc., it had to live off of it's sibling.

That in no way means it was not aware and sentient, which is how we humans catagorize ourselves as intellegent beings and having a "soul". My son (who died when he was 2 1/2 mths.) was born with an extremely rare disorder. The doctors in the NICU said he basically was only aware of whether he was comfortable or not (his brain was very undeveloped because of the disorder). He never responded to his nurses, and yet, when I arrived there everyday was the only time he opened his eyes (only seconds at a time) and stuck out his tongue (akin to the "head" blinking and smiling). Even with my son having basically a very primative brain, something enough was going on in there that he knew me as his mother though he spent 90% of his life with different nurses.

This story also reminds me of Chang and Eng, the "Siamese twins". In modern society they could very easily have been seperated, but not quite when they lived (late 1800's). They were only conjoined by a band of skin on their mid torso and if I remember correctly, they shared a liver and a major artery. Chang died from a brain clot and Eng died a few hours later because his heart kept pumping blood into Chang but it was not being returned back to Eng's body (some stories say it was just complete shock and fright). They both married, had sex, and sired some 20+ children between the two of them. If you ponder it, weren't they both parasite's? Neither could live without the other living (at least at that point in time).

Please excuse my wandering, the point I was aiming for is that the second baby (the "head") may very well have been sentient (however rudimentary) and needed it's sibling for life support. I can't help but wonder, if it had been allowed to mature to the appropriate age to learn language, if someone (doc's, parents, etc.) would have known that it was indeed sentient. Possibly using blinks to indicate "yes or no" or letters to spell out words.

Yes, my son colors my view a bit, but only a bit, it is mostly the fact that the undeveloped child showed awareness, and the pictures show a human head with visible signs of that, albeit without a body attached. Just overall strange and sad.

Ali

P.S. Although a fictional novel, "Chang and Eng" by Darin Strauss is a good book to read to get a feel of their lives.

two minds? two souls? that's creepy stuff.

if this would have heppened 100 or 200 years ago people in egypt would have probably thought she was a god, or she was and untouchable