It's not just the Vatican that's against the idea of using frozen embryos in IVF therapy. I am, too. This is because there's a risk that, once transferred to the womb, they might go on to develop, come to term, and be born as frozen babies.Women equipped with conventionally temperatured brats are annoying enough, always demanding crèches and baby-changing facilities, and all that kind of crap. However, if they had frozen babies, too, there'd be even more fuss. For example, they'd be forever having to stop their prams in the middle of the street or in the middle of busy shopping malls in order to fill them full of ice. Particularly on warm, summer days, otherwise the babies might melt and drip all over the floor, as ice lollies are wont to do (and they don't taste as nice, either, if you lick them).
I suppose supermarkets could offer a service whereby you could put your baby in the chiller cabinet along with other frozen produce while you went away and did your shopping. But you'd have to be careful to label him properly, otherwise some poor soul in search of frozen chicken might inadvertently pick him up and serve him up with Paxo for Sunday lunch. Then again, it could prove the birth of a new culinary sensation. And, if so, there'd be a ready supply of ingredients from council estates and inner city slums.
Eskimos don't have this sort of problem, of course. This is because their environment is always sub-zero. However, the downside of this is that Eskimo sperm and Eskimo eggs are frozen solid, even in their natural state. Which makes the sperm's job of fertilizing the egg somewhat difficult. A single, frozen sperm simply couldn't penetrate through to its nucleus. It would be forever heat-butting the frozen exterior.
Fortunately, though, Evolution has provided the solution: Eskimo ejaculate comes out of the penis in one, big frozen icicle of cum. It effectively "ram raids" the ovum, smashing its way in. This is why Eskimos always have flattish looking faces. It's caused by the impact of fertilization.
9 comments:
Not the most cogent scientic article I've read on the Inuit.You were asked about on MyT earlier.Some punter (not I) quoted your Jesus post.
Eskimos, please. The Inuit are just one of many of their tribes.
I haven't look at the My Telegraph site for ages. It was virtually all spam the last time I had a peek.
It has passed its glory days.It is Inuit,Esquimaux is the French form of an Algonquin word meaning "Raw meat eaters".Inuit is applied to all polar tribes.
Whatever. I have no time for these people ("Inuit" = people). What kind of dickhead crosses the Bering Strait, finds himself in an inhospitable, frozen wilderness, and then says, "Yeah, this looks good - I think I'll settle here"? I have far more time for the American Indians, who migrated to more pleasing, southern climes, and then wiped out Custer.
Or indeed the mayans who built a civilisation.The Incas,when not busy gnawing on guineapig.I must look up my DNA stuff to see if I really am part Indian/Dakota/Iroquois/Mohican.I am off to the gym to be the cynosure of female eyes.
If you are a Mohican, given that your haven't produced any offspring, you're presumably the last of them. There's a book title in there somewhere, should you ever want to write an autobiography.
You're fortunate that I don't go to the same gym as you. They wouldn't be able to keep their eyes off ME.
One son,two daughters.
Then the Mohican bloodline may yet be preserved.
But there won't be a book in it...
Post a Comment