I am in anatomy class and my teacher wants us to search for the answer to this question "Why do the feet sweat more then any other part of the body." i know it has to be medical so "wrapped up in socks" cant be a answer. Thanks NEED HELP!!

THIS IS A COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTION. If you dont’ have a serious attitude, don’t read and don’t answer.

I am a nursing student and have used many textbooks and internet sites for reference on human anatomy, including reproductive anatomy: one of the body’s essential systems.

I have noticed and am irritated with, however, that virtually all representations of external female genitalia are inaccurate or just plain wrong in these "professional" sources of information. Here are a few examples:

In "non-sexual" models for other body systems (i.e. respiratory system), when a whole male body is shown, it is usually drawn with a penis and testicles. However, if female body is used, genitals are *never* shown: only an "androgynous" smooth surface.

In front-facing reproductive diagrams, males are usually shown with pubic hair shaven and genitals fully visible, but females are always shown with either "androgynous" genitals, or with pubic hair that obscures every detail.

I have also noticed that there are many more diagrams of male sex organs in anatomy textbooks than female sex organs. Male genitalia are shown from above, below, from the front, and the side. However, external female genitalia are only shown from the bottom, and the drawings are often inaccurate (see more below).

Despite the fact that the female reproductive system has more parts and is more complex than the male’s, more pages are dedicated to the function of the male reproductive system than the female reproductive system.

The external female genitals are hardly mentioned at all, and while mention is made about variation in male genitalia (size of penis, etc.), no mention is made of normal variation in female genitalia (size of labia, clitoris, etc.). The drawings of female genitalia are almost always the "porn star" style model with very small labia and hardly-visible vaginal opening: this is not an accuate model of a "normal" woman’s anatomy. The view is often very confusing as well, and since no other views are presented (like the male), it is very difficult to tell "where things are".

While I am a male and can make no personal comparison to these models, most females (other medical students included) I talk to agree that they are inaccurate. I find this very irritating, because not only is it sexist, but it also has serious implications to the health field.

If doctors, nurses, and other medical personal do not have an accurate picture of female anatomy, how can they correctly diagnose irregularities with these areas of the body? I have read many stories, and even questions here on yahoo answers, of girls being told by their doctors that their genitalia were "deformed" because their labia were much larger than the "anatomical model" suggested, even though they are perfectly normal. This can seriously affect the self-esteem of these young women, who may feel that they are "abnormal" and become depressed, or opt for dangerous and unecessary plastic surgery to "fix the problem".

I don’t understand why PROFESSIONAL medical publishers feel the need to censor accurate female anatomy while ALLOWING fully-accurate male anatomy to be published. Is it really necessary that this perfectly viable MEDICAL information must be hidden to prevent embarassment and maintain modesty for a select few, conservative teachers and students?

AND NOW, the real question: what is the REAL reason this information is censored, in your opinion?
Brand new, 2008/09 textbooks censor female body parts, not just old ones. In reflexes chapters, they also leave out female orgasm reflexes. Most of the textbooks we were given in school were made in Texas though, which I know is a fairly conservative state morally and religiously. Still, most online diagrams sponsored by "reputable" sites are also similarly ambigous.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

Say goodbye to confusion over anatomical planes. 3D action with “Plane Jane” model.

models for human anatomy & physiology (BIO-141 & BIO-42)

THIS IS A COMPLETELY SERIOUS QUESTION. If you dont’ have a serious attitude, don’t read and don’t answer.

I am a nursing student and have used many textbooks and internet sites for reference on human anatomy, including reproductive anatomy: one of the body’s essential systems.

I have noticed and am irritated with, however, that virtually all representations of external female genitalia are inaccurate or just plain wrong in these "professional" sources of information. Here are a few examples:

In "non-sexual" models for other body systems (i.e. respiratory system), when a whole male body is shown, it is usually drawn with a penis and testicles. However, if female body is used, genitals are *never* shown: only an "androgynous" smooth surface.

In front-facing reproductive diagrams, males are usually shown with pubic hair shaven and genitals fully visible, but females are always shown with either "androgynous" genitals, or with pubic hair that obscures every detail.

I have also noticed that there are many more diagrams of male sex organs in anatomy textbooks than female sex organs. Male genitalia are shown from above, below, from the front, and the side. However, external female genitalia are only shown from the bottom, and the drawings are often inaccurate (see more below).

Despite the fact that the female reproductive system has more parts and is more complex than the male’s, more pages are dedicated to the function of the male reproductive system than the female reproductive system.

The external female genitals are hardly mentioned at all, and while mention is made about variation in male genitalia (size of penis, etc.), no mention is made of normal variation in female genitalia (size of labia, clitoris, etc.). The drawings of female genitalia are almost always the "porn star" style model with very small labia and hardly-visible vaginal opening: this is not an accuate model of a "normal" woman’s anatomy. The view is often very confusing as well, and since no other views are presented (like the male), it is very difficult to tell "where things are".

While I am a male and can make no personal comparison to these models, most females (other medical students included) I talk to agree that they are inaccurate. I find this very irritating, because not only is it sexist, but it also has serious implications to the health field.

If doctors, nurses, and other medical personal do not have an accurate picture of female anatomy, how can they correctly diagnose irregularities with these areas of the body? I have read many stories, and even questions here on yahoo answers, of girls being told by their doctors that their genitalia were "deformed" because their labia were much larger than the "anatomical model" suggested, even though they are perfectly normal. This can seriously affect the self-esteem of these young women, who may feel that they are "abnormal" and become depressed, or opt for dangerous and unecessary plastic surgery to "fix the problem".

I don’t understand why PROFESSIONAL medical publishers feel the need to censor accurate female anatomy while ALLOWING fully-accurate male anatomy to be published. Is it really necessary that this perfectly viable MEDICAL information must be hidden to prevent embarassment and maintain modesty for a select few, conservative teachers and students?

AND NOW, the real question: what is the REAL reason this information is censored, in your opinion?
Tried asking this a couple days ago, but Yahoo answers was messing up at that time, so not many people answered and I couldn’t choose a best answer.
R. Gaspari:

Netter does have good representation of female anatomy, I’ll agree. The other authors I have studied, however, do not, in my opinion. Internal female organs and glands are well documented and diagrammed. What I’m complaining about is the lack of representation of *external* female genitalia as compared to the male’s. I think the female’s is more complex, and yet is represented less in virtually every book I have read.

James Lyons:

If I was too modest to deal with these parts, why I am in nursing school and why would I be asking this question?

Again, I realize that the *internal* female organs are well-studied and understood by doctors because the perform more procedures on them. Nevertheless, the vulva is a part of the human body and needs to be properly represented. Doctors and nurses examine these parts for irregularity during physicals, so if they don’t understand common vulva appearances and variations, how can they make a proper diagnosis?

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

Integrative Biology 131: General Human Anatomy. Fall 2005. Professor Marian Diamond. The functional anatomy of the human body as revealed by gross and microscopic examination. The Department of Integrative Biology offers a program of instruction that focuses on the integration of structure and function in the evolution of diverse biological systems. It investigates integration at all levels of organization from molecules to the biosphere, and in all taxa of organisms from viruses to higher plants and animals. The department uses many traditional fields and levels of complexity in forging new research directions, asking new questions, and answering traditional questions in new ways. The various…

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

I’ve been doing a lot more sketching lately, and I was thinking about getting one of the wooden art dolls, or something like Art S. Buck’s anatomical models (See link below) from a local art store for poses, as poses have been one of my drawbacks as of late. But as I looked at them it brought up a question. Are there any websites or programs (preferably free) that encompass a virtual form of these models that I could manipulate like the real ones for poses?

http://www.dickblick.com/products/art-s-buck-anatomical-models/

P.S. – I’m not really looking for anything fancy, just a virtual version of these models to manipulate like the real ones.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

Goes over lymphatic system diagrams

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

3B Scientific STICKYcharts™ are printed in full color on durable vinyl with a 3M™ adhesive backing. The non-destructive adhesive affixes to walls, doors, windows, whiteboards, metal, cabinets and most any clean surface. Can be removed and re-affixed to surfaces many times.

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.

I’m going for my MOT and want my own skeleton so i can REALLY know the bones…. is this a good quality skeleton for someone in the health field? And is this a good price?

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-1st-QLTY-LIFE-SIZE-HUMAN-SKELETON-ANATOMICAL-MODEL_W0QQitemZ350247761612QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item518c64b6cc&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14#ht_4673wt_1059

This video was produced to help students of human anatomy at Modesto Junior College study our anatomical models.