Re: Dinosaur Discs

["Peter Von Sholly" <vonrex@gte.net>]

Dwight, 
Thanks, and lest I seem even stupider than usual, I did assume that
dinosaurs did HAVE discs... 
What I was really going for was whether you (we, they) think that dinosaur
discs were really large and thick, especially in large animals, and if so,
would that not have a significant effect on posture, or length or whatever?
 Discs seem to be ignored in many skeletal drawings and reconstructions. Is
that so, and if so, why so?

----------
> From: Stewart, Dwight <Dwight.Stewart@VLSI.com>
> To: 'vonrex@gte.net'; dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Dinosaur Discs
> Date: Monday, September 28, 1998 3:02 PM
> 
> Hi, All;
> 
>    As a person who has had a lot of pets in my lifetime (primarity
> quadrapedal) & seen loads of x-rays 
> And who has seen quite a few x-rays of horses & cattle too - let me
assure
> you that they have cartiligenous (sp??? :-)) discs.  So, they aren't only
> present in the human spine.  Loss of a disc in a human is USUALLY avoided
by
> replacing it with a synthetic prosthetic, otherwise; it would effect
spinal
> length (& one would think, height), placing strain on the whole
structure.
> I have 3 repaired vertebrae in my neck (5th, 6th, & 7th cervical) & two
> between my shoulder blades.  When my arthritis is really acting up, my
> height can vary by 2 cms, & yep: it hurts!  :-)  Therapy helps avoid
this.
> I don't know about dinosaur vertebrae, but discs certainly seem like a
good
> idea from a structural
> Standpoint.   I sure some of the folks at the conference would have good
> insight into this.  Logic would also indicate that a reconstruction
without
> the discs (if they existed) would reduce overall length in an animal with
a
> horizontal posture.  
> 
> Dwight