• DrT@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    That’s anatomically correct. These are the spinous processes cut in half.

    • naeap
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I’m actually not sure if I’m falling for a joke here, but that’s how I remember that a spine looks like

      Even if it’s a section view, there shouldn’t be 2 of them… Or maybe I just don’t see it correctly…

      Edit: ah, now I somehow see it. But still, it doesn’t really look correct with the spinal cord like splitting it. Although given that this would be a bit hard to visualise in a 2D slice…
      I’m still not convinced that this is actually correct ;⁠-⁠)

        • naeap
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 hours ago

          That one didn’t seem double on first sight

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Your marrow needs to go somewhere, also the spinal cord. Your pic has it simply from the side, not a cutaway

        • naeap
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          23 hours ago

          True that, but then the baby would also need to be sectioned, no?

          But, I want to give up now, I get that I’ve viewed it wrong