Morbid question I know, but it could be interesting. I’m talking like loss of all limbs and part of the torso. Obviously you can’t lose your vital organs.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    3·
    3 hours ago

    Depends on what you mean.

    Humans can live without limbs at all. There’s issues that need to be watched because the body can struggle to regulate itself with that much mass and blood vessels gone, but it isn’t a problem by itself… We can live with no eyes, ears, nose, or even lips and teeth. We can lose one kidney, part of a liver, one lung, and segments of our intestines.

    But, again, the more you lose, the more support you need, and the shorter your life expectancy.

    However, that’s not survivable if you lose it all at once, without very fast help. Just losing part of an arm or leg can kill you without addressing the loss of blood that’s probably happening as well. The survivability of losing two feet of intestines to a bear in the woods vs losing it in a surgery is massively different, to put another slant on it.

  • anon6789@lemmy.world
    11·
    9 hours ago

    Perhaps not exactly what you are looking for, but Stephen King’s short story “Survivor Type” was written after he got fascinated by this train of thought. He consulted with a doctor friend to see how much he felt a shipwrecked surgeon could use of himself to survive on until rescue.

    Hesitant to write anything down, King gained the assurance for the story after speaking with his neighbor, Ralph Drews, a retired doctor who confirmed that “a guy could subsist on himself for quite a while - like everything else which is material, the human body is just stored energy.”

    I remember it being pretty good, and is supposedly one of King’s favorites. That’s the first thing that popped in my head after reading your question.