There has been some chatter in the blogosphere after Animal Review referred to moose antlers as ‘organs.’ Some commentators have weighed in against that assertion, on account of antlers appearing externally and having a wood-like texture.
That being said, antlers are in fact organs. In fact, some scientists believe that they may hold clues to human organ regeneration. Very few deer or moose believe this, but they mostly practice Eastern medicine anyway.
Animal Review 
Dear Gads,
I’ve been drinking and commenting on blogs again haven’t I?
Without wanting to turn this into a round of pedantry, or indeed bring down twitter again, organs tend not to be classified on liking-a-bit-of-fresh-air or indeed bearing a passing resemblance to masonry.
Organs, and the classification is rather vague, tend to have a very specific use. It’s probably safer to call an antler an appendage, as if it dropped off the moose would be fine.
On a related note it would probably be safer to classify Sir Pilkington-Smythe as a drunken pedant.
Smashing blog chaps, look forward to the book
Sir P-S x
ahem, i can think of other “organs” that are external and appear like wood. (someone had to say it)