Intelligent (maybe), but far from perfect

I am new to this forum, but I tend to look at things from a high level. You can bicker about whether this animal, or that biological process, or that organ is likely or not the result of ID. Even though we humans are very complex, and work very well (usually), I can point out any number of serious design flaws that we exhibit.- For most of human history, and only without recent medical technology, infant mortality was quite high. Who would design something that could reproduce but that whose offspring had a relatively low chance of survival?- Vital components do not heal to their original state (eyes, teeth, whole limbs)- Many people have diseases and disorders that have meant certain death if not for recent medical advances (e.g. cancer)- Vital blood vessels are located precariously close to the surface.I can go on, but you get the idea. If ID is true, then we might want to rename it SID (somewhat intelligent design), or maybe IFITD (I'll finish it tomorrow design). Maybe we are prototypes - if so I can't wait to see what the final product will look like.