TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

I Was an Animal Experimenter

71 pointsby romefortabout 10 years ago

15 comments

jonchangabout 10 years ago
I can say with confidence that this sort of thing would never occur in a modern research laboratory. Note that standards for ethical experimentation on animals (including humans) hadn&#x27;t really appeared until the 70s and 80s. A couple of points here:<p>Any type of animal experimentation must be accompanied by an IACUC protocol that is approved by a committee, typically at least 3 people, and usually including a veterinarian, research scientists, and layperson. The protocol justifies why using animals is necessary for the research and exactly how the animals will be cared for during the experiments.<p>Performing surgery on live animals - You have to be trained in the procedure by practicing on dead animals first. Any surgery that happens must be done under anesthesia using approved chemicals. For example, in fishes and amphibians, this is an anesthetic dose of MS-222.<p>Sacrificing animals - Typical standards require that the experimenter sacrifice the animal quickly &amp; humanely, using at least 2 methods (chemical and physical) to ensure that the animal is not suffering due to a sublethal dose of your chemical. Again for fishes, this is a lethal dose of MS-222 followed by either pithing or freezing. For rodents this is usually anesthesia followed by cervical dislocation.<p>Experimental endpoints - You will not get your IACUC approved if you don&#x27;t have a way of dealing with your live animals after your experiment is over. Simply killing them because you don&#x27;t have money to keep them around is absolutely forbidden. For fishes, they get released back into the ocean or kept around for aquarium outreach purposes.<p>The issue of animal rights is an important one. For example I personally think that the IACUC protocols don&#x27;t go far enough. Nonvertebrate animals are typically not covered by IACUC at all so this means that it is legally above the board to vivisect slugs without anesthesia. Of course you might not think that slugs deserve rights but this is a debate that needs to happen. In particular many countries do not cover cephalopods (octopuses, squids, etc) under their animal use laws..
评论 #9413336 未加载
评论 #9413696 未加载
评论 #9414000 未加载
评论 #9413210 未加载
评论 #9413661 未加载
评论 #9418055 未加载
评论 #9413447 未加载
jobvandervoortabout 10 years ago
I used to do animal experiments and my partner still does them daily. We both had to kill (or as they say in science -sacrifice) the animals ourselves when necessary.<p>There is a very large body of research that couldn&#x27;t and can&#x27;t be done without animal experiments. Both in fundamental and clinical sciences.<p>However, what I do see is a movement away from usage of macaques towards a higher usage of experiments using flies. Rodents are fundamental in neuroscience and will stay that for a while, as they are both easy to genetically modify and have reasonably sized brain and organs that is comparable to ours.<p>I&#x27;ve seen several people, PhD students, but also top-level scientists, moving away from using animals or mammals for their experiments because of the same realization that the author had. It&#x27;s important that we realize what we are doing to the animals, but the end of animal experimentation is not yet in sight.
Lucabout 10 years ago
Reading &#x27;Animals Like Us&#x27; by Mark Rowlands made me realize that it is utterly reasonable to abstain from harming animals. There is a string of logic, starting from very basic principles of ethics, that makes it the rational thing to do (if you accept the basic principles).<p>It&#x27;s a sort of ethical math. Most people don&#x27;t do the math because it&#x27;s not obvious that some thought is needed, instead going with their gut feeling.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1859843867&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1859843867&#x2F;</a>
评论 #9413348 未加载
评论 #9415187 未加载
nosefrogabout 10 years ago
100 years from now, we will look back on the experiments performed on nonhuman animals with the same disgust that we have for the experiments performed on humans by the Nazis.<p>&quot;The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.&quot; - Martin Luther King Jr.
评论 #9413184 未加载
评论 #9413296 未加载
评论 #9413302 未加载
评论 #9413354 未加载
nailerabout 10 years ago
&gt; That powerful talk made me realize that animals, like us, are sentient beings who have intelligence and experience fear and pain.<p>Well yes, we&#x27;re animals. I don&#x27;t understand why adults still think of humans as somehow being not animals.
评论 #9413173 未加载
评论 #9415304 未加载
kingkawnabout 10 years ago
I did animal research for a few months before I couldn&#x27;t take it anymore. The standards are for PR, are hardly enforced, and nobody cares beyond not looking bad. I don&#x27;t care what they say they do, if they are taking the initial step of choosing to use animals theyre a poor choice for self-enforcement of animal welfare.
pvaldesabout 10 years ago
Puppet activists playing god and destroying the lives of the young researchers whereas everybody treat them as the great hero of the week. Is a problem, yes. To be young an naive and doing silly things trying to impress your crush is understandable and even likeable. But, when your love plan involves to &#x27;morally torture&#x27; or destroy lives of other young girls and guys, and millions of dollars in stuff, papers should adopt a more responsible point of view.<p>The type of activism that repeat again and again old dated facts as if were current, is mostly a way to climb up socially at any cost, and to find comfort in the group. No intelligent people can argue that to give a expensive dinner of mouses to the wild cats equals to love or improve the life of those mouses. The peaceful and intelligent lab rats set free ceremoniously, with be soon bitten, chased away and most of them will be ripped in pieces for the wild rats before 24 h. The survivors will last a couple of more miserable days terrified, hungry, bleeding and isolated of their families. This is cruel for a social animal, and not much different to stealing a lap dog from this friend owners and house and releasing it alone in the territory of a wolf pack to be teared apart and eated.<p>Experimentation is mostly a tool to achieve something that a lot of good people disperately need as soon as possible. To make a taboo of this tool will not solve much of our real problems and probably will create a huge amount of human pain.<p>Labs should have sticks with &quot;<i>Is the Thalidomide, stupid</i>&quot; printed in uppercases, and those type of articles should probably be answered also with the same slogan.
评论 #9413866 未加载
return0about 10 years ago
I think modern lab standards are not nearly as horrible. The larger problem is not the harsh treatment, but the huge number of animals that are killed in labs nowadays. There is the prevalent push to publish more and more often, which requires more and more animals in order to report minute results. Rarely do researchers analyze their experiment data to exhaustion; they&#x27;d rather run a new experiment than try to figure it out from existing data. If we want to use animals less, we need 1) public availability of all experimental data and 2) more and better computational models that take the bottom-up approach to studying organisms and the brain. Until then we &#x27;ll keep piling up dead animals with reckless abandon.
howlingabout 10 years ago
I always wonder why people feel so upset over millions of animals being experimented every year when we kill and eat billions of animals every day.
评论 #9413667 未加载
sam____about 10 years ago
If that is Paul&#x27;s belief system, he sold it out awfully quickly because he was &quot;fascinated by one class lab&quot;. He is now &quot;astonished that the daily grind of depriving, shocking and killing these animals did not move me to leave my job.&quot; He quit because he lost interest and wanted to be a programmer, stealing a lab coat in the process...<p>I don&#x27;t mean to be too harsh, but the thing that comes through loudest to me is that, by his own measure, Paul may be a bad person.
Lorentoabout 10 years ago
Animals suffer horrible lives naturally too, and on a much more massive scale. If you&#x27;re really against animal suffering and dying then a far bigger problem is the existence of wild animals with peak populations, unreliable food supplies, predators, fights and disease. Stopping animal research is like trying to stop global warming by driving slower. Feels like you&#x27;re making a difference but you&#x27;re not .
评论 #9413265 未加载
评论 #9413503 未加载
canviaabout 10 years ago
The train of thought that has me leaning towards becoming vegetarian is along the lines of:<p>If an advanced alien species came to Earth, how would I want them to treat humans? How about in the case that they are advanced to a level that comparing their abilities and technology to humans would be the same as comparing human technology and abilities to that of birds or dogs or cows?<p>Would I want them to dismiss our primitive (from their perspective) nests as the work of an unintelligent beast? Would I want them to corral us into pens and feed us fattening foods before harvesting our bodies? Would I want them to feed us hormones and genetically modify our bodies to produce more milk or grow larger muscles for consumption? Would I want them to breed the outliers of our species to create extremely large and extremely small &quot;pure-breeds&quot; of humans as a novelty? Would I want them to dismiss our primitive verbal communication as nothing more than cheerful song and make no attempt at all to understand what we are trying to express?
评论 #9416689 未加载
reasonattlmabout 10 years ago
Animal experimentation is horrible and terrible. Even in the most ethical of studies suffering is inflicted upon animals that otherwise would not have happened; entire genotypes of animals doomed to additional suffering have been bred in some cases. But the alternative is far worse: to not perform these animal studies, or rather for some privileged group to use force to prevent others from performing such studies, and so bring progress in medicine to a grinding halt. Without animal studies there would be no new meaningful advances in medical science. It is a harsh and unpleasant aspect of the human condition that forcing suffering upon animals in the course of scientific studies is necessary to advance both human and veterinary medicine. A few suffer for the benefit of many - an equation that should make any sane and compassionate person uncomfortable.<p>Animal studies are even required to refine the science needed to move beyond animal studies. Ethics and morality aside, studies employing animals are expensive and time-consuming. Given the choice, scientists would much rather experiment on cells in a dish, or on slabs of unfeeling cultured tissue, or upon simulations of animals, if these methods would generate results of the same quality.<p>In comparison to what might be and what is possible, we live in a barbaric age of suffering, war, death, and sundry other horrors that we like to keep behind the curtains and out of the mind&#x27;s eye. But barbaric as it is, this age is far better than the past by all such measures. We no longer absolutely, definitely need to slaughter animals for food to sustain the populace, for example, and rates of violence between humans are far lower than in the pre-modern era of tribes and universal poverty. The option stands open today for a society of vegetarians: it is practical from a technological and economic standpoint. That we have not moved rapidly in that direction is our shame, and our descendants will look back on us as savages for this and many other reasons.<p>Those people who criticize and take action against the use of animals in medical research should first look to their diets, and then to the practice of farming animals. Vast and expansive animal suffering is caused in the name of putting meat into the marketplace - greater many times over each month than in all the animal experiments in modern history. Persuade the omnivores of the human race to relinquish their participation in the meat market before savaging the medical science that will benefit both man and beast.<p>In short, the human condition is a rotted, cloying swamp, but we&#x27;re closer to the edge than we were - no longer up to our necks in it, we now have the luxury of finding more of our surroundings to be disgusting and primitive. The way out to solid ground is forward, through more of the same, until our biotechnology becomes good enough to do away with the suffering we must inflict upon animals in order to build better medicine. Perhaps along the way, societies will arise whose members also reject the needless suffering we presently choose to inflict upon animals in order to eat the same diet as our ancestors.
afarrellabout 10 years ago
If we are to devote resources to preventing humans from assaulting non-humans, should we also devote resources to preventing non-humans from assaulting each other?
SunShiranuiabout 10 years ago
It is paywalled.
评论 #9413085 未加载