Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I agree for the most part.

>> The shaking could as well be caused by the damage to the brain > That makes it worse.

Does it? I can see how an argument could be made along the lines of: the animal testing (rather than human testing) is there because of a theoretical risk of suffering, and so as soon as it happens in practice, the research should be stopped, the strategy changed etc. But does anyone here really think this is the case? I'd think everyone here knows animal suffering is inevitable on this stage of the research (obviously there could be less or more of it depending on competence and good will to invest in more humane procedures - neither can be evaluated based on such a note). What the quote does, I think, is that it implies some kind of sadism on the side of the researchers. Meanwhile I think the "uncontrollable shaking" could as well happen after a placebo procedure, just because the macaque doesn't know what is being done to it. Such a strong response to this particular quote seems to me purely emotional, which the OP confirms with his further line(s) of argumentation.

> It’s not like the original comment quoted the only problem in the article, they chose one of many.

Exactly! Why that one? After several requests, the OP refuses to explain why he thought it's such an important quote.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: