this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2024
288 points (84.1% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3195 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
  1. You can in fact test many of these devices in mice and even zebrafish.

So your solution to animal testing is other animal testing? Strange solution.

Nothing will ever be risk free, and most of the subjects stayed alive until euthanized to see the results. How else would you get the results?

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but lower order animals. There are creatures with more or less intelligence and therefore more or less capacity of suffering.

Euthanasia is fine for an end point but as an implanted device is lifelong such a short time with the implant before sacrifice is not as useful as longer timepoints.

[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There are creatures with more or less intelligence and therefore more or less capacity of suffering.

…. So it’s okay to make less intelligent creatures suffer…? Intelligence has literally nothing to do with something’s capacity to suffer. Where the hell did you get that from? Let’s see some citations on that asinine claim lmfao.

You need data from every step of the way… so no…. Not at all.