The question for me which remains, is whether the monkeys at neuralink are undergoing a particularly bad treatment or if this is a symptom of generalized animal testing. Basically, is it any better at any other location where animal testing is done?
Of course, in no way does this justify or defend any of the bad behavior, but I’m cautious because there sometimes seem to be unjustified focus on some places which get all the criticism while others keep doing what they do, free of any oversight, which is quite hypocritical.
No, no. It’s not about the lab conditions. Altho that may be a thing too. What they mean is that the product itself was causing brain damage to the monkeys and stuff like that. That makes human trials very dangerous
The question for me which remains, is whether the monkeys at neuralink are undergoing a particularly bad treatment or if this is a symptom of generalized animal testing. Basically, is it any better at any other location where animal testing is done? Of course, in no way does this justify or defend any of the bad behavior, but I’m cautious because there sometimes seem to be unjustified focus on some places which get all the criticism while others keep doing what they do, free of any oversight, which is quite hypocritical.
No, no. It’s not about the lab conditions. Altho that may be a thing too. What they mean is that the product itself was causing brain damage to the monkeys and stuff like that. That makes human trials very dangerous