• phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago
    1. You can in fact test many of these devices in mice and even zebrafish.

    2. You repeat testing in animals (with modifications) til it is actually safe or you at least understand what the risk is and how to mitigate it to tell the people who are going to trial it.

    • schmidtster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago
      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 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.