Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

news.northwestern.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 104 posts

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#51

Post by marcodiego »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #48

Recently every thread on HN about life and death has been devolving into a debate with people who insist that these things need to be addressed in the comments and those that simply don't care. It's honestly exhausting. It's sort of like making food and having someone at the table try to discuss the morality of the meat you're using.... Except it's every. single. time. Lab mice are killed off everyday after experimen…

A provocative and bad argument in favor of animal experimentation I heard is: "Animal experiments increase our life by X years. What each does with this extra time is a personal question."

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#52

Post by ajuc »

archontes wrote: post #42
mindcrime wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry you were downvoted for asking that. I think it's a fair issue to raise. Assuming the mice are intentionally injured to allow testing, it seems reasonable, to me, to question the ethics of that. Of course it's easy to say "they're just mice, who cares?" but it's not wrong to ask "they're living creatures as well, shouldn't we care?" I expect the response to be "it's justified given the benefits we derive for…

I'm curious if you can elaborate on, "they're living creatures, shouldn't we care?". What about them being living creatures "ought" to lead to that? Why do you think that the base assumption is caring?

Living creatures might be too much (see bacteria), but if you think we should care about other people - it follows that we should also care about other creatures that can feel and think. Mammals certainly qualify.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#53

Post by stephencanon »

dpcx wrote: post #31

Do I want to know how they get mice with severe spinal cord injuries to test on? I'm guessing it's exactly what I think it is, but I'm wondering if there's another way that it happens.

It is exactly what you think it is.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#54

Post by adventured »

ajuc wrote: post #52
archontes wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if you can elaborate on, "they're living creatures, shouldn't we care?". What about them being living creatures "ought" to lead to that? Why do you think that the base assumption is caring?

Living creatures might be too much (see bacteria), but if you think we should care about other people - it follows that we should also care about other creatures that can feel and think. Mammals certainly qualify.

> but if you think we should care about other people - it follows that we should also care about other creatures that can feel and think

It doesn't automatically follow. I can entirely correctly, subjectively decide which living things I want to care about and which I do not. I can separate living things by a hierarchy of importance. Which is exactly what we do all the time with other people and our relationships to them (example: hey HN, let me know how much you love Donald Trump and where he ranks on your hierarchy of importance).

I don't care about mice. I care about puppies (insert reasons here). That is not an irrational position. It's entirely subjective either direction. Any attempt to apply logic or science to the premise is inherently absurd. What we each value and why is subjective, it's personal; it inherently can't be objective. Rat and mice fans might likely pick those over puppies or kittens for example, due to their personal experiences and their hierarchy of values.

No, I wouldn't kill or injure the mice myself for a living. I think it's grotesque.

I wouldn't perform abortions for a living, it's sometimes a very grotesque process. I'm entirely pro-choice.

I wouldn't butcher animals for a living, it's often quite a disgusting process as far as I'm concerned. I have no problem with other people doing so. And I have no problem with eating a steak. That's not contradictory or hypocritical.

I also would never want to be a nurse. I fully understand what nurses do. The human body can be quite disgusting at times. I'm glad nurses exist.

Such things are not contradictory. You can find an action and outcome acceptable, while not enjoying (or glorifying) all aspects of the process in question.

Once you cross the line of: all living things matter without exception and should never be killed, on to: some living things do not matter as much as others (eg plants for consumption) - then you're down to subjectivism as your argument across the board.

The animal rights argument is entirely subjective (what should the protections be, should there be any protections, how many should there be, who decides, for which living things, and on and on). What that means is, the opposite position has as much validity, it's also subjective. What it comes down to is majority politics ultimately: how many people can you get to agree with you, such that you can pass legislation in your preferred direction.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#55

Post by rhino369 »

mindcrime wrote: post #32
dpcx wrote: post #31

Do I want to know how they get mice with severe spinal cord injuries to test on? I'm guessing it's exactly what I think it is, but I'm wondering if there's another way that it happens.

I'm sorry you were downvoted for asking that. I think it's a fair issue to raise. Assuming the mice are intentionally injured to allow testing, it seems reasonable, to me, to question the ethics of that. Of course it's easy to say "they're just mice, who cares?" but it's not wrong to ask "they're living creatures as well, shouldn't we care?" I expect the response to be "it's justified given the benefits we derive for…

It's really only a good question after we stop slaughtering animals for essentially entertainment.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#56

Post by atian »

0x0nyandesu wrote: post #48

Recently every thread on HN about life and death has been devolving into a debate with people who insist that these things need to be addressed in the comments and those that simply don't care. It's honestly exhausting. It's sort of like making food and having someone at the table try to discuss the morality of the meat you're using.... Except it's every. single. time. Lab mice are killed off everyday after experimen…

It’s a sanity check. Can we afford to not do X? because thank God there is some commonality in disgust. Clearly not at the moment, but I doubt even the original authors of those comments care more than you do.

It’s a feature and not a bug.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#57

Post by 0x0nyandesu »

atian wrote: post #56
0x0nyandesu wrote: post #48

Recently every thread on HN about life and death has been devolving into a debate with people who insist that these things need to be addressed in the comments and those that simply don't care. It's honestly exhausting. It's sort of like making food and having someone at the table try to discuss the morality of the meat you're using.... Except it's every. single. time. Lab mice are killed off everyday after experimen…

It’s a sanity check. Can we afford to not do X? because thank God there is some commonality in disgust. Clearly not at the moment, but I doubt even the original authors of those comments care more than you do. It’s a feature and not a bug.

The people insisting on this just want to use HN as their megaphone. There is no debate. They have already made up their minds.

It comes off about as well as an insufferable teenager at Thanksgiving dinner. Some feature.

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#58

Post by s1artibartfast »

mindcrime wrote: post #32
dpcx wrote: post #31

Do I want to know how they get mice with severe spinal cord injuries to test on? I'm guessing it's exactly what I think it is, but I'm wondering if there's another way that it happens.

I'm sorry you were downvoted for asking that. I think it's a fair issue to raise. Assuming the mice are intentionally injured to allow testing, it seems reasonable, to me, to question the ethics of that. Of course it's easy to say "they're just mice, who cares?" but it's not wrong to ask "they're living creatures as well, shouldn't we care?" I expect the response to be "it's justified given the benefits we derive for…

The the answer in the science and medical communities is Almost Never "they're just mice, who cares"

It is rather that this is an important experiment that can't be done any other way and can have large benefit for humans

Re: ‘Dancing molecules’ successfully repair severe spinal cord injuries

#60

Post by mental1896 »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #58
mindcrime wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry you were downvoted for asking that. I think it's a fair issue to raise. Assuming the mice are intentionally injured to allow testing, it seems reasonable, to me, to question the ethics of that. Of course it's easy to say "they're just mice, who cares?" but it's not wrong to ask "they're living creatures as well, shouldn't we care?" I expect the response to be "it's justified given the benefits we derive for…

The the answer in the science and medical communities is Almost Never "they're just mice, who cares" It is rather that this is an important experiment that can't be done any other way and can have large benefit for humans

"it can't be done any other way" strikes me as pretty thin. Whereas we may not be able to conceive of another way at this point in time, it does no good to imagine that this condition will continue in perpetuity.
Post reply on HN