3 ms·
All the comments discussing the moral implications of harming insects are focusing on the wrong part of how useful this information is. As the link says, this
by deftnerd 7y ago
All the comments discussing the moral implications of harming insects are focusing on the wrong part of how useful this information is.
As the link says, this research indicates that we can use insects to do basic research on Neuropathic pain. Insects, being easy and fast to breed, and easy to manage in large quantities, makes this especially useful for research.
Now they can try all sorts of methods of tackling the problem, from drugs to gene therapy.
It's not, of course, proof that successes will translate to mammal or human models, but it's an excellent way to do some initial concept filtering.
- devoply 7y agoNice going there bug Dr. Mengele.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- kranner 7y agoWhy are the moral implications 'the wrong part'? If we found a species of aliens that clearly suffered like us but bred as fast as insects and were as easy to manage, would the moral implications of experimenting on them still be irrelevant compared to the utility of experimenting on them?
- scotty79 7y agoBecause they didn't prove that insects expeirience pain as people understand it. They just proven that expeiriencing injury sensitizes an insect. Article tries to balance between biting the audience with insect pain but then trying to not be completely false calls it 'pain' and nociception which is the only scientifically accurate term for what is observed.
- kranner 7y agoGP seemed to say it doesn't matter whether they experience pain or not because the convenience of experimenting on them outweighs any suffering they may undergo. That's not specific to this experiment.
- scotty79 7y agoI was just explaining why focusing on moral aspect is the wrong reaction to this research. It's wrong because there are no moral insights from this research. They didn't obtain any new indications that insects feel pain.