7 ms·

This is really good to know, but this experiment makes me very uncomfortable. It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. I su

This is really good to know, but this experiment makes me very uncomfortable. It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. I suppose they didn't know what they'd find, but I don't think it's appropriate to intentionally induce high levels of pain in animals just to see what happens.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Vaslo 7y ago
Definitely not a big defender of mice or a PETA pal, but I kind agree-reading that makes you wonder what was done to them.
awalton 7y ago
> It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. The paper's very explicit on how this is done - they injected the mice either with RTX (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resiniferatoxin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resiniferatoxin, a functional capcasin analog) or saline (at random) to induce a stress response, and countered it in some mice with buprenorphine to rule out false positives. So, yeah, some of them got to deal with nothing, some dealt with a burning sensation, some dealt with burning followed by bliss, and some felt nothing but bliss. But, at the end of the day they are lab mice, and there are plenty that are being subjected to worse treatment for less laudable scientific ends than understanding the physiological responses to stress and pain.
- tehjoker 7y ago
  I mean, I'm a science person I get that. I don't think having a scientific procedure negates the fact that some unlucky ones were essentially tortured. Idk, maybe I am becoming more uncomfortable in general with animal experiments but the ones I participate in, the animals are anesthetized when something painful happens. Certainly, we are choosing to benefit human life over animal life, and certainly they have a much shorter life span, but I do feel we should be minimizing harm and refusing to cross certain lines. If someone that wasn't a professional said "look how quickly these mice turn white when you cause them searing pain" you'd have a different opinion of them.
  - s1artibartfast 7y ago
    > We should be minimizing harm and refusing to cross certain lines. Do you think the researchers in this paper failed or minimize harm or crossed certain lines? If so, where would you draw them? If conducted or published in the US, they almost certainly went through an independent animal use review.
    - tehjoker 7y ago
      I believe they went through a review and passed. I'm not questioning that the process was followed, I'm questioning our standards that are applied in process.
      - s1artibartfast 7y ago
        Fair enough. Do you have a specific question regarding the standards, or an opinion on if this should have been allowed? In my experience, the standard for mammal studies is the experiment must be of scientific merit and minimize unnecessary harm to the animals. nonhuman primates are treated separate and have a much higher bar.
echelon 7y ago
> It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. You really don't want to find out how we conduct basic biology research, then... Studying heat shock proteins, for instance? Burn their feet. There's a protocol for how to snap their necks when you need to dispose of them.
- germinalphrase 7y ago
  I had a hard time learning about the Harlow research into infant attachment, isolation and depression at UW-Madison back in the day.
- JenrHywy 7y ago
  My ex worked at a medical research school for a while - part of her job was snapping the necks of test mice. They do it that way because it's the most humane (as in, quick and painless) way. Killing thousands of mice did have a non-zero impact on her emotionally.
- tehjoker 7y ago
  I'm aware of basic biological research. This just seemed extreme to me. The neck breaking procedure is designed to reduce suffering btw...
meowface 7y ago
I recently left a similar comment on a similar HN thread regarding a mouse study and received a bunch of downvotes. (Complaining about downvotes is lame, but just adding this to show the potential attitude about it here.) I believe there's a pretty high chance humans in 2120 will look back on today and marvel at all of the facets of life that were filled with backwardness and barbarism, like we do for 1920, and like they did for 1820.
- pen2l 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument_to_the_laboratory_mouse#/media/File:Monument_to_lab_mouse-1.JPG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument_to_the_laboratory_mou...
- pera 7y ago
  Some people feel very uncomfortable with the idea that a non-human animal can experience pain as we do, it can make ones reality much more complex.
foolfoolz 7y ago
do you realize to test vaccines to killer diseases we inject animals with bad diseases all the time?
- ethanbond 7y ago
  Granted these researchers probably didn’t know what they’d find, but I figure part (in my case, all) of the discomfort comes from the relative inanity of the result. Torture mice to discover that stress turns hair white and whoa we might be able to prevent stress from turning people’s hair white. The benefit of their suffering is nowhere near developing vaccines for harmful diseases (at this point, anyway).
  - s1artibartfast 7y ago
    >The benefit of their suffering is nowhere near developing vaccines for harmful diseases (at this point, anyway) 1) They did more than see if their hair turned white. They identified the protein responsible for stem cell death and methods to suppress the stem cell death. 2) Science is additive. Nearly every single medical product you benefit from today was supported by hundreds of modest animal experiments.
    - ethanbond 7y ago
      Not debating any of this, mostly commenting that, “yeah well we torture mice to discover vaccines” is not a good rebuttal to someone’s discomfort with this experiment.
MperorM 7y ago
I think it's really important to put their torture in proper context. https://animalcharityevaluators.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/donation-allocation-chart.jpg https://animalcharityevaluators.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/... This statistic from animal charity evaluators, show just how small a percentage lab testing makes up for in the total amount of animals we use and kill. If your goal is to effectively reduce animal suffering, the only place that makes sense to start is factory farming. The conditions animals endure are much worse than most testing, and the scale is difficult to comprehend. I don't mean to trivialize the suffering these mice went through, I just think it's important to make clear that we cause the same amount of suffering every time we eat meat, something that brings us much less value than this research.
- tomc1985 7y ago
  With the growing amount of consciousness towards ethically-sourced meat, I'm not sure your statement is 100% true
  - MperorM 7y ago
    When surveyed, most people respond that the meat they buy is ethically sourced but it is rarely the case. Most meat that is claimed to be ethically sourced is far from it. Worse yet, the places where demand is growing the fastest, are places with minimal concern for how the animals are treated.
  - chc 7y ago
    "Ethically sourced meat" is essentially a marketing gimmick. It generally doesn't denote conditions that are meaningfully different from "normal" meat.
    - tomc1985 7y ago
      So, you're saying that farm-raised, open-pasture, free-range, or other titles are meaningless? I don't think that is true when the labels are used honestly
nine_k 7y ago
If you think lab mice are treated badly, read something about chicken or cow industrial farming. (And then we kill them to eat their dismembered corpses. Sorry about that. I hope artificial meat becomes good enough soon.)
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

Vaslo 7y ago

Definitely not a big defender of mice or a PETA pal, but I kind agree-reading that makes you wonder what was done to them.

awalton 7y ago

> It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. The paper's very explicit on how this is done - they injected the mice either with RTX (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resiniferatoxin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resiniferatoxin, a functional capcasin analog) or saline (at random) to induce a stress response, and countered it in some mice with buprenorphine to rule out false positives. So, yeah, some of them got to deal with nothing, some dealt with a burning sensation, some dealt with burning followed by bliss, and some felt nothing but bliss. But, at the end of the day they are lab mice, and there are plenty that are being subjected to worse treatment for less laudable scientific ends than understanding the physiological responses to stress and pain.

tehjoker 7y ago
I mean, I'm a science person I get that. I don't think having a scientific procedure negates the fact that some unlucky ones were essentially tortured. Idk, maybe I am becoming more uncomfortable in general with animal experiments but the ones I participate in, the animals are anesthetized when something painful happens. Certainly, we are choosing to benefit human life over animal life, and certainly they have a much shorter life span, but I do feel we should be minimizing harm and refusing to cross certain lines. If someone that wasn't a professional said "look how quickly these mice turn white when you cause them searing pain" you'd have a different opinion of them.
- s1artibartfast 7y ago
  > We should be minimizing harm and refusing to cross certain lines. Do you think the researchers in this paper failed or minimize harm or crossed certain lines? If so, where would you draw them? If conducted or published in the US, they almost certainly went through an independent animal use review.
  - tehjoker 7y ago
    I believe they went through a review and passed. I'm not questioning that the process was followed, I'm questioning our standards that are applied in process.
    - s1artibartfast 7y ago
      Fair enough. Do you have a specific question regarding the standards, or an opinion on if this should have been allowed? In my experience, the standard for mammal studies is the experiment must be of scientific merit and minimize unnecessary harm to the animals. nonhuman primates are treated separate and have a much higher bar.

echelon 7y ago

> It sounds like they had to torture several mice for days to get this result. You really don't want to find out how we conduct basic biology research, then... Studying heat shock proteins, for instance? Burn their feet. There's a protocol for how to snap their necks when you need to dispose of them.

germinalphrase 7y ago
I had a hard time learning about the Harlow research into infant attachment, isolation and depression at UW-Madison back in the day.
JenrHywy 7y ago
My ex worked at a medical research school for a while - part of her job was snapping the necks of test mice. They do it that way because it's the most humane (as in, quick and painless) way. Killing thousands of mice did have a non-zero impact on her emotionally.
tehjoker 7y ago
I'm aware of basic biological research. This just seemed extreme to me. The neck breaking procedure is designed to reduce suffering btw...

meowface 7y ago

I recently left a similar comment on a similar HN thread regarding a mouse study and received a bunch of downvotes. (Complaining about downvotes is lame, but just adding this to show the potential attitude about it here.) I believe there's a pretty high chance humans in 2120 will look back on today and marvel at all of the facets of life that were filled with backwardness and barbarism, like we do for 1920, and like they did for 1820.

pen2l 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument_to_the_laboratory_mouse#/media/File:Monument_to_lab_mouse-1.JPG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monument_to_the_laboratory_mou...
pera 7y ago
Some people feel very uncomfortable with the idea that a non-human animal can experience pain as we do, it can make ones reality much more complex.

foolfoolz 7y ago

do you realize to test vaccines to killer diseases we inject animals with bad diseases all the time?

ethanbond 7y ago
Granted these researchers probably didn’t know what they’d find, but I figure part (in my case, all) of the discomfort comes from the relative inanity of the result. Torture mice to discover that stress turns hair white and whoa we might be able to prevent stress from turning people’s hair white. The benefit of their suffering is nowhere near developing vaccines for harmful diseases (at this point, anyway).
- s1artibartfast 7y ago
  >The benefit of their suffering is nowhere near developing vaccines for harmful diseases (at this point, anyway) 1) They did more than see if their hair turned white. They identified the protein responsible for stem cell death and methods to suppress the stem cell death. 2) Science is additive. Nearly every single medical product you benefit from today was supported by hundreds of modest animal experiments.
  - ethanbond 7y ago
    Not debating any of this, mostly commenting that, “yeah well we torture mice to discover vaccines” is not a good rebuttal to someone’s discomfort with this experiment.

MperorM 7y ago

I think it's really important to put their torture in proper context. https://animalcharityevaluators.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/donation-allocation-chart.jpg https://animalcharityevaluators.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/... This statistic from animal charity evaluators, show just how small a percentage lab testing makes up for in the total amount of animals we use and kill. If your goal is to effectively reduce animal suffering, the only place that makes sense to start is factory farming. The conditions animals endure are much worse than most testing, and the scale is difficult to comprehend. I don't mean to trivialize the suffering these mice went through, I just think it's important to make clear that we cause the same amount of suffering every time we eat meat, something that brings us much less value than this research.

tomc1985 7y ago
With the growing amount of consciousness towards ethically-sourced meat, I'm not sure your statement is 100% true
- MperorM 7y ago
  When surveyed, most people respond that the meat they buy is ethically sourced but it is rarely the case. Most meat that is claimed to be ethically sourced is far from it. Worse yet, the places where demand is growing the fastest, are places with minimal concern for how the animals are treated.
- chc 7y ago
  "Ethically sourced meat" is essentially a marketing gimmick. It generally doesn't denote conditions that are meaningfully different from "normal" meat.
  - tomc1985 7y ago
    So, you're saying that farm-raised, open-pasture, free-range, or other titles are meaningless? I don't think that is true when the labels are used honestly

nine_k 7y ago

If you think lab mice are treated badly, read something about chicken or cow industrial farming. (And then we kill them to eat their dismembered corpses. Sorry about that. I hope artificial meat becomes good enough soon.)

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]