If it is consistency you are after, then join PETA. The logic of weighing cost and benefits is always sound, but there are cases where it is so one sided that

If it is consistency you are after, then join PETA. The logic of weighing cost and benefits is always sound, but there are cases where it is so one sided that it is offensive to pose the question. Experimenting on babies falls in that category. I suppose at this point my personal opinion on this issue is relevant to you. I am personally okay with Neuralink because it isn’t implausibility far from someone walking from a wheelchair. This specific research miles apart both from the welfare side (it requires emotional harm to the monkeys) and the benefits are far less tangible. I think this research should be put up for review and if I were a reviewer I’d start from a position that this needs to stop. I suppose my meta point is that it is okay to have red lines and argue them, but peppering the discussion with arguments against logic unnecessarily makes your commentary less persuasive to me.