The lab-born primate, developed by Chinese scientists, made history as the world’s first live-born “chimeric” monkey. And: he glowed! Green!

  • ZahzenEclipse@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They can’t live for very long. It’s why I kinda think this work is somewhat unethical - even if it brings about breakthroughs that could help millions.

    • GONADS125@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This tends to be an unpopular opinion, but I completely agree. I believe it’s unethical to do experiments like this on animals that cannot consent, but have a clear capacity for suffering, including on a conscious level.

      Even lab rats show a capacity for empathy [1], and they will stop pulling a lever to feed themselves if they see the rat in the subsequent cage is electrocuted. [2]

      Monkeys (and other animals) can understand the concept inequality. [3] Inequality is a moral concept, indicating that the animal has a capacity for complex social relationships and understanding.

      Monkeys were taught the concept of currency (in the form of silver discs) and soon after, they unexpectedly developed prostitution on their own. [4]

      Monkeys like this are the primates of lower intelligence, mind you. I’m not even saying I condone these studies even, as I’m not convinced the ends justify the cruel means with which the experiments were conducted.

      I think we should be more respectful of life, rather than subjecting it to such mass exploitation and suffering. I can admit I will value my loved ones over other animals and humans on a selfish level, but when I separate emotion from my reasoning, I don’t believe it is justified for humans to exploit animals as we do for our own gains.

      It’s important to note the extremely unnecessary suffering of frivolous experiments on a widespread scale. One example is the LD 50 (or median lethal dose), in which animals are essentially force-fed a product (cosmetics, cleaners, medicines, etc.) until half of the test subjects die, to determine the lethal dose. [5]

      Much of the time, their death isn’t because of the substance itself; it’s due to the quantity force-fed (stomach/organs rupturing, whatnot). This test is used on clearly nonessential products like cosmetics, and the results are often unreliable. [5]

      I am not interested in debating this subject. I just wanted to share my thoughts. Things to watch out for in objection to animal rights arguments are common fallacies like the appeal to nature, appeal to tradition, and just blatant speciesism.

      • PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocksB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

        [3]

        Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

        I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.