🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2663@polya.STANFORD.EDU>, roberts@polya.STANFORD.EDU (Paul Roberts) writes:
> 
> 
> J. Findley, W. Robinson, and W. Gilliam of the Johns Hopkins
> University Medical School have reported on a restraining chair they
> have developed for long-term studies on baboons. Noting that ``the
> difficulties of restraint increase markedly with the use of electric
> shock'' they ``anchor'' the baboons' arms so as not to allow the
> animal to straighten them. At the same time they allow room for
> ``considerable growth'' to be expected in a long-term study. For the
> delivery of electric shock the baboon is fitted with an electrode
> around the waist, and other metal parts, including the seat itself,
> serve as a second electrode for the delivery of electric current. The
> report states that twenty-two baboons and rhesus monkeys have been
> restrained in this manner for ``lengthy periods,'' - ``several'' of
> them for one-and-a-half years of ``continuous experimentation''.
> 
I am not one of these wild-eyed animal rights activists and am quite
aware that at some point it becomes necessary to use a model for 
scientific research.  Additionally, animals are sometimes the only
appropriate model for experiments which rival the Inquisition in
the horror one feels at hearing them described.  Nevertheless, as
a (I hope) sensitive thinking man who is aware that the earth 
and its creatures are not the mere toys of humans I cannot help
but be outraged at the above story.

And now for the philosophical part...

How could the results of such experimentation retain any credibility?
I think I can find some agreement that changes in the circumstances
in which a creature exists can produce changes in that creatures
physiology and its normal responses to various stimuli.  To put a
creature in restraints for lengthy periods of time must produce
changes in its physiology and therefore skew the results.

Bad show, Mssrs. Robinson and Gilliam, and a porr display of humanity.