Sci 1: The Dead Rat Hope Experiment - Voodoo Death

[whatever I feel like]

I do not like this.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

Is it a problem that educational programming (or any type of product) can be considered entertainment? Obviously there are plenty of pseudo-documentaries around these days where really the goal is to entertain first with little meaningful information, but there is still plenty being made that are enjoyable entertainment while also enlightening the viewer on a subject. Edutainment while mainly aimmed at kids does a great job of this.

He was talking about adults and so were we in this thread.

I look at how many people get their news primarily from entertainment programs like daily show and I'd say yes, it's a pretty big problem overall. Though probably not solvable.

 

[Not a bee]

Poor rats.
Reminds me of the fly experiment that scientists/entomologists did. They were testing hopelessness in the common housefly. If you put too much pressure on the fly, it will eventually "give up" and accept its doom.
Poor animals.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Satan must have been bummed out when the researchers died, it takes the fun out when the ironic eternal punishment is way too obvious.
Anyways like other people here said, the problem with all those experiments is the attempt to explain the behaviour through humanising and making parallels with human society, which makes cool rhetoric but doesn't really prove anything. Like people said the lab rats are cucked while the wild rats are chads, but the lab rats go through the plot of Saw while the wild rats might have been in a place where they didn't need to look far for food and water.

 

[Marissa Moira]

I do not like this.

I would have pulled them out just when they were about to go under. Letting them drown doesn't serve a purpose.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

Satan must have been bummed out when the researchers died, it takes the fun out when the ironic eternal punishment is way too obvious.
Anyways like other people here said, the problem with all those experiments is the attempt to explain the behaviour through humanising and making parallels with human society, which makes cool rhetoric but doesn't really prove anything. Like people said the lab rats are cucked while the wild rats are chads, but the lab rats go through the plot of Saw while the wild rats might have been in a place where they didn't need to look far for food and water.

A lot of good arguments in this thread why tests with humans would offer more reliable results.

 

[Jeff_the_Thriller]

Definitely interesting but I think it only proves scientists are weirdos who can only cum if they are torturing living creatures. I don't even know what the hypothesis of the experiment was supposed to be.

Before scientist intervention I think the domesticated rats lasted longer because they had hope that they would be taken care if things got bad. For instance, they would get food, water, and necessities given to them. The wild rats didn't have this safety net. If they were in a bad situation they knew they were fucked and that's it. The second part I found interesting because the wild rats discovered that they might be rescued and held onto hope.

To put this in human terms, let's say someone breaks their leg. The person in civilization knows someone will call an ambulance or help is on the way. Then let's say this happens to some mountain man in middle of nowhere Alaska, who falls off a cliff and shatters his femur. He might as well give up hope because he knows no one will find him in time. But if he had a cell phone and contacted someone, he would hold onto hope to be rescued.

I don't think this experiment proofed anything we didn't already know, even in the 50s. I think it was just an excuse for some sick fuck with a lot of college education to torture rats.

 

[TFT-A9]

I do not like this.

There are protections extended to a number of animal species used in experimentation.

Mice and rats are not privy to these.

I can't say I like it either but I doubt my feelings on the matter concern anyone with the ability to curtail gratuitous cruelty at the hands of psychopaths in lab coats. Sometimes the information they glean improves our medicines and practices, at least.

 

[Jewthulhu]

If ever you feel so inclined, I would be interested in reading it. I don't think there is any better place for such autism than here.

I might write something up on a separate document and share it via DM. It's something I like to think about and would like feedback on but I'm always concerned with coming across as egotistical or an attention seeker.

There are protections extended to a number of animal species used in experimentation.

Mice and rats are not privy to these.

I can't say I like it either but I doubt my feelings on the matter concern anyone with the ability to curtail gratuitous cruelty at the hands of psychopaths in lab coats. Sometimes the information they glean improves our medicines and practices, at least.

Mice and rats have the same protection other species do. A lot of studies you read about in the past (such as this one) wouldn't be possible today due to regulations that exist now.

My comment about researches liking to torture and kill mice is half facetious, half an actual frustration with the overreliance on rodent models, even when rodents aren't the best animal model for the study.

 

[Picnic_Boy]

People scare me.

 

[Saint Agustin]

I feel bad for the little mice who had to endure their final moments as test subjects from some deranged scientist.

 

[TFT-A9]

Mice and rats have the same protection other species do. A lot of studies you read about in the past (such as this one) wouldn't be possible today due to regulations that exist now.

That's somewhat relieving.