This is taken from this month’s ‘Fortean Times’ magazine.
Scientists who blasted drugged mice with loud music in an experiment describrd by the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection as “tasteless and horrific” have recieved an official reprimand,a year after the after the results of the study were published.The experiments on 238 mice at Cambridge University,were a by product of research into Huntingdon’s disease.
Half the mice were injected with methamphetamine and half with salt water.they were then exposed to silence,white noise or loud music-either the dance act The Prodigy or Bach’s Violin Concerto in A minor,which have a similar tempo.Mice injected with salt water fell asleep when the music was played,but the sound dramatically affected the drugged mice,causing them to suffer more speed induced brain damage than normal.Seven died listening to The Prodigy and four while listening to Bach.They appeared to”jiggle backwards and forwards”as the music pounded in their ears.
the scientists should be *nicked* by the RSPCA (so their criminal record damages their career) – not just *reprimanded*.
This *was* just a pointless and cruel experiment (although I have seen anecdotal evidence that similar experiments are sometimes carried out on mice by illegal drug manufacturers, in less controlled conditions).
Another thing that is overlooked is that 112 of the mice on speed appear to have suffered *no ill effects whatsoever* – and this was probably a dose which if scaled up to humans would be over the “safe” recreational limit! Doesn’t exactly show that its a “killer drug”.
Saw the blue roo and thought YAY another Aussie, followed the link but alas, no true blue!
but I did find “Sleep Deprived trippy as fuck mix” by Helen Kormo.
I haven’t listened to techno for years but it brought me back the Cargo days in Detroit with mr cox
That was one of the most useless, pointless and cruel “experiments” (not counting Mengele) I’ve ever heard of. If you explained their hypothesis and the results in the OP I missed them or they were just dumber than the rest of the post.
This is more disgracefull than doing LD50 studies.
Some testing must be done on animals for the reason people would be more pissed off about using humans but I’d rather it wasn’t done at all tbh but to take 100 healthy animals and give them so much of a chemical until 50 are dead serves no purpose and proves nothing but you are harder than 50 rabbits.
The experiment in the OP is just in-funkin-sane. Is this what David Nichols has become now he’s left Perdue and has an acid surplus?
a lot of the unis put security classifications on their animal experiments (with the blessings of the home office who have to approve them) so only whistleblowers would have managed to find this out.
Things have changed but only after some very nasty backlashes (the animal rights groups are equally easy infiltrated by ex-footy casuals who are up for a ruck with any authority as its a better way of impressing girls than fighting at the footy); scientists got threats to their homes and families and personal property damage; and there were protests which brought a lot of fed to campus and injuries on both sides. Rather bizzarely one incident involved stalking a scientist; pouring corrosive liquid over their motor car; but the protestors didn’t realise the family dog liked to sit on the car and he injured his paws and needed the vet! a punk hippy friend of mine is well into her animal rights and told me about all this in the 80s/90s; and when I worked for Defra (even though the place was by then full of hippies) we still had to put every parcel through a scanner in case of IEDs.
These sorts of “experiments” are what give scientists and engineers a bad name; and the costs (both of security and keeping the animals) are now much more than using celll cultures or computer simulations of toxicity. thankfully they LD50 test is today widely discredited but apparently some EU countriies insist on it for some products.
I noticed when I researched the profs on the catwatch show they had all got EU data protection restrictions on their google; yet none of them had been involved in experiments which actually harmed a live animal and all the TV experiments were very ethically carried out. Others were practising vets and their info is always on RCVS or their surgery websites! I think the security procedures were the standard BBC stuff to protect the buildings they work in from stalkers/protestors and probably weren’t even needed but the climate of paranoia still exists.
This topic has no tags