Pig brains kept alive outside bodies for first time(independent.co.uk)
independent.co.uk
Pig brains kept alive outside bodies for first time
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/pig-brains-kept-alive-outside-bodies-first-time-yale-university-a8325331.html
18 comments
It's not well defined, but we can compare a dead brain to a brain in comatose to a fully awake and perceptive brain.
I assume, given what they say in the article, that the pig brain activity in the experiment was somewhere close to the activity of a dead brain or a brain in a coma.
They also explained that the blood-replacement they used contain a lot of inhibitive substances probably preventing the brains from being active even if they could.
I assume, given what they say in the article, that the pig brain activity in the experiment was somewhere close to the activity of a dead brain or a brain in a coma.
They also explained that the blood-replacement they used contain a lot of inhibitive substances probably preventing the brains from being active even if they could.
They measured brain waves via an electroencephalogram. The lack of brain waves reflects a lack of brain activity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillation
I was also curious, but as I kept reading it seems they may have answered that.
> After initially shocking results indicating the brains were partially conscious – which later turned out to be mistaken – the scientists concluded they were producing a flat brain wave comparable with someone in a comatose state.
> “That animal brain is not aware of anything, I am very confident of that,” said Dr Sestan.
> After initially shocking results indicating the brains were partially conscious – which later turned out to be mistaken – the scientists concluded they were producing a flat brain wave comparable with someone in a comatose state.
> “That animal brain is not aware of anything, I am very confident of that,” said Dr Sestan.
You have to wonder if the evidence of lack of consciousness could just as easily be a result of the lack of any sensory input whatsoever.
I mean what does a brain do with absolutely no external stimulus at all?
I mean what does a brain do with absolutely no external stimulus at all?
It hallucinates its own patterns.
the tl;dr is that a healthy brain produces a significant amount of activity, even absent of sensory stimulation.
https://www.quora.com/What-happens-in-the-brain-during-senso...
the tl;dr is that a healthy brain produces a significant amount of activity, even absent of sensory stimulation.
https://www.quora.com/What-happens-in-the-brain-during-senso...
> what does a brain do with absolutely no external stimulus at all?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream
How would we stimulate such a brain? Would you put electrodes on nerves going into the brain-stem?
Agreed. It may not be observing itself but there was obviously some brain function.
This is fascinating research.
This is fascinating research.
How do you define consciousness such that pigs have actual consciousness on their own (without having spent some significant amount of time with humans)?
"the scientists concluded they were producing a flat brain wave comparable with someone in a comatose state."
Simply that certain brain waves correlate with some definition of awareness of your surroundings.
I'd imagine its pretty hard to be certain that a brain-dead person can't perceive his or her surroundings, however.
I'd imagine its pretty hard to be certain that a brain-dead person can't perceive his or her surroundings, however.
How would a disembodied brain even be capable of being “aware of its surroundings” without any sensory information?
Some sense of touch/pressure/temperature as the skin does, perhaps?
Consider how we can feel physical sensations in dreams without any physical source, or “phantom limbs” that amputees are sometimes said to feel.
Consider how we can feel physical sensations in dreams without any physical source, or “phantom limbs” that amputees are sometimes said to feel.
But someone with far less brain activity than, for example, an unconscious patient on an operating table is not going to be more conscious.
Its a rational, intuitive assumption. But we learn new things all the time.
Given that there are people walking around living perfectly normal lives who have only a small fraction of normal brain mass, I'm always skeptical of definitive pronouncements regarding conciousness.
>Given that there are people walking around living perfectly normal lives who have only a small fraction of normal brain mass,
Could you find a link perhaps? I Googled the end of what I just quoted but didn't find anything...
Could you find a link perhaps? I Googled the end of what I just quoted but didn't find anything...
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Psycho-pass just yet [0].
The Sibyl System is made up of networked human brains giving tremendous computation ability.
Would not surprise me that the answer on what's beyond silicon is actual living brain tissue being the CPU.
[0]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2379308/
The Sibyl System is made up of networked human brains giving tremendous computation ability.
Would not surprise me that the answer on what's beyond silicon is actual living brain tissue being the CPU.
[0]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2379308/
Not quite.
The setup is that the brains come from people that "broke" the system, and are wired up to look for others that match their kind.
They are effectively there much like Neo and Zion are to the Matrix, a way to rebalance the system over time.
The setup is that the brains come from people that "broke" the system, and are wired up to look for others that match their kind.
They are effectively there much like Neo and Zion are to the Matrix, a way to rebalance the system over time.
Spintronics.
It's possible to build compact neuromorphic devices using spintronics... Denser and more energy efficient.
It's possible to build compact neuromorphic devices using spintronics... Denser and more energy efficient.
The article mentions "ethical implications" a few times, but doesn't really hint at anything potentially negative. Obviously the potential to save or prolong lives is an enormous potential benefit, and any negative consequences would need to be elaborated on to be weighed against it.
Is it just that the technology smells like scary sci-fi stuff?
Is it just that the technology smells like scary sci-fi stuff?
One group of concerns is probably around unintentional harms -- for instance, only discovering much later that the process causes the brain to experience unimaginable pain or fear and without any way to communicate it or take action against it or even escape it by dying. It would be a form of hell that should terrify even the most stalwart of us.
The other would be intentional harm. Imagining the technology developing into the hopefully-far future, it's fair to also imagine interest from organizations like the CIA, who are so very fond of finding new ways to cruelly torture people while pretending they get good intelligence from it.
The other would be intentional harm. Imagining the technology developing into the hopefully-far future, it's fair to also imagine interest from organizations like the CIA, who are so very fond of finding new ways to cruelly torture people while pretending they get good intelligence from it.
I'm surprised that nobody's pointed out how... breathlessly far-fetched both of those scenarios are? You'd find out the "unimaginable pain and fear" thing the first time you woke someone up, and standard anesthesia already has this issue. And for the CIA, wouldn't "take out their brain and hook wires into it" kind of constitute "major surgery without consent or medical reason"?
We haven't reached the point of waking anyone up. Presumably, if this progresses, they could perhaps get better/more life-like/normal brainwave patterns, and THEN you have to work out I/O, like communication. So, I don't see that as far-fetched at all in the intermediate stages of developing it in a practical direction.
As for the CIA, MKULTRA? Bay of Pigs? Drug trafficking? You seem to imply a simple ethical boundary would stop them. I don't see much historical basis for believing that.
As for the CIA, MKULTRA? Bay of Pigs? Drug trafficking? You seem to imply a simple ethical boundary would stop them. I don't see much historical basis for believing that.
They are approximately as far-fetched as the ideas that AI will eventually destroy humanity or GMO crops will cause ecosystem collapse. Which is to say, it takes a new technology and contextualizes it with past bad behavior to try to imagine what the worst possible future looks like.
If this technology is developed further and eventually becomes available to more than a tiny number of people, I don't think we can guess what the positive or negative effects on society will be.
We never can; we live in a surveillance state, but it doesn't look like Orwell's 1984. We have advanced technology that the dreamers of the 1950s never foresaw, but no jetpacks or flying cars -- just miniaturized, globally-connected pocket computers designed to capture as much attention as possible. The global climate has continued to worsen since alarms were broadly sounded in the 1980s, but most of us that have the luxury of discussing the topic are sitting in nice little homes and offices and blissfully untouched by it all. We have high-tech network-connected systems and a mix of severely concentrated wealth and a much larger impoverished group, but none of this looks like cyberpunk genre fiction.
Bad futures tend to happen gently enough for them to seem perfectly acceptable. A lot of people even come to defend them.
If this technology is developed further and eventually becomes available to more than a tiny number of people, I don't think we can guess what the positive or negative effects on society will be.
We never can; we live in a surveillance state, but it doesn't look like Orwell's 1984. We have advanced technology that the dreamers of the 1950s never foresaw, but no jetpacks or flying cars -- just miniaturized, globally-connected pocket computers designed to capture as much attention as possible. The global climate has continued to worsen since alarms were broadly sounded in the 1980s, but most of us that have the luxury of discussing the topic are sitting in nice little homes and offices and blissfully untouched by it all. We have high-tech network-connected systems and a mix of severely concentrated wealth and a much larger impoverished group, but none of this looks like cyberpunk genre fiction.
Bad futures tend to happen gently enough for them to seem perfectly acceptable. A lot of people even come to defend them.
Anyone get that Metallica(?) video going through their head, about the soldier?
Gets me thinking of the prison in Minority Report.
What do pre-crime do to someone they grabbed for what they were supposed to do if pre-crime didn't intervene? Put them in a stasis tank while they get to watch their supposed future crime on repeat.
What would even be the goal of such a prison?
What do pre-crime do to someone they grabbed for what they were supposed to do if pre-crime didn't intervene? Put them in a stasis tank while they get to watch their supposed future crime on repeat.
What would even be the goal of such a prison?
"The ethical implications are left as exercise for the reader".
Keeping a brain alive outside the body might be have the problem that it in constant pain and unable to act in the world in any meaningful way. What more terrifying experience could imagine than being aware and utterly "disembodied"?
But then again, it might have the implication that the brain might installed in a new body with the slight problem that existing brain is evicted. Sure, some healthy bodies with dysfunctional brains can be found but that's only a short term problem.
Nothing that hasn't covered by the scariest horror movies you can think of. The movie "get out" occurs to me - old people parasitizing younger bodies, rich people parasitizing poorer bodies, etc.
Keeping a brain alive outside the body might be have the problem that it in constant pain and unable to act in the world in any meaningful way. What more terrifying experience could imagine than being aware and utterly "disembodied"?
But then again, it might have the implication that the brain might installed in a new body with the slight problem that existing brain is evicted. Sure, some healthy bodies with dysfunctional brains can be found but that's only a short term problem.
Nothing that hasn't covered by the scariest horror movies you can think of. The movie "get out" occurs to me - old people parasitizing younger bodies, rich people parasitizing poorer bodies, etc.
"in constant pain and unable to act in the world in any meaningful way"
This is how many factory farmed animals already live.
Where is the outrage?
This is how many factory farmed animals already live.
Where is the outrage?
Great point, reminded me of the stress hormones that their animal brains release into the meat I mindlessly consume. I think I'm gonna be vegetarian for a while...
"Altered Carbon" also poses this problem.
Is prolonged solitary confinement considered torture? How about if it's in a sensory deprivation tank? Then add paralytics.
Now contemplate consciousness with no sensory input at all (not even your own heartbeat or normal bodily sensations when you move, etc.) leaving only whatever phantom sensation the traumatized nerves generate, like amputees' phantom limbs and phantom pain, but for your only sensation.
On an individual basis this may be the most terrifying thing I could ever imagine.
Now contemplate consciousness with no sensory input at all (not even your own heartbeat or normal bodily sensations when you move, etc.) leaving only whatever phantom sensation the traumatized nerves generate, like amputees' phantom limbs and phantom pain, but for your only sensation.
On an individual basis this may be the most terrifying thing I could ever imagine.
CPR can be ethically complicated, this is a step more so. How does consent work? Who can give it? What if the revived brain somehow asks to be switched off - is that suicide or assisted suicide or neither? Does it have rights? Property rights? Can it make decisions about the things it owns? How do those decisions get authorised?
Why should any of those answers be different than for a person under normal circumstances?
Euthanasia isn’t legal many places and life as a brain is probably not for everyone.
How do you communicate with it or know what it wants. How does that get into a legal document. There is little about it that is comparable with a normal human existence.
This is the part I'm wondering about - my uncle died of a malignant brain tumor recently. I wonder if it would be possible to use a technique like this to transplant parts of a healthy donor brain to his brain. I read about two being done on wikipedia but it seems like something that is largely out of reach for now.
I think it might be easier to transplant a whole brain than to transplant a part of a brain. I'm not even sure the latter is possible at all.
Is a disembodied but conscious human brain a pig?
If so, suppose it is in pain? It certainly stands to reason that a brain without a body would be very confused. At the very least, fear would be a logical reaction.
None of this is certain, but I think little of this is very controversial.
None of this is certain, but I think little of this is very controversial.
So... Krang? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krang
This is truly horrifying. Makes me think of _I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream_.
They haven't figured out how to interact with the nerves to create any kind of sensory input (vision, hearing, taste, smell, touch, balance, ...), so no Altered Carbon-like virtual reality where you can be tortured to death over and over again.
Well, not yet, anyway.
Well, not yet, anyway.
The point is we don’t know what sort of horribly torturous experience it might be to be a conscious mind disconnected from all sensory input.
That's what sensory deprivation tanks are for. As the brain is a constant pattern-matcher and input-filter, depriving it of fresh inputs seems to turn it a bit hallucinatory, it starts to make up stuff (could be described as boredom, perhaps?). Feynman seemed to enjoy the experience somewhat (described in "Surely you're joking, mr Feynman").
Of course, every person's experience could be unique and different.
Of course, every person's experience could be unique and different.
> “To ensure the success and social acceptance of this research long term, an ethical framework must be forged now”
It seems to me like the ethical framework surrounding this depends rather a lot on the outcome of these experiments. We have no idea what a disembodied consciousness experiences. Nor do we know what, if anything, they would express. To me, the answers to these questions determine the ethics of this to a very large degree.
One might argue that the possibilities are so horrible that we should not proceed. And yet I cannot help but be curious.
It seems to me like the ethical framework surrounding this depends rather a lot on the outcome of these experiments. We have no idea what a disembodied consciousness experiences. Nor do we know what, if anything, they would express. To me, the answers to these questions determine the ethics of this to a very large degree.
One might argue that the possibilities are so horrible that we should not proceed. And yet I cannot help but be curious.
> We have no idea what a disembodied consciousness experiences.
Try sensory deprivation (or isolation) tanks, or just solitary confinement. Both and especially the latter obviously are just a tiny fraction as bad. You don't spend much time in a tank, and the solitary confinement still leaves you with your senses. But already getting too much of either is pretty bad.
As an exercise for yourself: Just sit completely still in a completely quiet and dark room for as long as you can (try the cellar).
Try sensory deprivation (or isolation) tanks, or just solitary confinement. Both and especially the latter obviously are just a tiny fraction as bad. You don't spend much time in a tank, and the solitary confinement still leaves you with your senses. But already getting too much of either is pretty bad.
As an exercise for yourself: Just sit completely still in a completely quiet and dark room for as long as you can (try the cellar).
Here it comes ... pig-brain powered autopilot.
OK, maybe not pig brains. Maybe dog brains. Dogs are pack animals, and quite trainable.
Remember the watchdogs in Cryptonomicon :)
PETA would not be happy, however.
Edit: No, that was Snow Crash. How embarrassing :(
OK, maybe not pig brains. Maybe dog brains. Dogs are pack animals, and quite trainable.
Remember the watchdogs in Cryptonomicon :)
PETA would not be happy, however.
Edit: No, that was Snow Crash. How embarrassing :(
You don’t need that advanced tech for that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pigeon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_dog
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pigeon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tank_dog
I don't think that you'd actually want a dog driving your car. But yes, the anti-tank dogs didn't work out. So maybe you don't want dog brains.
PETA might be the most known animal welfare-related organization, but they aren't really worthy to be a drop-in replacement for the generic term.
Also, allegedly, China experiments on humans. Human rights organizations probably wouldn't be happy to see the resulting scientific papers.
Also, allegedly, China experiments on humans. Human rights organizations probably wouldn't be happy to see the resulting scientific papers.
Maybe human brains would work in China. But that'd be pushing the envelope.
In Hannu Rajaniemi's Flower Prince trilogy, he posits that the minds of billions of people will get uploaded, and that all but a few rich ones will end up as slaves. Basically apps.
In Hannu Rajaniemi's Flower Prince trilogy, he posits that the minds of billions of people will get uploaded, and that all but a few rich ones will end up as slaves. Basically apps.
While I am not sure how long the Soviets were able to keep the dogs alive for (they say "hours"), there is a very interesting film about reanimation of dogs from decades ago.
Warning that the film does show a decapitated dog being artificially kept alive through a bypass device. A much different era.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KDqh-r8TQgs
Warning that the film does show a decapitated dog being artificially kept alive through a bypass device. A much different era.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KDqh-r8TQgs
I have seen this. I tend to question whether they actually did it, and whether this represents an authentic film.
Consider, say, the space race. They have a clear motivation to demonstrate superiority close to this era. I have also gotten the impression that the classic soviet government didn't exactly have a reputation for sterling honesty, and this doesn't seem wildly far afield from something you could achieve with practical effects.
I have limited specialist domain knowledge, but the head doesn't really have a power source. Blood can give the brain oxygen, but hours seems a bit far-fetched. They definitely skip a lot of detail here, like where/how they oxygenate the blood without lungs. The head has the brain, which takes a lot of energy to run for its size, and probably doesn't carry out the metabolic processes of energy production, with the blood/brain barrier. So, you have a big power draw, and no engine. Hours of observable or verifiable life seems like a lot for stale blood with no power source and a big power draw.
I also don't know the authentic history of the video to verify it didn't come as a complete fabrication of a historical curiosity at a later date.
I would like to see credible verification, but it doesn't really add up.
Consider, say, the space race. They have a clear motivation to demonstrate superiority close to this era. I have also gotten the impression that the classic soviet government didn't exactly have a reputation for sterling honesty, and this doesn't seem wildly far afield from something you could achieve with practical effects.
I have limited specialist domain knowledge, but the head doesn't really have a power source. Blood can give the brain oxygen, but hours seems a bit far-fetched. They definitely skip a lot of detail here, like where/how they oxygenate the blood without lungs. The head has the brain, which takes a lot of energy to run for its size, and probably doesn't carry out the metabolic processes of energy production, with the blood/brain barrier. So, you have a big power draw, and no engine. Hours of observable or verifiable life seems like a lot for stale blood with no power source and a big power draw.
I also don't know the authentic history of the video to verify it didn't come as a complete fabrication of a historical curiosity at a later date.
I would like to see credible verification, but it doesn't really add up.
Thank you for your response. I do have some domain knowledge as it seemed to be a crude form of ECMO (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extracorporeal_membrane_oxyg...) , but it made me dig deeper into the history of extracorporeal perfusion. I think you will enjoy the link below which has a lot of information about the video.
The scientist in the beginning of the film is the famous physiologist Haldane, which is why I originally believed the video. However your response led me to find out he was a Marxist! Now I was torn and had doubts.
Turns out that while the film was propaganda aimed toward Western Scientists, it was real and did work.
http://perfusiontheory.com/who-really-invented-the-heartlung...
The scientist in the beginning of the film is the famous physiologist Haldane, which is why I originally believed the video. However your response led me to find out he was a Marxist! Now I was torn and had doubts.
Turns out that while the film was propaganda aimed toward Western Scientists, it was real and did work.
http://perfusiontheory.com/who-really-invented-the-heartlung...
Thanks for the link! It was interesting. I could never really figure out if it was real. Seems pretty advanced for the time. I definitely didn't know about ECMO.
> However your response led me to find out he was a Marxist!
You say that as if you just found out he was a member of ISIS and killed women and children by burning them alive. I can't find anything in Karl Marx' teachings that could cause such a response, even when you disagree with him completely.
You say that as if you just found out he was a member of ISIS and killed women and children by burning them alive. I can't find anything in Karl Marx' teachings that could cause such a response, even when you disagree with him completely.
I think there is a misunderstanding about what is surprising, I'd be just as surprised if he was an Ayn Rand card-carrying objectivist (is that what they call themselves?). My surprise was that I didn't think Haldane would have any political bias to cause doubt about the authenticity of the video.
Is there any research being done into putting living neurons on a chip and having them process information?
I saw some research into that back in ~2004 (?), where researchers put rat neurons in a petri dish that had an electrode array inside. Had great success, the neurons were able to drive a little rc car around and fly a jet simulator.
I've seen nothing about it since then. I like to imagine the scientists are working on Terminators for DARPA.
Edit: guess I should've read the link in the other reply. :)
I've seen nothing about it since then. I like to imagine the scientists are working on Terminators for DARPA.
Edit: guess I should've read the link in the other reply. :)
Somebody will connect a neural interface to the pig brains. Then run neural programs on the brains as that will be power efficient. This seems like a scene from the movie the matrix.
cool. but that's a lousy article just playing up the ick factor for clicks. I'd guess that this makes studying the living brain much easier - but they don't get into any detail.
This is really disturbing :(
finally wilbur will be able to survive without charlotte.
Brain in a jar!
It’s odd people talk about ethics here but have no problem torturing and killing pigs so they can eat them.
I did find the experiment a bit more eerie than 'killing for food'. But that aside, some of the ethical problems they discussed in the article were regarding whether the possible revival of ones brain would mean that the person and his juridical status as a person would also follow, as well as his thoughts etc.
As opposed to if we experiment on some dead persons liver, if we experiment on his revived brain we might actually be experimenting on a conscious being (human), is what I believe is the main thing here.
As opposed to if we experiment on some dead persons liver, if we experiment on his revived brain we might actually be experimenting on a conscious being (human), is what I believe is the main thing here.
Why is it odd? Those are very different kinds of "torture". This is like saying that it's odd that people are against waterboarding, but are fine with keeping people locked in prisons, even when done for purely retributive reasons.
Vegans have this bizarre tendency of reducing human ethics to a bunch of incorrect generalizations (i.e. a dog is sort of like a cow, therefore it's "odd" that people eat cows but consider it wrong to eat dogs), and are then baffled that the world doesn't follow their artificial ethical formalism.
Vegans have this bizarre tendency of reducing human ethics to a bunch of incorrect generalizations (i.e. a dog is sort of like a cow, therefore it's "odd" that people eat cows but consider it wrong to eat dogs), and are then baffled that the world doesn't follow their artificial ethical formalism.
Pigs are not typically tortured before they are killed for consumption.
Yes, they are. We can split hairs over what qualifies as torture, but I invite you to familiarize yourself with how commodity pigs are raised and slaughtered.
I am quite aware of that and it's a good reason why I consume very little meat. But it is as nothing compared to keeping a brain alive outside of the body. If we did that to a human without their consent there would be blood in the streets.
Keep in mind that the whole reason pigs were used for this experiment is because they are biologically similar to humans.
Keep in mind that the whole reason pigs were used for this experiment is because they are biologically similar to humans.
> If we did that to a human without their consent there would be blood in the streets
The same could be said for almost anything we do with pigs
The same could be said for almost anything we do with pigs
There is a big difference between the way pigs are treated for consumption and what is happening in this experiment. For all we know the rest of the pig was discarded.
To me there is a huge difference between killing animals for food and conducting ethically questionable experiments on them. Another bothersome element here is that pigs are super smart and even though they state they are sure the pig(s) never regained consciousness you have to wonder what kind of extreme stress they would have cause if that had not worked out.
Animal research is something that I hope we can do without in the near future. And if we all ate less meat (or none at all) then that would be for the better as well, though ironically that would likely mean that there would be no more domesticated animals kept for food at all except for cows (for milk) and chickens (for eggs).
To me there is a huge difference between killing animals for food and conducting ethically questionable experiments on them. Another bothersome element here is that pigs are super smart and even though they state they are sure the pig(s) never regained consciousness you have to wonder what kind of extreme stress they would have cause if that had not worked out.
Animal research is something that I hope we can do without in the near future. And if we all ate less meat (or none at all) then that would be for the better as well, though ironically that would likely mean that there would be no more domesticated animals kept for food at all except for cows (for milk) and chickens (for eggs).
It sounds like they literally took the brains from slaughtered pigs. I don't know why they wouldn't have processed the meat as normal.
> Brains rescued from a slaughterhouse had their circulation restored with a system of pumps, heaters and artificial blood.
> Brains rescued from a slaughterhouse had their circulation restored with a system of pumps, heaters and artificial blood.
It’s not really possible to separate the egg and dairy industries from the meat industry. What do you think happens to chickens or cows when their production levels start falling?
More than that, male chicks are overwhelmingly not raised and just killed because they’re not particularly worth the money. Buying mass produced eggs means a lot of chicks died to make it efficient at the start. With cows the males who are not going to be used for breeding (very few are raised as bulls) are generally raised for veal.
As you say, they are inextricably linked on the large scale. At least for eggs though, you can definitely patronize small farms that don’t need to employ such aggressive economies of scale.
As you say, they are inextricably linked on the large scale. At least for eggs though, you can definitely patronize small farms that don’t need to employ such aggressive economies of scale.
You’re ignoring the method of killing the animal for food. It’s not just “killing them for food”. It’s the entire industrial process of slaughter at scale. Look into it sometime.
> pigs are super smart
Until they smell blood. If you ever go into a pig pen and cut yourself the pigs will attack you and probably kill you. Chickens are similar but of course being smaller they attack each other.
People these days more than ever want to anthropomorphize animals they like. But when instinct kicks in many of those animals are, well, just animals.
Until they smell blood. If you ever go into a pig pen and cut yourself the pigs will attack you and probably kill you. Chickens are similar but of course being smaller they attack each other.
People these days more than ever want to anthropomorphize animals they like. But when instinct kicks in many of those animals are, well, just animals.
I suppose we could pack hundreds of non consenting humans so they are always touching each other on a metal grates for flooring and no sunshine, no access to bathrooms, and no ability to move around.
No one would complain about that. /s
No one would complain about that. /s
Humans have done worse than that to other humans. And are doing so as we are having this conversation.
Have you ever been on or near a farm ever, or even talked to (not shout at) a farmer? Pigs squeal for no reason and they squeal all the time I'm sure non-farmers assume squealing means pain.
I live in a rural area with lots of farming. A few people I know come from families that raise pigs and no they do not torture them. Even to the point of having a controlled access entry to the barn to prevent disease coming in from the outside (disinfectant tray for shoes).
It's hard work to maintain and raise animals for food farmers aren't going to spend time and effort torturing pigs which are their income. No business person is going to damage their product for kicks. A wheat farmer doesn't drive over his crop and flatten it. Fishermen don't throw dynamite into the water for fun.
I live in a rural area with lots of farming. A few people I know come from families that raise pigs and no they do not torture them. Even to the point of having a controlled access entry to the barn to prevent disease coming in from the outside (disinfectant tray for shoes).
It's hard work to maintain and raise animals for food farmers aren't going to spend time and effort torturing pigs which are their income. No business person is going to damage their product for kicks. A wheat farmer doesn't drive over his crop and flatten it. Fishermen don't throw dynamite into the water for fun.
Yes, yes I have.
At minimum pigs are castrated, transported and imprisoned against their will, and slaughtered against their will. Small, independent or family farmers do take care to minimize suffering. Minimize, not eliminate.
That's not at all the case at industrial farms. Sows are raised and slaughtered in dismal conditions. Gestation crates, forced and early weaning, artificial insemination, etc. Sows raised for slaughter can experience physical abuse, sexual abuse, and psychological abuse in a number of ways.
At minimum pigs are castrated, transported and imprisoned against their will, and slaughtered against their will. Small, independent or family farmers do take care to minimize suffering. Minimize, not eliminate.
That's not at all the case at industrial farms. Sows are raised and slaughtered in dismal conditions. Gestation crates, forced and early weaning, artificial insemination, etc. Sows raised for slaughter can experience physical abuse, sexual abuse, and psychological abuse in a number of ways.
Seconded and proud that fellow HNers are ethically conscious of their food.
Wow, most downvotes I’ve ever gotten, for simply showing support for other people on this site, nice...keep ‘em coming!
Do you not think that hitting them, packing them into cramped conditions, transporting them in similar conditions is torturous?
People eating pork don't think their meat as coming from such conditions and/or want/expect that to happen. So it's not fair to say "people" are okay with that and not the brain experiment. Producers might be okay but that's a different argument to which the one you're replying in this thread.
People don’t want to know what’s going on on factory farms about it because it makes them uncomfortable. A textbook example of cognitive dissonance. From ethics point of view that’s better than wholeheartedly endorsing it but not by a large margin.
There is plenty wrong with the bio-industry but to compare that and this experiment is not helping the discussion.
It's the same as saying that what was happening at Guantanamo bay was no worse than what was happening elsewhere so why all the fuss?
It's the same as saying that what was happening at Guantanamo bay was no worse than what was happening elsewhere so why all the fuss?
Could you provide more specific examples of "what was happening everywhere else"?
An animal doesn't know if it is being raised for experimentation or food. They are simply being treated cruelly until they are slaughtered. They may even be leading a better life if they are being raised for experimentation than for slaughter. We on the other hand are trying to wipe our conscious clean by rationalizing the reasons behind the slaughter and putting food over knowledge. We don't need to eat meat to survive or thrive, so saying "but it is for food" holds no higher a moral ground than "but it is for an experiment".
An animal doesn't know if it is being raised for experimentation or food. They are simply being treated cruelly until they are slaughtered. They may even be leading a better life if they are being raised for experimentation than for slaughter. We on the other hand are trying to wipe our conscious clean by rationalizing the reasons behind the slaughter and putting food over knowledge. We don't need to eat meat to survive or thrive, so saying "but it is for food" holds no higher a moral ground than "but it is for an experiment".
On the plus side they aren't being eaten alive as it happens in the wild.
In the wild, they get to be free until the day they are killed by a predator.
In captivity they are treated cruelly, fattened, and slaughtered with no chance of escape. How is that a "plus side"?
The alternative lifestyle for them is not frolicking on a green grass, but non-existence. We are the cause that they exists. They don't know about "no chance of escape", you do. I'm all for labgrown meat, but mixing your own feelings and objective information about their assessment of quality of their own life (which you don't have) is not helping your cause.
Feelings are there for a reason, mate. Mine tell me that an animal would rather not exist than being born into a life of torture followed by slaughter.
So a next step should be redesigning biosphere to eliminate suffering or eliminating all sufficiently intelligent animals. Their life is a struggle for survival followed by death, after all.
[deleted]
The people talking about ethics here are not necessarily people who would have no problem torturing and killing pigs for food.
I'd prefer an animal not be tortured before I eat them.
And that's the concern, here; torture.
And that's the concern, here; torture.
industrial scale meat production is basically a life-long torture for animals. Note: i gave up on pork and beef, still eat chicken, fish. Hope to get easy on chicken with time too. Artificial meat can't come too soon. Its impact on our civilizations would hardly be possible to overestimate. We'll be able to go off the hypocrisy of "only humans have soul" and finally look with open eyes and meet other intelligent creatures beside ourselves (i mean i hope we're intelligent creatures).
It’s one thing to kill a pig; it’s another to bring them back.
Most people would not be concerned if this were somehow just something people did and could only do to pigs. But the thing is that this is clearly showing what might be possible to do with people in a little bit.
[deleted]
Hmm, but killing plants and fungi is totally OK then, yes?
Yes. There’s a huge difference between a sentient being and a plant. I don’t think anyone seriously believes that these are morally equivalent.
How do you distinct sentient beings? There are some plants which display indications for rudimentary sentience, some molds and fungi can also be sentient. Does your rather bold statement also apply there?
I don't see this being any more unethical or unnerving than keeping a liver a or a lung or a heart alive outside of a body. A brain is just another organ, it's not a mind. It is a vital organ, to be sure, but the article equates it with the "essence" of a living being. This involves too many assumptions.
Assuming it is not a mind and isn't in massive pain is also too many assumptions. If your stance can be proven, fine - but the ethical problem is getting to that proof without creating disembodied minds living a life of absolute torture, with no senses or possible actions or communications... just an endless experience of pain.
I would suspect that being deprived of sensory input, you would become a vegetable after going crazy at some point.
This is true. The "mind" could very well exist outside of any organ system.
No it can't.
Prove it?
The sheer amount of energy used by this organ is a major hint.
Also damage to the brain has immediate and profound effects on one's mental capabilities as opposed to damage to any other organ.
Also damage to the brain has immediate and profound effects on one's mental capabilities as opposed to damage to any other organ.
There are theories that the brain is just an interface for the mind-- as in, it exists apart from the brain, but the brain facilitates its expression in physicality. If the brain were damaged, the interface would thus be damaged, and you could no longer access the information provided by mind. There are theories that there is no such thing as mind. You didn't prove anything.
[deleted]
“However, Dr Sestan has since said he does not wish to elaborate on the findings of his pig brain experiment, as he is awaiting publication of the results in a scientific journal.”
Hmm why? No spoiler? I wouldn’t mind sharing it right away.
Hmm why? No spoiler? I wouldn’t mind sharing it right away.
Some journals are very picky about that. As in refusing to publish, if too much gets leaked.
I'm curious how they were able to verify this. I am under the (perhaps incorrect?) impression that consciousness is neither well defined nor a binary function.