[HN Gopher] How 'animal methods bias' is affecting research careers
___________________________________________________________________
How 'animal methods bias' is affecting research careers
Author : LinuxBender
Score : 30 points
Date : 2025-03-21 19:51 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > In general, Krebs says, NGO grants for animal-free research
| tend to be smaller than the longer-term, multimillion-dollar
| awards offered by government sources such as the US National
| Institutes of Health (NIH), the world's biggest funder of
| biomedical research.
|
| ... for now. Given the widely circulated "naughty words" list for
| grants [1], I would not be surprised at all if this kind of
| research gets labeled and discarded as "woke" just as well.
|
| [1]
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2025/03/15/these-197-t...
| DrNosferatu wrote:
| With that terms index, there will be no more mathematical
| statistics research!
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Pushing FUD on the entire academic sector, that's what it is.
| Pressure people into absurd self-censorship.
| DecentShoes wrote:
| Should've thought of that before they started punishing
| scientists who dissented from gender ideology. Something had to
| be done to stop it stomping further on the rights of women,
| children, and gay people.
| SpicyLemonZest wrote:
| I'm a bit confused on whether "other models that may more
| reliably mimic human biology" generally exist today. The article
| mentions a couple non-animal models, but do we know that they
| _are_ better analogues, or are they just ideas of where research
| might go if people didn 't expect in vivo results? The point of
| in vivo studies, after all, is that it's easy to build artificial
| models which accidentally strip out some important complicating
| factor.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-25 23:01 UTC)