What is the worst scientific experiment you can think of?

youtube.com/watch?v=evXdwZ6LtF8

It is called Internet.

Thing is, that while the way the data was generated was completely and utterly inhumane, using said data when it already exists has no moral implications.
In fact one could argue that to disregard potentially lifesaving data simply because of how it was obtained is in fact the immoral action.

Japanese version of that was worse.

He mentioned Unit 731 you stupid korean.

Yeah, the pic is related to that study. But the experiments on Beagles started long before and a notorious researcher was Dr. Oscar Auerbach.
>The American Cancer Society was an early promulgator of the link between smoking and cancer in the landmark epidemiological studies of 1952 and 1959. However, the tobacco industry was able to delay widespread acceptance of this link largely because animals in studies did not develop cancer. [3] Animal testing was used by politicians to avoid taking action against tobacco companies. Decades of vague and inconclusive results enabled them to perpetuate confusion and prevent doctors from giving authoritative warnings. Researchers spent decades forcing beagles to smoke cigarettes and painting tar on the backs of mice (although there were already clear links between tobacco and human cancer). Physicians were encouraged to keep quiet while researchers spent years performing animal tests. [4], [5]

The study you are refering to is from 1975.
So early on (in the 60s) they try to prove tobacco causes cancer, they fail. Later on the tobacco industry (supposedly) uses the same experiments the first invented and who is to blame? The tobacco industry of course!

A large number of the scientists involved in Japan's unethical WW2 era experiments were pardoned in exchange for the valuable medical data they gathered.

The united states of america

This doggo is still alive.

What a surprise, Soviets win again for most evil!

It was, perhaps, the smoking Beagles that were referred to in the 1964 SG's Report, when the Committee made the observation that with the "possible exception of dogs", the animal experiments had all failed to induce lung cancers. Whatever the case, in the 1971 Report, the Surgeon General conceded that the experiments with dogs, using smoking machines, had failed. However, also in the 1971 Report, the SG described a new experiment, conducted by a government physician, Oscar Auerbach, and others, in which the Beagles were forced to smoke in what the SG described as a "more natural" manner.

Specifically, Auerbach claimed to have slit the throats of 78 Beagles and inserted tracheotomies. He claimed that he had been able to train the dogs to smoke cigarettes through those tracheotomies. A table was presented, showing the number of dogs that managed to survive for 875 days, smoking either regular cigarettes or filter tips or no cigarettes at all. Amongst the 8 controls who did not smoke, there were no deaths. Among the smokers, however, there were 24 deaths from various causes, variously listed as "aspiration of food", lung fibrosis, etc. Although Auerbach did not claim that any of the dogs died from lung cancer, he did in fact claim that 2 of the animals, who smoked non-filter cigarettes, had developed early invasive squamous cell carcinoma in the bronchi.

Auerbach's experiment was again described and the table again presented in the 1977 SG's Report (which was just a reprint of portions of earlier reports). In the 1982 Report, however, the SG described Auerbach's experiment again but this time the SG remarked that Auerbach's "observation has not been repeated so far".

When a scientist says that an observation has not been repeated, it is a polite way of saying that the initial experiment may have been fraudulent. It would be nice to know whyAuerbach's experiment was not replicated.

Not covered by Colby but listed in the Center for Disease Control's Bibliography of Continuing Studies on Smoking and Health, 1984-85 is a study on the effect of tobacco to the circulatory system. In this one, the legs of the dogs were completely severed except for the major arteries. The dogs, still living, were monitored for extended periods while the researchers kept track of the effects of nicotine on the circulatory system. Presumably they were unconscious during these tests.

Ten dogs had their chest cavities opened so that their coronary arteries could be mechanically manipulated to reduce blood flow. The dogs were forced to breathe cigarette smoke, then treated with Ethanol. Ethanol then cigarette smoke, cigarette smoke then Ethanol.1

15 dogs were subjected to 30 experiments where Ethanol ingestion was combined with tobacco smoke inhalation. The purpose was to prove that smoking and drinking are bad for the heart.2

For a change, no animals were pierced, cut, strapped down, rendered unconscious, shot up with dangerous substances or forced to breath tobacco smoke through tracheotomies. Instead two veterinary teaching hospitals examined pet dogs in the comfort of their own homes. Exposure levels to secondhand smoke were assessed. Disappointingly, the researchers found no dose response, no statistical significant risk.3

PETA's sly innuendo that animals are at risk from secondhand smoke is preposterous given the results of the tests on animals looking for that non-existent link. Of course lab studies haven't been able to induce lung cancer in dogs exposed to any amount of smoke, including those poor dogs given tracheotomies and having smoke pumped into their lungs.

It's doubtful that the horrifying experiments as described above have increased the knowledge of tobacco smoke yet the cruel research continues. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. If a particular animal doesn't react as it should, then chose another beast to torture.

It's fake you dingdong.

Communism and socialism

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_radiation_experiments

In the US 20,000 experiments on over 200,000 people including

>pregnant women were given radioactive mixtures
>feeding radioactive material to mentally disabled children[4]
>exposing U.S. soldiers and prisoners to high levels of radiation[4]
>irradiating the testicles of prisoners, which caused severe birth defects[4]
>exhuming bodies from graveyards to test them for radiation (without the consent of the families of the deceased)[5]

In the USSR

>As of 1950, there were around 700,000 participants at different levels of the program, half of whom were Gulag prisoners used for radioactivity experiments, as well as the excavation of radioactive ores. Information about the scale, conditions and lethality of those involved in the program is still kept secret by the Russian government and the Rosatom agency.[10][11]

>So early on (in the 60s) they try to prove tobacco causes cancer, they fail. Later on the tobacco industry (supposedly) uses the same experiments the first invented and who is to blame? The tobacco industry of course!

We already knew you were dishonest the moment you said "Anti-tobacco industry paid scientists."

sourcewatch.org/index.php/Smoking_beagles

>After years of this experiment no beagle developed cancer.

>At one point, Dr. Oscar Auerbach "trained" 86 beagles to smoke in experiments where 12 developed cancer. It was said to be the first instance of tumors produced in large animals exposed to tobacco smoke.

Why do people so often post false information here that a quick google search can clear up?

forces.org/evidence/animals/animals.htm

"Harlow devised what he called a "rape rack", to which the female isolates were tied in normal monkey mating posture."

>you will never design a bdsm monkey dungeon in the name of scientific progress

He did this apparently because he was immensely depressed, all of his colleagues went "why are you doing this, all the research you're doing we already know"

> "The Porto Ricans (sic) are the dirtiest, laziest, most degenerate and thievish race of men ever to inhabit this sphere... I have done my best to further the process of extermination by killing off eight and transplanting cancer into several more... All physicians take delight in the abuse and torture of the unfortunate subjects."

Shit like this is why you shouldn't trust CIA.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg#Views_on_sexuality

>put OP into a room full of men
>record the amount of time it takes him to devolve into faggotry
>sink into a black morass of diaspontment at the embarrassingly short amount of time

when will people learn
the best/most ethical form of extermination is STERILIZATION

c'mon people

become a salaryman

I feel depressed having known this occurred. For the simple sake of answering a postulation of the human mind.

Source?

a good number of those who got a pardon turned out to have no valuable data to speak of though
a good deal of the supposed "scientists" assigned to unit 731 had no scientific methodology to speak of, kept spotty records at best and generally almost went out of their way to ruin their own experiments.

The frostbite example is the exception rather than the rule.

youtube.com/watch?v=K_T8OuYIfhM
I'm not sure I would say that this is totally "bad" in a moral sense... depends on how you look at it. But it's certainly very grotesque, albeit fascinating. Given that it was conducted in the USSR, it's also likely that secret tests of this nature were conducted on humans as well.

youtube.com/watch?v=zoc7SViUvus
Shit makes me sick