http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSrIkUXwsNk&feature=related

what do you think about stuff like this? i sort of thought it was okay but the soundtrack creeped me out.

I thought it was pretty cool, though the vid exaggerated several claims. It was a propaganda vid.

Sides, this stuff is the ancestor of our methods of keeping the body alive during surgery while surgeons mess around in you.

Didn't creep me out but I'd very much prefer to test it on other animals. (since I owned a dog) Kinda reminds me of Futurama.

Ok...That is just FAKE. No living thing on the surface of planet earth can take such pain – a surgery with your head chopped off & you’re still alive. Yah Right.

As for that experiment: Artificial life support, when you’re ‘technically’ dead? Citric acid to make sure you’re alive?

This stuff cannot in any way be done, and even if it were (?), it should not be. It’s a living creature you’re researching mercilessly on.

Animal testing for cosmetics, etc. seems a lot better than this - at least you just kill the thing at once, instead of making it feel/suffer the pain when you cut/chop/slice it’s body – It is just plain coldblooded,ruthless torture,and you gain nothing from it.

& the soundtrack wasn’t eerie :p

@lovinlife: actually, the work the doc was doing (ie keeping the head alive and all) WERE real. The vid just embellishes things.

Sergei Brukhonenko did keep a dog head alive though it wasn't as responsive as it was in the vid due to brain damage.

But his experiments were real and submitted to a scientific journal:
Brukhonenko, S.S., & Tchetchulin, S. (1929), Experiences avec la tete isolee du chien. Journal de Physiologie et de Pathologie Generale. 27 (1): 31-45.

And if you thought that experiment was weird, check out these other ones: Click

Oh wow. I found the “obedience” & the “vomit – drinking doc” very disturbing.

But the “Facial expressions while decapitating a rat” was pretty cool.

Well, the “isolated head of a dog” – the dog survived, if they did it to a human, I bet he/she’ll have 0.01% chances of survival.

God, those 20 experiments are really crazy.

Initiate a homo into a hetero , human ape hybrid
*shudders*

@lovinlife: how do you think we keep people alive in surgery?

We're using the same concepts of keeping the blood and oxygen flowing in order to keep them alive. So his experiments weren't that farfetched in retrospect.

I think a human probably has a similar circulation system to a dog so you can probably duplicate the same results with a human head. Results being it's responsive to stimuli and that's bout it.

At least we're unconscious while going through a surgery, they inject anesthesia in us :p

The poor doggy didn’t have that. They only used the blood oxygen flowing concept.

Me is pitying the doggy, very much.

Can’t believe it’s able take the pain with its head alone & still stay alive.

It's SO cruel doing that to a dog, to any animal!
It's just so cruel in general!
There should be NO testing on animals, it's just soo wrong!

Agree there,Mat.My general thought.animal testing is so cruel.

Also, testing animals to see if it's safe to use a certain kind of soap etc. is very cruel tto, and dump.
"Okay, that one killed the monkey..." or "It worked out on the monkey, great!" i mean, it works on a monkey, okay, how you know it works on a human?

Very dump! use old men instead! they have lived their lives!

Haaaaa-hahahahaha!God!XD That got out a good chuckle out of me.

huh, whats so funny? Why did you say God? it did?
You COULD use it on old women too.. but then who should make cookies?

Lol!XD I agree with all that.the grumpy old people are very very irritating.

Except semi-old women, they are always nice and bakes cookies

Animal testing is controversial. But really, you can't argue about its benefits. Most products are animal tested. If you stop this, every drug (Medicine) would have to be made theoretically, and then you would have Human Fatalities. Though I feel it is cruel, you can't argue about its many benifits

@matrimat: than I assume you do not wear any type of leather or animal products? Or eat any type of animal? Or do not take any type of medication, receive any type of medical treatment, and do not wish to learn anything about biology?

Because like or not, animal testing is a necessary. Not only as test subjects but also as model systems. Do you know that many animals, mice specifically, are used in all sorts of cancer, gene, and other biological research?

Before you condemn animal testing as abominable, you better understand what we gained from that research. We wouldn't be where we are if there was no animal testing.

@KTC: You got a point.
Some of it is useful. But seriously, cutting off a dogs head, or using chimps to test shampoo is not really necessary.
I don't wear any animal products, i only eat chicken and fish, i do get medicine when sick. And i wish to learn about biology, because i want to study to become a vet aka. saving animals.
But things as descesting a frog and/or fish is GROSS!

@KTC- As I said, no one can deny it's use. But some experiments are downright ludicrous. For example, there was one to check whether elephants can survive after eating Sulfuric Acid. Give me one reason that this was useful. And the poor elephant died in an hour in pain and suffering.

@matriamat: yet cutting that dogs head was probably very helpful in developing our current surgery methods. Would you rather have shampoo that was highly acidic and ended up melting your skull?

Seriously, animal testing is necessary. Be thankful that it is generally highly regulated. In US, you have to go through a lot of red tape to test on mice. A. lot. And if you think dissecting frogs/fish was gross, you haven't seen anything in terms of animal testing.

For C elegans, a worm species, scientists mutated a gene so that the vulva of the worms was closed up. The eggs cannot leave the worms body. The eggs hatch inside the worm's body and the offspring eat out of the worm's body. Now that was disgusting. But it was necessary to learn what that gene did and by extension, what it could do in humans.

@theone: I would need a link to it and the research before I can judge it.