this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
76 points (100.0% liked)

Science

23823 readers
15 users here now

Welcome to Hexbear's science community!

Subscribe to see posts about research and scientific coverage of current events

No distasteful shitposting, pseudoscience, or COVID-19 misinformation.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
gaycomputeruser@hexbear.net
thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net
Wake@hexbear.net
76
Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing (www.science.org)
submitted 2 days ago by git@hexbear.net to c/science@hexbear.net
87 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Your one example does not provide evidence for the skepticism you want to justify... If there's plenty out there, it would would seem easy enough for you (the one making the claim) to provide a clear cut example, and preferably even an article that mentions a wider problem, to prove the point.

This kind of lazy "look it up I'm obviously right" in the face of push back as tepid as reading the article YOU linked would get you dunked on if you were a lost Liberal.

[–] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/06/us/kentucky-organ-donations.html

Go wild with it. I really don't feel like having to rehash the conversation that pops up a couple times a year anyway when some lib comes in complaining about falun gong claims and we gotta go into how it's projection of what Israel does to Palestinians and the US does to their poor.

[–] Keld@hexbear.net 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Wait this has the same issue. Not a single person who shouldn't have had their organs removed had their organs removed as per the article. Subjecting people to this is still beyond the pale though, and it shows nonprofit having a skewed incentive structure. But pat_riot's objections are just as valid here.

[–] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

What are you expecting evidence to be? A necromancer resurrected 200 organ donors after their death and 25 of them said they were still alive when they were killed? @MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net the reason I shared the first article is because it was

  1. A specific example that showed disaster averted.
  2. Named one of the orgs involved.
  3. Showed that the only reason it didn't happen was refusal by an organization member that was so sickened by the experience that this was the last straw and they left the organization.
  4. Discusses the org is under investigation for more of these events.

Either it's a good enough for a starting off point for people to look more into or they're just gonna give the response Keld gave here. Regardless, I'm done with it. Y'all take care.

[–] Keld@hexbear.net 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

What are you expecting evidence to be?

I mean if what you wish to prove is that they kill people for their organs, then that. Like one example of that.

If what you wished to prove is messed uo incentive structures, then this suffices.

Showed that the only reason it didn't happen was refusal by an organization member that was so sickened by the experience that this was the last straw and they left the organization.

No it doesn't. It was caught repeatedly before any organs were harvested. The fact that it had to be stopped repeatedly because of insufficient prior checks is the issue.

[–] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is comradely critique, no need for the resentment. You have a right to disengage, but it's fairly unproductive to just get frustrated and imply it's your reader's fault for critically reading the articles provided.

[–] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago

Keep that article on standby instead, then. Simple enough.