Chemputer t1_iwol41l wrote
Reply to comment by triffid_boy in How do medical researchers obtain lab animals with diseases like specific forms of cancer which arise spontaneously? Do they raise thousands of apes and hope some eventually develop the disease? by userbrn1
Yes, we are primates. That's why we call non-human primates "non-human primates" when referring to them in a technical capacity, not necessarily when casually discussing something on Reddit, to avoid confusion.
It is, though, due to ethical reasons, much more practically and technically difficult to work with primates than, say, rodents. Getting any procedure approved on primates is going to be infinitely harder, and involve far more precautions, extra steps, difficulty, etc. than a similar procedure with mice, and be far more limited in number of subjects.
triffid_boy t1_iwp60md wrote
I think you missed the point of my comment. The implication from the comment I replied to was the technical challenge of Crispr in primates was limiting factor, I used the example of current, clinical, use in humans of Crispr as an argument that it's not a technical limitation that prevents more widespread research in primates.
Chemputer t1_iwwh6gt wrote
No, I understood what you were saying. I agree with you to a large extent.
I'm simply saying that ethical difficulty and technical difficulty are intrinsically linked. When you have to jump through more hoops for ethical reasons, it makes it more technically difficult.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments