And as fair as that view is, I wouldn’t do “trial and error involving the likelihood of death” on humans, or for me, most (if not all) living creatures.
So that’s gonna be a controversial sell, and using “save the dolphins” that leave out crucial info isnt going to be it…
Does it?
It shows dying early deaths. Is that better than a life in a (better) captive place?
Definitely, trial and error for a solution is better than giving up. The long term as a solution would provide forever after that point.
Some deaths would provide for no deaths in the future.
Just my plebe thoughts is all.
And as fair as that view is, I wouldn’t do “trial and error involving the likelihood of death” on humans, or for me, most (if not all) living creatures.
So that’s gonna be a controversial sell, and using “save the dolphins” that leave out crucial info isnt going to be it…
I agree it’s untenable.
There would be many peops that agree to take that risk on.
Even though, it would be a no go right from the start due to funding and as you mentioned harm to others.
The thought I had is far beyond my pay grade so to speak but would not a few deaths on either side be worth it to save many many more in the future?
No, it’s not ethical.
It’s unacceptable to do that to humans in a ‘modern Western’s’ clinical ethics setting.
I agrue it’s still unethical to do to animals…