Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post Reply
User avatar
Azathoth
blind idiot god
blind idiot god
Posts: 9418
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:31 pm
Contact:

Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by Azathoth » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:51 pm

In the 1940s Rene Spitz did a study on infant hospitalism. A total of 91 infants were placed in the Foundling Home located just outside of the United States. For the first three months of the infants’ lives, they were breastfed by their mothers in the Foundling Home. If an infant’s mother was not available, one of the other mothers would also breastfeed that infant. The infant’s enjoyed the affection given by their mothers during this initial three month period. After three months, all of the infants were separated from their mothers. The infants were cared for by nurses and received high quality physical and medical care. Each nurse was in charge of eight to twelve infants, making it almost impossible for the infants to have any need except for the physical/medical need met. As Spitz (1965) states, “To put it drastically, they got approximately one tenth of the normal affective supplies provided in the usual mother-child relationship” (p. 279). In other words, no love or social support was given to these infants.
It wasn’t long before a rapid decline was seen in the infants’ development. Just after three months of the separation, the infants’ motor development had completely halted, and they became totally passive. They’d stopped crying. The infants just lied on their backs and did not have the motivation to roll over or sit up. “The face became vacuous, eye coordination defective, the expression often imbecile. When mobility reappeared after a while, it took the form of spasmus mutans in some of the children; others showed bizarre finger movements reminiscent of decerebrate or athetotic movements (Spitz, 1945a)” (Spitz, 1965, p. 279). Sadly, these infants were failing to thrive, and were severely stunted in all aspects of development.
By the end of the children’s second year of life, those who had survived, their development was “forty-five percent of the normal” (Spitz, 1965, p. 279). This was after they had been placed back into loving homes. These children had become severely disabled both physically and mentally. Even the children who survived and were checked on again at age four, the majority still could not sit unassisted, walk, or talk (Spitz, 1965). It was a horrific example of how social-emotional depravation severely affects infants. Many of the infants did not survive. The death rates of these children were extremely high compared with other children in institutions in which loving care was provided. According to Spitz (1965), “Of the 91 children originally observed in the Foundling Home, 34 had died by the end of the second year; 57 survived” (p. 281). It was speculated by Spitz that the death rate may have been even higher due to the fact he lost touch with some of these children after the study. It was also noted by Spitz that only two of the infants died of disease (Spitz, 1965).
:worried: :|~

I can't believe even in the 40s he was allowed to turn 91 healthy babies into retards to further his research. Anyone else got some horrible studies to share?
Outside the ordered universe is that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.

Code: Select all

// Replaces with spaces the braces in cases where braces in places cause stasis 
   $str = str_replace(array("\{","\}")," ",$str);

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Stabsobermaschinist
Posts: 151265
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
Contact:

Re: Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:59 pm

The Tuskegee syphilis study matches that.
Image
Ein Ubootsoldat wrote:“Ich melde mich ab. Grüssen Sie bitte meine Kameraden.”

User avatar
Strontium Dog
Posts: 2229
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:28 am
About me: Navy Seals are not seals
Location: Liverpool, UK
Contact:

Re: Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by Strontium Dog » Sat Jun 23, 2012 9:22 pm

Image
100% verifiable facts or your money back. Anti-fascist. Enemy of woo - theistic or otherwise. Cloth is not an antiviral. Imagination and fantasy is no substitute for tangible reality. Wishing doesn't make it real.

"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear" - George Orwell

"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" - Barry Goldwater

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74175
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by JimC » Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:19 pm

The zeitgeist sure has moved on...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Jason
Destroyer of words
Posts: 17782
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:46 pm
Contact:

Re: Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by Jason » Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:42 am

Why the fuck don't we have androids already? I don't mean clunky collections of servos, primitive sensors, and speech recognition software. Phh.. I fucking want C-3P0. Chop Chop!

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 74175
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Shit that scientists wouldn't get away with today.

Post by JimC » Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:45 am

PordFrefect wrote:Why the fuck don't we have androids already? I don't mean clunky collections of servos, primitive sensors, and speech recognition software. Phh.. I fucking want C-3P0. Chop Chop!
Stuff C-3PO, where's the Angelina android, the one with insatiable desires for elderly physics teachers?
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest