| Pages:
1
2 |
blogfast25
International Hazard
Posts: 10562
Registered: 3-2-2008
Location: Neverland
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by macckone  | I think the board world do well to have a math and other sciences sub-forum.
Of course the other boards that cover those subjects specifically are more likely to do a good job. |
Yes, completely seconded.
|
|
|
macckone
Dispenser of practical lab wisdom
Posts: 2168
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Iacuc is often decided at an institutional level. The awa only covers warm blooded animals and exempts bird, mice and rats bred for lab use. But
institutions have a vested interest in making sure animals are used cost effectively, even mollusks. They also have institutional interest in
maintaining a good reputation. Of course some people are going to be against any animal research even on mollusks. Most iacucs are going to prefer
culture tests before animal research because cell cultures cost less in most cases.
|
|
|
Chemosynthesis
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 26-9-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu |
The point isn't whether high school students get grants, the point is that biology is clearly a science where even high school students can get
involved in publishable research. And the vast majority of hobby chemistry isn't trying to approach publishable to begin with, so why hold
hobby biology to a higher standard? |
My point is that highschool students get involved in a generla non-hobbyist setting. Just by merit of being a high school student doesn't inherently
separate them from affiliations with research institutions. I am curious to know how many people publish from a hobby perspective, as I imagine is it
a small amount (though it does happen).
| Quote: | | And hobby biology regulations? What? In the US at least, I am aware of no animal welfare laws that apply to fish (If we call a hobby lab a "research
institution," I thought all cold-blooded animals were exempt from the AWA). If your jurisdiction does regulate, step down to invertebrates, where
basically nobody cares at all. Perhaps one day the requirements for publishing any sort of animal research will be as draconian as the requirements
for legally working with scheduled drugs, but it won't actually stop someone from being able to do science, it'll just prevent publication.
|
There are restrictions on animal abuse, zoning, etc. I would be shocked if some laws applicable to animal breeding or the like wouldn't apply, even if
they were never written to, to hobbyists. You can get around most of these with something such as entomology in a home setting, most likely, but there
definitely are regulations. An IACUC panel, some of which are independent from institutions for PR purposes, helps take some of the burden of adequate
housing and such out sight of researchers.
|
|
|
j_sum1
Administrator
Posts: 6320
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: At home
Member Is Offline
Mood: Most of the ducks are in a row
|
|
Hobby biology might pass under the guise of gardening. After a while you begin to play with different varieties of tomatoes or breeding your own
orchids. Or you could investigate symbiotic fungi with a microscope. It could all be really innocuous low-level stuff. (Or is could be drug
manufacture in your ceiling space.)
Hobby chemistry will always look a bit more like a mad-scientist enterprise. It more likely to involve complex equipment and less likely to be
understood by the general public, and therein lies a key difference.
As for being published or making new contributions to the scientific community, I think that biology probably provides a few more options than
chemistry simply due to the range of things that can be done without complex or expensive equipment. So there is a sense where biology is a bit more
accessible.
I think that most of physics goes to an even further extreme. For the most part, new discoveries are dependent on equipment that is well outside the
reach of the amateur. Therefore physics is even less accessible. The exception of course is astronomy. There have been numerous significant
discoveries made by amateurs simply because of the combined power of observation of the hobby astronomer sector.
|
|
|
Tdep
National Hazard
Posts: 519
Registered: 31-1-2013
Location: Laser broken since Feb 2020 lol
Member Is Offline
Mood: PhD is done! It isn't good but it's over lol
|
|
Hobby theoretical physics? I guess that's a possibility, at least no-one will arrest you for having a backyard math lab.
|
|
|
Chemosynthesis
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 26-9-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I think anything computationally-based stands a much better chance of being performed at home. I've done such at home and seen others do so... usually
for work, but still capable of being done at home. I also have seen semi-retired academics perform such work at home, given they have nice enough
computational hardware.
| Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1 |
As for being published or making new contributions to the scientific community, I think that biology probably provides a few more options than
chemistry simply due to the range of things that can be done without complex or expensive equipment. |
What kind of publications are you thinking when you say this? Can you post an example? A lot of my experience isn't applicable, so I am having
difficulty in imagining it. When I think of biology that isn't molecularly or chemically based, I generally recall marine labs and environmental
experiments. What other kind of experimentation do you envision with botany?
|
|
|
Tdep
National Hazard
Posts: 519
Registered: 31-1-2013
Location: Laser broken since Feb 2020 lol
Member Is Offline
Mood: PhD is done! It isn't good but it's over lol
|
|
Beyond botany I guess you could do a lot of behavioral science research. People love birdwatching! And ant farms! Tropical aquariums, there'd be
certain fish who wouldn't survive long in captivity, and you could try to research why that might be the case.
In botany, I guess there's great challenges growing certain plants at home, tropical plants and how you'd protect them from frost in your area, you
could do home grafting? That would be pretty awesome. Long term experiments to see new varieties of fruit for the first time ever, in your backyard.
(Is that how grafting works? I only respect the chemistry man)
|
|
|
j_sum1
Administrator
Posts: 6320
Registered: 4-10-2014
Location: At home
Member Is Offline
Mood: Most of the ducks are in a row
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis |
What kind of publications are you thinking when you say this? Can you post an example? A lot of my experience isn't applicable, so I am having
difficulty in imagining it. When I think of biology that isn't molecularly or chemically based, I generally recall marine labs and environmental
experiments. What other kind of experimentation do you envision with botany? |
That's a fair call. I am not familiar with academic publications in botany and am not likely to become so. Therefore my comments must be considered
at least in part speculative. I had in mind some research I have seen presented on TED talks -- some interesting discoveries involving fungi and the
phosphorus cycle, some work done by high school students on bacteria that biodegrade some standard plastics and other such things. I assumed that at
least some of this must have been published. Another situation I had in mind is a book written back in the 50's entitled "The Dancing Bees", (by Karl
von Fritz IIRC. I just tried to find it on my bookshelves but can't locate it at present.) This was my introduction to the scientific method as a
teenager. It presents a series of experiments on the behaviour and communication of bees that were done in a home setting. Now, I have no knowledge
as to whether any of Karl's findings entered the academic literature, but I see no particular reason why they couldn't. It was original research and
well conducted with good control of variables and significant discoveries made with far-reaching applications for apiarists. In this vein of thought,
I cannot see why an amateur could not make publishable discoveries in similar fields.
Advancing the field in chemistry without high precision analytical apparatus would seem to be comparatively problematic for the hobbyist.
[Edit] Ok, so I got the year wrong and the author wasn't quite right. But here is the book I was referring to.
The Dancing Bees
Nothing contained in this book would preclude a home science setting.
It seems that he published a bit in the field of biology and not just referring to bees.
Other works
[Edited on 18-5-2015 by j_sum1]
|
|
|
Etaoin Shrdlu
National Hazard
Posts: 724
Registered: 25-12-2013
Location: Wisconsin
Member Is Offline
Mood: Insufferable
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis | | Quote: | | And hobby biology regulations? What? In the US at least, I am aware of no animal welfare laws that apply to fish (If we call a hobby lab a "research
institution," I thought all cold-blooded animals were exempt from the AWA). If your jurisdiction does regulate, step down to invertebrates, where
basically nobody cares at all. Perhaps one day the requirements for publishing any sort of animal research will be as draconian as the requirements
for legally working with scheduled drugs, but it won't actually stop someone from being able to do science, it'll just prevent publication.
|
There are restrictions on animal abuse, zoning, etc. I would be shocked if some laws applicable to animal breeding or the like wouldn't apply, even if
they were never written to, to hobbyists. You can get around most of these with something such as entomology in a home setting, most likely, but there
definitely are regulations. An IACUC panel, some of which are independent from institutions for PR purposes, helps take some of the burden of adequate
housing and such out sight of researchers. |
Are you talking about hobby biology still? I know research institutions like to do this, but I'm fairly certain there are zero animal welfare laws
protecting fish or invertebrates in the US, unless they're endangered, and there are fairly few laws restricting ownership unless they're dangerous.
(Animal dealers may have somewhat more regulation depending on state.) As for zoning, seems very unlikely there would be a restriction on the number
of aquariums a person might own? If zoning difficulties come down specifically to the difference between owning fish to study, and owning fish
to...not study, I think most of us have already flipped off much less ambiguous regulations against hobby chemistry.
|
|
|
macckone
Dispenser of practical lab wisdom
Posts: 2168
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Ignoring any potential state and local regulations, biology and computational science are the least likely to get you arrested. I mean how many
police are likely to raid a house because the owner has 8 mice instead of the zoning allowed 2? Or god forbid a teenager has a computer?
|
|
|
Chemosynthesis
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 26-9-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu | | Quote: Originally posted by Chemosynthesis | | Quote: | | And hobby biology regulations? What? In the US at least, I am aware of no animal welfare laws that apply to fish (If we call a hobby lab a "research
institution," I thought all cold-blooded animals were exempt from the AWA). If your jurisdiction does regulate, step down to invertebrates, where
basically nobody cares at all. Perhaps one day the requirements for publishing any sort of animal research will be as draconian as the requirements
for legally working with scheduled drugs, but it won't actually stop someone from being able to do science, it'll just prevent publication.
|
There are restrictions on animal abuse, zoning, etc. I would be shocked if some laws applicable to animal breeding or the like wouldn't apply, even if
they were never written to, to hobbyists. You can get around most of these with something such as entomology in a home setting, most likely, but there
definitely are regulations. An IACUC panel, some of which are independent from institutions for PR purposes, helps take some of the burden of adequate
housing and such out sight of researchers. |
Are you talking about hobby biology still? I know research institutions like to do this, but I'm fairly certain there are zero animal welfare laws
protecting fish or invertebrates in the US, unless they're endangered, and there are fairly few laws restricting ownership unless they're dangerous.
(Animal dealers may have somewhat more regulation depending on state.) As for zoning, seems very unlikely there would be a restriction on the number
of aquariums a person might own? If zoning difficulties come down specifically to the difference between owning fish to study, and owning fish
to...not study, I think most of us have already flipped off much less ambiguous regulations against hobby chemistry. |
To the best of my knowledge.
European laws are generally considered more strict, and I know nothing about them as opposed to the little about US regulations I am passingly
familiar with.
The Animal Welfare Act can apply to individuals, and it seems to be that way regardless of animals used (though you avoid some level of USDA APHIS
inspections in invertebrates currently, I believe).
"(e) The term “research facility” means any school (except an elementary or secondary school), institution, organization, or person that uses or
intends to use live animals in research, tests, or experiments, and that (1) purchases or transports live animals in commerce, or (2) receives funds
under a grant, award, loan, or contract from a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States for the purpose of carrying out research,
tests, or experiments: Provided, That the Secretary may exempt, by regulation, any such school, institution, organization, or person that does not use
or intend to use live dogs or cats, except those schools, institutions, organizations, or persons, which use substantial numbers (as determined by the
Secretary) of live animals the principal function of which schools, institutions, organizations, or persons, is biomedical research or testing, when
in the judgment of the Secretary, any such exemption does not vitiate the purpose of this chapter;"
This seems to hinge on getting USDA secretary exemption, and may technically force a hobbyist to purchase animals from specially licensed dealers,
which may not be allowed/choose to sell to you, you may need to get approval as a lab, and possibly form an IACUC to various legal standards.
Additionally, the NIH has Guidelines on the use of, and euthanasia of zebra fish. A hobbyist may not need to abide by these without their funding...
but depending on the wording of state law might still apply (potentially even if you are exempted federally). It just seems like an absolute mess to
me, and it takes a whole bureaucracy for research facilities, so I would be surprised if an individual were cut any slack, particularly since that
probably was not envisioned as a legitimate hobby when the laws were written and amended, and might have been seen as a loophole that evil researchers
would use, subcontracting sadistic animal research to negligent contractors at their 'domicile' beyond the oversight of whomever.
|
|
|
Etaoin Shrdlu
National Hazard
Posts: 724
Registered: 25-12-2013
Location: Wisconsin
Member Is Offline
Mood: Insufferable
|
|
AWA
| Quote: | | (g) The term “animal” means any live or dead dog, cat, monkey (nonhuman primate mammal), guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or such other warm-blooded
animal, as the Secretary may determine is being used, or is intended for use, for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a
pet; but such term excludes (1) birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not used for research
purposes, and (3) other farm animals, such as, but not limited to livestock or poultry, used or intended for use as food or fiber, or livestock or
poultry used or intended for use for improving animal nutrition, breeding, management, or production efficiency, or for improving the quality of food
or fiber. With respect to a dog, the term means all dogs including those used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes; |
Fish/invertebrates seem fair game to me.
[Edited on 5-18-2015 by Etaoin Shrdlu]
|
|
|
Chemosynthesis
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 26-9-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Etaoin Shrdlu | AWA
| Quote: | | (g) The term “animal” means any live or dead dog, cat, monkey (nonhuman primate mammal), guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or such other warm-blooded
animal, as the Secretary may determine is being used, or is intended for use, for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a
pet; but such term excludes (1) birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not used for research
purposes, and (3) other farm animals, such as, but not limited to livestock or poultry, used or intended for use as food or fiber, or livestock or
poultry used or intended for use for improving animal nutrition, breeding, management, or production efficiency, or for improving the quality of food
or fiber. With respect to a dog, the term means all dogs including those used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes; |
Fish/invertebrates seem fair game to me. |
Oh, good point. I guess I should read more. Embarrassing. Thank you for pointing that out, and I'm sorry I was mistaken. I think I was confused over
regulatory debates on whether crabs were protected, because apparently that had to go to Congress. I see various foul, rats and mice have
intermittently been lobbied in and out of the bill as well, and I had not kept up with that aspect either. No excuse for being wrong on my part. There
are lobbiests who want to change this for zebra fish, as it is extremely popular (PMID: 19916799).
I guess state and local law would likely be the only potential hurdles.
Very interesting.
[Edited on 19-5-2015 by Chemosynthesis]
|
|
|
macckone
Dispenser of practical lab wisdom
Posts: 2168
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Pretty much what I said earlier. Also endangered and threatened species can't be used for research purposes unless bred in captivity or otherwise
exempted unless such research is to increase the viability of the species.
|
|
|
Chemosynthesis
International Hazard
Posts: 1071
Registered: 26-9-2013
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Yeah, but fish etc. were included back in 2002. I have managed to avoid any direct animal work somehow and don't keep up with the times. Hopefully
they remain out.
|
|
|
macckone
Dispenser of practical lab wisdom
Posts: 2168
Registered: 1-3-2013
Location: Over a mile high
Member Is Offline
Mood: Electrical
|
|
Fish are not covered under AWA but the could be covered under state laws or institutional rules.
Unless someone has a link altering the law as posted that seems to be current. And it doesn't cover fish.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
