Slashdot Mirror


What Ecstasy Does To Octopuses (theatlantic.com)

Gul Dolen, a neuroscientist at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine who studies how the cells and chemicals in animal brains influence animals' social lives, gave ecstasy to octopuses and recorded her observations. The study, published in the journal Current Biology, suggests that the psychoactive drug that can make people feel extra loving toward others also has the same effect on octopuses. An anonymous reader shares the report from The Atlantic: [Dolen] and her colleague Eric Edsinger put five Californian two-spot octopuses individually into the middle of three connected chambers and gave them free rein to explore. One of the adjacent chambers housed a second octopus, confined inside an overturned plastic basket. The other contained an unfamiliar object, such as a plastic flower or a Chewbacca figurine. Dolen and Edsinger measured how long the main animal spent in the company of its peer, and how long with the random toy. The free-moving individuals thoroughly explored the chambers, and from their movements, Dolen realized that individuals of any sex gravitate toward females, but avoid males. Next, she dosed the animals with ecstasy. Again, there's no precedent for this, but researchers often anesthetize octopuses by dunking them in ethanol -- a humane procedure with no lasting side effects. So Dolen and Edsinger submerged their octopuses in an MDMA solution, allowing them to absorb the drug through their gills. At first they used too high a dose, and the animals "freaked out and did all these color changes," Dolen says. But once the team found a more suitable dose, the animals behaved more calmly -- and more sociably. "With ecstasy in their system, the five octopuses spent far more time in the company of the same trapped male they once shunned," the report continues. "Even without a stopwatch, the change was obvious. Before the drug, they explored the chamber with the other octopus very tentatively."

"They mashed themselves against one wall, very slowly extended one arm, touched the [other animal], and went back to the other side," Dolen says. "But when they had MDMA, they had this very relaxed posture. They floated around, they wrapped their arms around the chamber, and they interacted with the other octopus in a much more fluid and generous way. They even exposed their [underside], where their mouth is, which is not something octopuses usually do."

129 comments

  1. Internet is for ... animal porn ? /s by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    I wonder how long the inevitable website(s) pops up ...

    This is your ___ animal on Ectasy.

    1. Re:Internet is for ... animal porn ? /s by Calydor · · Score: 1

      You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the internet isn't already full of animals doing what comes naturally. And unnaturally.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:Internet is for ... animal porn ? /s by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      TouchÉ !

  2. Octopuses gone wild! by quenda · · Score: 5, Funny

    > "They even exposed their [underside], where their mouth is, which is not something octopuses usually do."

    1. Re:Octopuses gone wild! by sabbede · · Score: 2

      Well, I tend to expose things people normally wouldn't when I'm on MDMA.

  3. Peace on earth.. by sqorbit · · Score: 1

    Everyone start tripping balls on MDMA.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
    1. Re:Peace on earth.. by Patent+Lover · · Score: 2

      Sorry, we only condone drugs that make idiots start fights at football games. Any drug not made by big pharma is evil and must be eradicated.

    2. Re: Peace on earth.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your second sentence is not on the same track as the first. That drug is not made by big pharma.

    3. Re: Peace on earth.. by webmistressrachel · · Score: 1

      I presume by "that drug" you mean testosterone? LOL!

      --
      This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
    4. Re:Peace on earth.. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Everyone start tripping balls on MDMA.

      . . . nah, then everyone would start posting here: "Funding secured!" I'm taking Slashdot private!

      I thought that the PETA folks might get their bowels in an uproar about giving Molly to octopi . . .

      . . . but then I figured that those kind researchers thoroughly and extensively tested the Molly on themselves first, before giving a dose, to the ones they love most.

      So, for the follow-up research grant . . . what does Viagra do to octopi . . . ? Could rigid digit octopi save the coral reefs . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re: Peace on earth.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he meant alcohol

  4. IG Nobel, here we come! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now *this* is what I consider worthwhile research.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:IG Nobel, here we come! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      individuals of any sex gravitate toward females, but avoid males

      Thanks to this research, I now understand my night club experiences in a much more cuddly way. This beak goes up for them!

  5. I often anesthetize myself by dunking in ethanol by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Funny

    Usually it's towards the end of the evening and I am spilling drinks on myself.

  6. this is difficult to fap to. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's it baby, expose your tender underside.

  7. Presumably they synthesized it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, man, I'm givin' it to octopuses.
    Cool, whatever, here's your 500 pills.

    And what about the leftovers? Party in the chem lab tonight! Woo! un-chss un-chss un-chss!

  8. So the final result is that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    drugs can turn you gay?

    1. Re: So the final result is that... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      No but they can definitely lead to homosexual sex.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    2. Re: So the final result is that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story bro.

  9. The real question by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Funny

    The real question... does ecstasy make octopuses feel extra loving toward researchers? Just think of the possibilities.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real question... does ecstasy make octopuses feel extra loving toward researchers? Just think of the possibilities.

      Ooooh yeaaahhh, I got da molly so I'ma get dat octopussy tonight bro! For science.

    2. Re:The real question by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      The real question... does ecstasy make octopuses feel extra loving toward researchers? Just think of the possibilities.

      Jokes about Japanese tentacle pr0n in 3...2...1...

      Anyhow, you gotta be high to ponder what it's like to make octopi high.

    3. Re:The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Japanese have been working on this paper for years, but so far only the illustrations have been published.

    4. Re:The real question by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      The real question... does ecstasy make octopuses feel extra loving toward researchers? Just think of the possibilities.

      Well, to be fair, Dr. Dolen had just gone through a very bad breakup and was feeling lonely - but not ready to be with another guy.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re: The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They have a beak, and it bites!

    6. Re:The real question by Krishnoid · · Score: 5, Funny

      First joke: Can't we just cuttle?

    7. Re:The real question by ComputersKai · · Score: 1

      They did what to Chewbacca!?!

    8. Re:The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real question... does ecstasy make octopuses feel extra loving toward researchers? Just think of the possibilities.

      Think about the possibilities?
      I have a large DVD collection of Japanese "documentaries" about the subject.

    9. Re:The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that beak is really though to love? Oh, yeah..

    10. Re:The real question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do octopi feel love at all? They are radically different from mammals for starters.

  10. It's actually kind of a big deal by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    philosophically anyway. It lends credence to the idea that social behaviors can be traced back to certain chemical responses. The reason that matters is stuff like religion and the origin of morality. There's a pretty big debate on, for example, whether you can have morality without God. This is a notch on the atheist's side since it implies socializing might have a generalized chemical factor to it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think morality exists outside of the religious doctrines. I believe there is a big difference between being religious and having faith. There are a lot of non-religious people out there that have a good sense of morality. And while I have a hard time believing in some all powerful being responsible for creating everything I do keep an open mind. There's no harm in hedging your bets. And give me some MDMA and I will open my mind a little wider and re-investigate the topic.

    2. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This debate only exists in the minds of religious kooks. It is pretty obvious to everyone else that morality is just a formulation of our pack instincts, with a bit of logical extension to modern circumstances.

       

    3. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by quenda · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a pretty big debate on, for example, whether you can have morality without God.

      Where is that !? At your local evangelical church or mosque? Even there, it would only be among the dumber, more zealous members.

      I mean, not only is it obviously true, but it even turns out that societies share the same moral values, even when individual members have different or no religions.
      i.e. religion does not shape moral values, but the opposite occurs.

    4. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by aybiss · · Score: 1

      There's no debate about whether you can have morality without God. The only people saying that are the ultra religious.

      --
      It's OK Bender, there's no such thing as 2.
    5. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody who has given it any thought believes God is necessary for morality. There is no debate over it among rational minds. You'd have to be completely brain dead and/or in a cult to think morality requires a deity.

    6. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      There's a pretty big debate on, for example, whether you can have morality without God.

      As a Czech, I almost pissed myself with laughter. :-p

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And funnily enough, the 'ultra religious' are actually the least spiritual of all the religious folks around. They cling to dogma and words, and are blind to the morality of people, the spirituality essential to being 'in touch with {god}', and the disciplined acceptance required to be a enlightened positive influence to those around them.

    8. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by easyTree · · Score: 1

      const likelyFlawedConclusion = proposition.indexOf('obvious') != -1;

    9. Re: It's actually kind of a big deal by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Interesting, but I'm genuinely concerned that these animals consciousness could be elevated by such experiments to the point of becoming self aware. A moral delimma because these people are now trapped in an octopus body with no way of alerting the researchers to thier God given human rights. Dunking animals in drugs for fun? This is sick.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    10. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an American atheist, I just smiled a little that religious people could be this stupid.

      Of course you can be moral without religion. Idiots.

      Plus, without some religion, there isn't anyone wearing a funny hat trying to make you feel guilty for loving other people or trying to get you to blow up stuff or harm someone else just because they disagree that your Dog is different from their Dog.

    11. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      There's a pretty big debate on, for example, whether you can have morality without God. This is a notch on the atheist's side since it implies socializing might have a generalized chemical factor to it.

      Um, right, because giving ecstasy to females to make them warm up to strange males is the height of morality ...

      I guess you see what you want to see, lol

    12. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I mean, not only is it obviously true, but it even turns out that societies share the same moral values, even when individual members have different or no religions. i.e. religion does not shape moral values, but the opposite occurs.

      That's so clearly false on the face of it that's hard to know where to begin.

      Take pagan Rome and Christianity, for example. Not the same values, which is why all the conflict.

    13. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by sudon't · · Score: 1

      This debate only exists in the minds of religious kooks. It is pretty obvious to everyone else that morality is just a formulation of our pack instincts, with a bit of logical extension to modern circumstances.

      Right, it’s an evolutionary adaptation. All social animals have “rules” which help the group maintain cohesion. Ours are just a bit more elaborated.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    14. Re: It's actually kind of a big deal by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Hmm... if you could induce sapience so easily, might it not be your duty to do so rather than thinking leaving them comparatively crippled is humane? Unfortunately, octopuses do not live long and die shortly after mating, although we could probably give them a hand with that and the right CRSPR edits.

    15. Re:It's actually kind of a big deal by quenda · · Score: 1

      Take pagan Rome and Christianity, for example. Not the same values, which is why all the conflict.

      Back when it was a small cult? I'm sure you can find plenty of counter examples, but they general trend when you have different religions in one society is for them to share values. Otherwise they'd be at war even more. You could look at the US today, or the Middle East a hundred years ago.

      If religion really shaped morality, you'd expect Christianity today to have more than superficial resemblance to the Christianity of ancient Rome.
      And the morality of Jesus time bore little resemblance to that in the Torah.

  11. I prefer octopi by Kargan · · Score: 1

    Even though 'octopuses' or even 'octopodes' are etymologically correct and 'octopi' is not. It just sounds better out when said aloud.

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
    1. Re:I prefer octopi by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      "Octopie" sounds delicious!

    2. Re:I prefer octopi by sysrammer · · Score: 2

      And 8 slices...just right!

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
  12. obvious next experiment by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Funny

    "freaked out and did all these color changes,"

    They clearly need to try LSD next.

    1. Re:obvious next experiment by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

      "freaked out and did all these color changes,"

      They clearly need to try LSD next.

      I'd say it's more likely that they need to meter doses better. Alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and LSD can all make humans feel on top of the world (or another world) sometimes and like death (or completely out of it) at others.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    2. Re:obvious next experiment by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      "freaked out and did all these color changes,"

      They clearly need to try LSD next.

      You'll just get gray...all the colors will cancel out.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    3. Re:obvious next experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would that do to a cuttlefish?

  13. Correlation is not causation by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We need to be careful here not to infer that the rolling subject octopuses are spending more time with the contained male because they want to interact socially. We don't know how sober octopuses think, so it is terribly wrong to assume that high ones are not just out of their minds with no idea what they are really doing. We do know what different dosages of MDMA tend to do to humans, though there is still variability there, while we know nothing about the octopus MDMA response curve. It appears that MDMA does make them behave abnormally but it is impossible thus far to draw any conclusions about octopus motivations, and probably wrong to apply human concepts of mood and socialization. The octopuses exposing their undersides and doing flips and whatnot might indicate that they've lost their shit, more so than that they feel all warm and fuzzy and want to cuddle.

    --
    This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    1. Re:Correlation is not causation by swb · · Score: 1

      I think they would benefit more from trying MDMA on dogs.

      We have a pretty good understanding about canine socialization and interaction and can better interpret ambiguous behavior on their part.

      And what about trying it on chimps or other great apes? I suppose the argument there is they are SO similar to humans that the effects are probably entirely predictable.

      Or is the whole point of this to actually see if octopuses specifically provide human-like responses to mind altering drugs as a means of evaluating octopus cognitive abilities?

    2. Re:Correlation is not causation by sysrammer · · Score: 1

      Even dogs are more similar to humans than octopi.

      --
      His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
    3. Re: Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the takeaway from this was sociability being caused by the chemical and not so much the structure of the brain it's interacting with, as octopus brains are so radically different from our own.

    4. Re:Correlation is not causation by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Nobody has any empathy with male losers. Nobody wants to spend time with them except other male losers. If MDMA makes octopuses have empathy with them then it needs to be very carefully controlled so that it doesn't happen to us.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dogs are too damn artificial, they're a domesticated animal... This has me wondering if humans are domesticated animals as well.

      I think in a non joking way that the dogs will seek sex with the experimenters

    6. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears that MDMA does make them behave abnormally but it is impossible thus far to draw any conclusions about octopus motivations, and probably wrong to apply human concepts of mood and socialization.

      I actually read an article on this yesterday ... what they were really testing was that they'd figured out octopus have serotonin receptors by doing genetic analysis ... the intent was to figure out if they could trigger that with the MDMA and see what happened.

      They were very careful to say that they didn't know what the octopus was feeling, because as you say they are so alien to us, but mostly focused on the fact that these animals which are so unlike as had a response to serotonin induced by the MDMA.

      They especially pointed out that since the octopus doesn't even have the same regions and structures in the brain, that they really didn't know much about anything like what the octopus was thinking or feeling. Merely that they became less aggressive and significantly changed their behaviours.

    7. Re:Correlation is not causation by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Eh... any mammal is going to be basically the same as us from a biochem standpoint. That's why seeing what happened to the octopuses was so interesting, they're very smart and aren't even vertebrates so there's more likelihood of a variable response.

    8. Re:Correlation is not causation by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      If you read up on animal domestication (the study with the Russian foxes is particularly interesting), it is easy to get the idea that humans have domesticated themselves.

    9. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even dogs are more similar to humans than octopi.

      Damned near everything on the planet is more similar to humans than octopus are ... they're just so completely different from us that it is kind of amazing that serotonin has any effect on that at all.

      Most brains, and definitely the brains of mammals, share some basic structures with us. The octopus has very little similarity at all (if any).

      These things are so completely different from us that it's hard to find ways they're similar to us, which is why it's kind of cool that they still have serotonin receptors at all, and are somewhat changed by doses of ecstasy.

    10. Re:Correlation is not causation by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      I think they would benefit more from trying MDMA on dogs.

      Given that the authors are studying the neurology and behavior of octopodes, I think they would not.

    11. Re: Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or perhaps it turns octopi into cannibals and they were seeking out the weakest individual?

    12. Re:Correlation is not causation by Monkey · · Score: 1

      You nailed it, cephalopods (octopus,squid, cuttlefish etc.) forked off from us on the evolutionary tree so far back, twice as far back as the first dinosaurs, that this is the closest we'll likely come to meeting an alien intelligence.

  14. I squirt black ink! by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

    Everyone has their own name for it...

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  15. Did they test for Suicide Tuesdays? by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    ....

    Been testing out MDA for a bit. Noticed if I do it 4 times in a row with a 100-150mg dose every two weeks the magic disappears on the 4th time. If I do it once a month seems to have the normal MDA/MDMA trip magic, unlike the every two weeks. Now add it about .4 grams of shrooms with a dose of mda 30 min later and good times....

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re: Did they test for Suicide Tuesdays? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dude...you are depleting and downregulating your serotonin. Stop taking it that often. It should be a few times a year max to avoid long term impact. You will be chemically depressed even if done a few times a month, as it take awhile to return to baseline after rolling.

    2. Re:Did they test for Suicide Tuesdays? by h4x0t · · Score: 1

      Do not do that. You will destroy your brain. https://thedea.org/mdma-risks-...

    3. Re:Did they test for Suicide Tuesdays? by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      I'd say that doing MDMA every two weeks is on the high side, no matter what.

      Other than that, you can use 5-HTP supplements to counteract the serotonin depletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Works pretty well to improve your mood even if you never do MDMA but are just naturally low on serotonin.

    4. Re:Did they test for Suicide Tuesdays? by future+assassin · · Score: 1

      I'd say that doing MDMA every two weeks is on the high side, no matter what.

      Other than that, you can use 5-HTP supplements to counteract the serotonin depletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      Works pretty well to improve your mood even if you never do MDMA but are just naturally low on serotonin.

      It's not a regular type of thing. I wanted to see for myself what people meant by lost its magic. The magic loss was the shortness of the feel good/euphoria and a longer withdrawn feeling comedown. Normally if I do it say once in a month or two the warm feel good effect is followed by a short withdrawn feeling for about 20-30 min and then back to feeling kind amphetamine kind of high like you body feels a little cold and then as long as I don't do any past 12am usually get tired by 2-3 if I'm dancing and then can fall asleep fast after that. AS for Suicide Tuesdays I only got that once about 6 months ago but we went pretty hard that night and there was hooker and blow so... But even with the 4 times in a row separated by two weeks never get any depression a week later. Mind you I eat pretty good and eat lots of ground turnkey mean so that might help.

      --
      by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  16. Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're high by raymorris · · Score: 1, Troll

    Nobody denies that brain chemistry exists. So it's not "a notch" for anyone. Drugs can make you feel different ways - yeah we've all known that for at least 7,000 years.

    Well, I take that back - sometimes when someone is seriously under the influence of heavy drugs, they might think they are having a spiritual experience rather than a chemical experience. But they also think that they could walk through a wall if they really, really wanted to, think they ARE walking when they are actually sitting still, and think that Bernie Sanders makes sense. So we can disregard what they think when they're really, really high.

    The question isn't whether or not brain chemistry exists and can affect our emotions. The question are:

    Are our emotions linked to something eternal, or are they purely random happenstance?

    Is their a *reason* we have brains and emotions, a purpose, or is it again totally random and devoid of any meaning or purpose?

    When you use the words "religion" and "God", those words have thousand different meanings; everyone has different ideas about what this "God" thing is. What all the major world religions agree on, a common denominator, is that Exodus and Moses are Canon (plus and Exodus account also appears in Egyptian records). So the generally agreed part of what "God" is would include God's answer to Moses when he asked in Exodus who Had is. The Greek is really hard to translate accurately to English because English uses the word "is" for several different meanings, but a reasonable translation would be "I am the eternal", or "I (permanently) am", or "I am what is everlasting".

    Given God's own answer as to who / what God is, in the book most agreed on, that's why I say the question is whether our spirits, our deepest emotional selves, are connected to something eternal. Because "the eternal" is the one definition of "God" that most agree on.

  17. look ma i'm a scientist! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    let's give heroin to sharks!

  18. Jerome Lettvin knew by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Lettvin

    While working in the Marine Zoological Station in Naples, Letttvin had a 30-foot-long (9.1 m) room in which octopus holding tanks were kept, with fine mesh metal screens to keep them from escaping. One tank, at the far end, held his youngest son Jonathan's pet octopus, known as Juvenile Delinquent or JD.[11][not in citation given] One day he teased JD with a stick. The next morning, he and his son came to the door, and noticed a puddle. Fearing that the tanks had broken, Lettvin opened the door, and was greeted by a blast of water in his face (but not his son's face). From across the room, and through the screen, JD had perfect aim, after which he jetted to the bottom of the tank, inked it up, and hid for the rest of the day. Still confused about the water under the door, Lettvin looked at the back of the door and saw a spot of water at the height of his face. JD had been practicing for revenge. From this and other experiences, Lettvin concluded that octopodes are highly intelligent, and from that time on he never ate octopus again.[citation needed]

  19. the onion by enrique556 · · Score: 1

    Seemed a bit harsh that they subjected these noble creatures to an ecstasy overdose. Reminded me of this skit from The Onion:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    1. Re: the onion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Define noble.

  20. Compare to previous results on spiders by ToTheStars · · Score: 2

    A Canadian short documentary (2 minutes) on exposing spiders to different drugs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    1. Re:Compare to previous results on spiders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found that far more enjoyable than the paper on the octopuses, thank you!

      FWIW, if the octopus paper had included video of them doing the things they were talking about, like changing color, clinging to the walls to stay away from the male, interacting with the toys, etc, well... I don't know what if, but I would have enjoyed it more!

  21. Re:Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're h by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What all the major world religions agree on, a common denominator, is that Exodus and Moses are Canon (plus and Exodus account also appears in Egyptian records).

    All the Abrahamic religions agree on that, sure. They're really all just branches of the same religion though. The other major religions have pretty much nothing to say on the matter. As for Exodus, which Egyptian records is it in?

  22. Octopussy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It makes me think of that pr0n movie "octopussy" the lusty woman with eight vaginas.

  23. Re: Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you went political with it. Obvious tell that. Morality had nothing to do with religion be and religion has nothing to do with morality. Good people are good. Bad people are bad. It's how you use your education to influence the world not vice versa.

    Look in the mirror Jack ass. What you really see may terrify you more than you know.

  24. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are we accepting research from a damned military Cardie? Gul Dolen cannot be trusted at face value!

    1. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, I was concerned that I was the only one who thought of Star Trek after reading the name.

  25. The obvious next step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Human trials! Take 10 male nice-guys who don't have anything glaring wrong with them but are routinely shunned by females. Drug the females. If the nice guys get laid, hypothesis proven. Then it's time to... Hmm...

    1) Aerosolize it at the next Hollywood party. Make sure plenty of papparazzi are around.
    2) Spike females' drinks at DEFCON.
    3) Try it on that hot cousin of yours.
    4) Find the latest "let's just be friends" and dose her.
    5) ???
    6) PROFIT! OFFSPRING!

    1. Re:The obvious next step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, see a counsellor before you end up in prison.

      You seem to be confusing "behaving more sociably" with sexual desire. That is a very dangerous confusion to be making as an adult or near-adult male. Also, you are confusing MDMA with date rape drugs.

    2. Re: The obvious next step by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, get a sense of humor.

  26. All over the place actually by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    I've been watching a bunch of Youtube videos on Atheism (Dawkins, Aronra, Chistopher Hutches, Genetic Skeptic). One of the main talking points for the Creationist side is that you need the supernatural to explain morality (supernatural here doesn't mean ghosts & magic, it means something beyond nature). The Atheists for their part argue that morality can exist without supernatural explanations.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:All over the place actually by quenda · · Score: 1

      talking points for the Creationist side

      hang on, "creationist"? In the developed world (possibly excluding parts of the us?), these are a tiny minority of religious people.

      I've seen some great discussions between Dawkins et al and and theists.
      But an intellectual debate between a professor of evolutionary biology and a creationist, would be like a running race between Stephen Hawking and Usain Bolt. Just embarrassing. Unless by "creationist" you mean something other than the usual young-earth, created as is, sense.

      Atheists for their part argue that morality can exist without supernatural explanations.

      Are these creationists suggesting that atheists are immoral, or that they derive their morality from outside the natural universe (whatever that means) even without faith?
      Either seems absurd if you know anything about biology and psychology.

      I've never met a religious person who claimed religion had a monopoly on morality, they just thought their morality was better.

    2. Re:All over the place actually by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      How do religious people justify arriving at roughly similar ideas of morality when they often believe significantly different things? For that matter, the largest somewhat compact religious group is like what, 30% of the world's population? Assuming that at most one religion can be right, doesn't this mean that at least 70% of people fervently believe in something that is provably at least largely wrong? That would seem to suggest that religion is a very unreliable way of getting information on things. However, that morals in particular largely coincide, as opposed to the other teachings, doesn't seem to support the case that they have anything to do with religion itself.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:All over the place actually by SqueakyMouse · · Score: 1

      I've seen some of these embarrassing "debates" on trashy day time TV before. It's like watching two people speaking different languages to each other and getting nowhere. Essentially they playing different games with different rules. On the academic side they demand sound logic and an intellectually honest approach to evidence, etc. and this is how you win. On the other side this counts for nothing because it's not understood. To gain followers amongst this crowd it's about speaking with confidence and passion with the right amount of repetition to be remembered. Its about making the message easy to understand with the right buzzwords that stick in the mind. It's about making the audience want to believe you because it feels good to them. Academics credit all this with zero value however. This means both sides can come away thinking they've won the debate despite converting nobody. To convert someone, you need to understand it from their point of view and learn the rules of their game.

    4. Re:All over the place actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i was once totally convinced evolution was legit and creationism was garbage.

      i've since changed my viewpoint.

      try looking up sean pitmans talk "The Best Arguments Against Intelligent Design"

    5. Re: All over the place actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A shame you fell to a con. How does he explain the fossils of other human species, do tell? Or of any extint species? How does he explain how we have never seen fossils of recent species together with their ancestors? Come on, it is not even that complex.

  27. I know what they are getting at ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    So I take some Extacy and then I get erotically attracted by a male Octopus ...
    Sounds not to bad ... where do I find one?

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:I know what they are getting at ... by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

      Japan. Just do a Google search for "Japanese Tentacles" and see what results you get.

      Be afraid of what you may find though...

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    2. Re:I know what they are getting at ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just do a Google search for "Japanese Tentacles" and see what results you get.

      I am appalled by your blatant promotion of such degeneracy.

      The rest of us who are not deviants will stick with the nice, wholesome scheisse genre instead.

  28. Re:Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're h by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > is that Exodus and Moses are Canon

    *facepalm*

    The Torah is NOT a history book. Take Genesis: It has the lie of omission about Adam's first wife, has contradictory creation stories (Man is created _after_ the animals in chapter 1, but _before_ the animals in chapter 2), has the nonsense of day & night existing BEFORE the sun was made, chapter 4:4 shows that there were humans BEFORE Adam, etc. In Exodus we find nine of the ten commandments come directly out of the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The only ones treating Moses as canon are those ignorant of history.

    It is obvious you've never read it, let alone understand the allegory of it.

    e.g. Why is Day 2 of the creation is the ONLY day that doesn't say "It was good."

  29. In other words by bursch-X · · Score: 1

    Theyâ(TM)re turning the frogs gay! :-D

    --
    There are two rules for success:
    1. Never tell everything you know.
  30. why octopi? by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

    The reason the researchers used octopuses is not to gather any special insight into neurochemistry that an octopus may provide, but simply because invertebrates are not covered by animal experimentation laws.

    Through genetic testing, the authors of this study were able to determine that octopuses and vertebrates all share the neural transmitters that MDMA acts upon.

    The authors then go on to ask whether the drug functions similarly in humans and animals when it comes to social situations. I don't know how much literature there is on the social abilities of octopodes, but that this study discovers that they all prefer females over males seems to indicate it's pretty rudimentary. It's hard to believe that any real social abilities can be measured in a species so poorly understood.

    On the other hand, there are tons of studies on the social habits of monkeys, apes, dogs, cats, mice... why not try one of them?

    Now we're back to the top. Octopuses are not covered by the animal experimentation laws, and the authors chose to not have any oversight from their campus Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (which they could have done to be ethical, even though it's not legally required), which makes this whole study feel really gross.

    1. Re: why octopi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just octopus man. People pull them out of the sea and eat them. Already they are "murdered" in vast numbers... so what is a little E ?

    2. Re:why octopi? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      Any other mammal is going to have more or less the same response as humans, more interesting to see if it affects the social habits of something so different from us.

    3. Re:why octopi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how much literature there is on the social abilities of octopodes

      From TFA ...

      ... admits that the study is just a pilot, and one with a very small sample size. "We would obviously want other people to try and repeat it in a much larger group of animals," she says. "But we wanted to publish it, because there really aren't established protocols for delivering drugs to octopuses or doing social tests with them." She hopes that her findings will encourage more neuroscientists to study these beguiling animals.

      It may surprise you that they already know all of this stuff.

      Everyone seems to be pointing out limitations of this, while failing to realize the TFA includes them discussing all of this crap and being fully aware of what they can and can't say that this shows them.

      So far they've demonstrated that since the octopus has receptors for the chemicals in MDMA, that they could in fact see a difference in behaviours when they give the octopus MDMA. Given how different they are from us, that was a surprise.

      Reading the article, it sounds like they don't need people to tell them the limitations of this, because they're fully aware of what they don't know about octopus brains.

    4. Re:why octopi? by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      ... there are tons of studies on the social habits of monkeys, apes, dogs, cats, mice... why not try one of them?

      Because they weren't studying MDMA. They were studying octopodes.

    5. Re:why octopi? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Because the animals you list are extremely similar to humans, so you'd expect similar responses as humans.

      The point was to study a creature dissimilar to humans and see what happened. An octopus fits that bill.

    6. Re:why octopi? by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

      They knew through biochemistry that octopuses would have the same response as well. They tested a bunch of animals and listed those that wouldn't have the same response. Then tested one from the list that would.

    7. Re:why octopi? by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

      That's a nice bit of circular logic.

      Why study MDMA?

      We're not, we're studying octopodes.

      Why study octopi?

      Because we don't need oversight.

      Why don't you want oversight?

      Because we're doing sketchy MDMA studies.

      Why study MDMA? ...

    8. Re:why octopi? by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

      oh no, they new they had serotonin receptors, not that they played a similar role in their cognition. That was the whole point of the experiment.

  31. Say.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I came here for tentacle porn. Ecstasy for octopi. But it was just another drug story, sigh.

  32. More vivisectionist fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More obviously pointless and useless 'research', involving living animals, who don't want to be experimented on.

    Notice the sociopathic responses of the Slashdot crowd - you can't even see that you have something fundamentally wrong with you - a complete inability to empathise with the suffering of others.

  33. Re:Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're h by SqueakyMouse · · Score: 2

    The Torah is NOT a history book.

    That's right, it's five books!

    Take Genesis: It has the lie of omission about Adam's first wife,

    Genesis didn't have a member named Adam. You mean Phil Collins?

    has contradictory creation stories (Man is created _after_ the animals in chapter 1, but _before_ the animals in chapter 2

    So he made at least two worlds trying out different orders of creation. Where's the contradiction? If anything this makes it more plausible because it explains why we don't see Spiderman in this world. (He's in the other one).

    has the nonsense of day & night existing BEFORE the sun was made,

    The sun only comes out during the day because it's scared of the dark. I thought everyone knew that, jeez.

    Chapter 4:4 shows that there were humans BEFORE Adam, etc.

    Go on any star wars fan site, and they'll all agree the original trilogy is canon. This happened A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Obviously Luke Skywalker came before Adam, so this just confirms both the Torah and the Star Wars trilogy.

    I could go on but I think it's clear all your concerns can easily be resolved by saying whatever nonsense comes into my head. This awfully stringent requirement that your worldview must make sense is like shackles upon you. Like so many slashdot users you have learnt to accept the shackles and love your captor like some sort of twisted figurative stockholm syndrome. Only when you rid yourself of these shackles are you truly free! Remember ignorance is bliss, and why would you not want bliss? Follow me and I give you ultimate freedom and ultimate bliss. We can talk about tithing later.

  34. Re:Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're h by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they might think they are having a spiritual experience rather than a chemical experience

    I'm sorry, but what is the difference? All experience is a chemical experience and singling our spirituality is silly.

  35. Unwanted attention by petes_PoV · · Score: 1
    So the "drugged up" octopus started to invade the space of the one that was trapped. The article suggests that prior to getting dosed, the free-moving octopus avoided the other one. Presumably the feeling was mutual.

    Yet did anyone give any thought to the feelings of the one trapped in a basket? It might sound very empathic and touchy-feely to anthropomorphise the behaviour. However if they are naturally wary of others of their own species, then to the target of such behaviour, it becomes intrusive. Much like quietly minding your own business and then having a drunk take the seat next to you on a train or plane and spend the whole journey "getting friendly".

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  36. Now we know how to freak out the octopussy ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... by loading them with ecstasy

    ... and the animals "freaked out and did all these color changes ..."

    o=Can't wait to see octopuses with polka dots !

  37. Translation by easyTree · · Score: 1

    What's Octopus for "I love you?"

    1. Re:Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's Octopus for "I love you?"

      Vermilion, with a hint of plaid.

      And, not killing you and dragging you back to the lair to be eaten.

  38. Yet another reason why.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we are now ignoring "science".

    because of doing stupid shit like this.

  39. #octotoo by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    Oh great; now we're going to have an #octotoo thing ...

  40. Just put it in the water already by lamer01 · · Score: 1

    Like fluoride

  41. Re:Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're h by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

    The Torah is NOT a history book. Take Genesis...

    If you take the time to read them, it's quite easy to see that there's a fundamental difference between Genesis (really just the first quarter or so of it) and the rest of the Torah. The parts that read like a mythology are a fairly small percentage overall; once you get past the first section of Genesis, there's mostly just a few brief stories. The last part of Genesis (how the small tribe of Israel fled from the famine in their homeland to settle in Egypt) and the first part of Exodus (a slave revolt a few hundred years later) are the major historical sections, though the rest of the journey from Egypt back to Canaan is scattered through the rest of the Torah. The rest of Exodus is laws and a very lengthy description of the construction of the portable tabernacle. Leviticus and Numbers are mostly just laws and rituals. Deuteronomy is mostly a speech by Moses shortly before he dies, which includes some repetition of earlier laws and some new laws.

    So no, the Torah isn't really a history book, it's more of a law book ("torah" literally means law). Yes, Genesis includes some creation stories, but the rest of the Torah includes things like how much you owe your neighbor when your ox kills his sheep.

  42. this is how you get... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is how you get tentacle pron -- really people

  43. A first in many ways. by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

    Gul Dolen, a neuroscientist at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine...

    I understand that diversity is a goal these days, but is this the first Cardassian working at an Earth school?

  44. Re:I often anesthetize myself by dunking in ethano by Woeful+Countenance · · Score: 1

    "Drowned in a vat of whiskey ... Death, where is thy sting?" -- W. C. Fields

  45. What Does The Octopus Say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does an octopus high on Ecstasy say?

    Anything he wants, man!

  46. In America they're 38% of the populace by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    source

    Folks don't seem to realize how many evangelicals America has. Our Vice President is a Dominionist, for example.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:In America they're 38% of the populace by quenda · · Score: 1

      Folks don't seem to realize how many evangelicals America has. Our Vice President is a Dominionist, for example.

      Australia's new Prime Minister (won't last long) is a evangelical (or "happy clappy" as we call them), but I never heard anybody call him a creationist.
      If he was, surely the opposition would be making it known.

      Senator Steve Fielding has been widely ridiculed for his creationist beliefs, but he belongs to the fringe "Family First" party.

  47. The argument I've seen by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    is either that the holy spirit works within the heretics or that the heretic knows that their religion is the one true one but doesn't want to profess belief because of either social pressure or a desire to sin.

    If you ask me it's working backwards from the conclusion but that's their argument.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  48. Meanwhile... by Mats+Svensson · · Score: 1

    How is that cure for cancer coming along?

  49. Re: Nobody denies brain chemistry (unless they're by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no question, really. With the current evidence we know personality, memory, etc. is dependent on your brain and its reactions. We know for a fact we are not too different from rats and we have no problem considering they have no eternal soul to speak of. Only wishful thinking could lead anybody to believe otherwise. There is no inteligent debate to be had about souls, or god for that matter, because they can not be showed to exist or to not exist and believing in them doesn't help you in understanding the world you live in.