upvote

points

by somenameforme3 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby anthonj2 hours ago|
next
[-]
The title ie a bit misleading:

The study want to prove that cocaine is yet another polluter thar alters the fish behaviour even in the small quantities that can be found in the wild in polluted areas. Not that something is special or different about cocaine pollution.

So the control group in this case are fishes with an implant with no drug at all.

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(26)...

reply
upvoteby gus_massa1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
At very low doses, for example chewing the leaves of coke instead of using the high purified version, it's somewhat like drinking a coffee [1].

I expect the fish to be more active. A coffee patch would be a nice 4th group as another control.

[1] Chewing the leaves of coke is common in many countries of South America, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acullico

reply
upvoteby tomalbrc25 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Why would you yap on like that when commenter anthonj already explained what is going on.
reply
upvoteby defrost18 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

~ Hacker News Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

reply
upvoteby gus_massa7 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Because even in low concentrations, I expect cocaine to have a different effect than Valium. (And in both case I expect a different effect at high concentrations.)
reply
upvoteby kees991 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Agree with your point overall, but ammonia in particular is a poor example.

Fish lack urea cycle, so they produce and excrete significant amounts of ammonia as part of normal metabolism.

reply