#16: Seeing Through Cat’s Eyes (Comments)

"Very well-researched and delivered in an engaging, breezy, wink-wink tone similar to that of Mark Leyner and Billy Goldberg's Why Do Men Have Nipples?, this will likely be enjoyed equally by science buffs and casual aficionados of the curious. One of the finest science/history bathroom books of all time."
-Kirkus Reviews

#16: Seeing Through Cat’s Eyes

In 1999 researchers led by Dr. Yang Dan, an assistant professor of neurobiology at the University of California, Berkeley, anesthetized a cat with sodium pentothal, chemically paralyzed it with Norcuron, and secured it tightly in a surgical frame. They then glued metal posts to the whites of its eyes, and forced it to look a screen that showed scene after scene of swaying trees and turtleneck-wearing men.

This was not a form of Clockword-Orange-style aversion therapy for cats. Instead, it was a remarkable attempt to tap into another creature's brain and see directly through its eyes. The researchers had inserted fiber electrodes into the vision-processing center of the cat's brain. The electrodes measured the electrical activity of the brain cells and transmitted this information to a nearby computer which decoded the information and transformed it into a visual image. As the cat watched the images of the trees and the turtleneck-wearing guy, the same images emerged (slightly blurrier) on the computer screen across the room.

The commercial potential of the technology is mind-boggling. Forget helmet-cam at the superbowl; get ready for eye-cam. Or how about this — never carry a camera again. Take pictures by blinking your eyes. It would work great unless you had a few too many drinks on vacation.

Return to the Top 20 Most Bizarre Experiments of All Time
Total Comments: 24

Comments
Listed in chronological order. Newest comments at the end.

Page 2 of 2 pages < 1 2

How can testing on a human be any less horrible than testing on a cat? The cat who had no idea what was happening to it would have been terrified. A person would understand what was happening, making it a much worse experience for the person. Besides, I am sure that the scientists would have tried to ensure that the cat was able to live normally after the experiment, there is more point to proving that subjects can recover from the treatment. Also, as Kitty and others have shown, if they seriously harmed the cat animal rights activists would have been upset with them, which would have made their experiment more known for animal crualty than for the scientific contribution.
Posted by DaniL on Mon Nov 23, 2009 at 08:34 PM

it seems some people have trouble differentiating between torturing animals/people and pursuing scientific knowledge. many experiments that are performed on living things are rather gruesome and appear inhuman, and I for one could probably never stomach such acts, but they're usually done with the mind to help others. people were upset when doctors wanted to dissect corpses, and saw it as "defiling the dead", but guess what: we understand anatomy much better now and are able to perform life-saving surgeries because of it.

I think it would be much more difficult to do some of these experiments on human subjects, because it's much harder to disconnect yourself from the subject.

they don't choose to do these things for their own sick fantasies, but they choose all for the name of Science.
Posted by kayel on Sun May 08, 2011 at 06:46 PM

Verily; a 16 year old isn't mature enough to recognize that much of life is cruel and very unusual. The purity of their mind is to see how black and white the universe is and that's called ignorance. It's not a bad thing, as long as you identify it and combat it.

To assume an inhumane act where science is involved is just childish and naive. To consider an animal's welfare above a human's is just stupidity and those of such an opinion should consider the tables-turned should they so willingly offer another into the service of science.
Posted by ... on Mon May 09, 2011 at 01:38 PM

Page 2 of 2 pages < 1 2