#in mice

[comparativelysuperlative]

Regular reminder that there is one simple trick for which news articles you can maybe trust versus probably shouldn't trust to talk about (American) criminal cases.

-Check for what they say about possible sentences. If it's "up to X years" or "maximum sentence of" or worst of all "potentially" anything, do not trust them.

-A journalist who is actually trying to inform you will instead talk about plausible sentences. Look for the phrase "sentencing guidelines," or maybe at least the word "range."

Why it works: The maximum sentence is a) catastrophically longer, so if they want to push a narrative, including the usual one that Crime Sells Papers, this one plays better, and b) Googleable. Estimating the guidelines range isn't hard but is definitely harder. Someone who's just trying to meet a deadline is likely to give in to the same temptation as someone trying to mislead you.

So this is an okay litmus test for whether a minimum of journalist effort went into saying true things because they are true. Which is a nice thing to know about the places you're getting information from.

[nyctibiius]

she has been pickled for her crimes

[businesskitty]

a Very Important Purchase

[mollybeenoel]

Tiny friends

Photographed by Miles Herbert

[celesse]

🐭🍎❤ Inspired by this video from simon_dell_tog

[landsccape]

[dinosaurcharcuterie]

"in a lab setting"

"in animals"

The safety trial in humans, if I understand correctly, is about a different drug meant for celiac disease, and it's in the stage of testing if it kills anyone, less so if it is actually effective.

Twitter is rife with flaws, but at least justsaysinmice is there in the qrts to call out amazing scientific advancement (which this very much is) presented as months away from being available (which this is not).

We have cured MS, diabetes, a fuckton of cancers and a whole host of other things in mice bred for lab purposes before. Most of those results didn't translate to other animal models, sometimes not even to wild type mice of the same species, let alone humans.

People are not mice.

People do not exist in lab conditions.

I've got a few less debilitating autoimmune conditions I'd love to get rid of myself, but if I can't have that, I just want a 500k fine for every article reporting science as if a successful mouse model is basically the CDC and FDA being big meaniepants who want sick people to stay poor and sick, and making revolutionary cures "disappear" when it turns out they straight up don't work in real life conditions. Add another 250k if they don't put the mouse part in the title or first paragraph.

[bajingo]

Mous-fer-RATu.

[bedupolker]

Time to cook 🫓

Commissioned by oceanchairsky, thank you so much! Any artist's dream to get paid to draw their OCs

[omg-rodents]

It's not common, but every so often I run across a baby mouse that has crawled into a discarded peanut shell. It's usually body armor but sometimes it can be headgear also.

I call them Peanut Knights. This fuzzy has a quite stylish open-face helmet!

Here she is without her helmet:

[sarakipin]

🌲 🐁 👑 🕯️

[ash-elizabeth-art]

A mouse and his tea, 2024

[nando161mando]

[mostly-funnytwittertweets]

[beemovieerotica]

the cognitive dissonance from people who want the products of modern medicine but get weird about animal research. like im sorry but this is necessary for the survival of the society we currently live in. and the scientists who work on these things are not evil cackling psychopaths. anyone you talk to in animal research has incredibly complex feelings about their work and incredibly complex relationships to the animals in their care. there are regulations and oversight and penalties in place to make the work as humane as possible and scientists are overwhelmingly the ones enforcing and advocating for better care.