[oifjsidjf]

Since mice are not humans the gender of the mice might be irrelevant.

So much nutritional studies have been done on animals and yet we know that different animals react totaly different to eg saturated fats and atherosclerosis.

Animals are a garbage proxy for anything human related.

[RobotToaster]

Unfortunately, with political correctness these days, people start whining about "ethics" and "human rights" when you experiment on human brains (fnord).

[stinos]

Depending on what you define as 'experiment', there's quite some recent neuroscience research using invasive techniques in humans. Which as far as I'm aware is approved by an ethical committee, but that's not quite the same as 'whining' :)

[morkalork]

The gender of researchers also effects outcomes: https://www.science.org/content/article/male-scent-may-compr...

[cubefox]

... technically, the "sex" of the researchers.

[slondr]

Maybe we should be doing more invasive neuroscience research on humans.

[mschuster91]

> Since mice are not humans the gender of the mice might be irrelevant.

Actually, it's not. It's well known that medications can have different effects or different dosage requirements depending on menstrual cycle.

And if you drop out a drug candidate in animal trials because you don't account for genetic and hormonal gender as well as menstrual cycle, you can end up dropping prematurely.