So the author tried to fix a non-issue of somebody else's dog with human-grade probiotics.
I think that actually there was no issue at all and he just wanted to YOLO it.
And then he only goes to discuss if it was ethical as he didn't ask the dog? What about just not medicating a dog when there is no medical problem? What about consent from the owner? So much more issues with this than what the author discusses.
Yeah, they're mostly fluff. Based on the title I'm a bit disappointed there wasn't more actual science here, like measuring bacterial content changes in the stool.
While I don't doubt the perceived changes and there is plenty of human research indicating that gut bacteria dictates more about us than we'd like to admit the graphs in this article definitely portray the results as having more rigor than they actually did.
TomJansen|3 months ago
I think that actually there was no issue at all and he just wanted to YOLO it.
And then he only goes to discuss if it was ethical as he didn't ask the dog? What about just not medicating a dog when there is no medical problem? What about consent from the owner? So much more issues with this than what the author discusses.
kinderpingui|3 months ago
knollimar|3 months ago
The behavioral changes one seems very unreadable.
gnabgib|3 months ago
kinderpingui|3 months ago
Cpoll|3 months ago
ticulatedspline|3 months ago
While I don't doubt the perceived changes and there is plenty of human research indicating that gut bacteria dictates more about us than we'd like to admit the graphs in this article definitely portray the results as having more rigor than they actually did.
unknown|3 months ago
[deleted]