• lorkano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    While it sounds a like a dick move, there probably was a reason they would prefer other patients. Maybe it’s more risky to do surgery second time? I don’t really blame them for this one, their goal is to take best steps to develop technology before they make it widespread and really functional. I blame them for all of those animals death though.

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 month ago

      there probably was a reason they would prefer other patients.

      yeah, they fucked up on this one and want a new test subject.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean yes. They wouldn’t be part of a study of two different tests were tried or even the same test install twice.

    • MajorHavoc@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah. I also can think of lots of reasonable reasons, but if those were the real reasons, the company should still be making commitments and plans with their first user…

      The healthy stuff sounds like: “We intend X follow up procedure, but it needs to follow Y precaution.”

      Hell, even companies that have no intention to help usually take the time to lie and claim that they do.