Yes, I do understand the concept of controlled research, sir. Resnick and Spilling do apply it. Yes, the research took place during Black's epidemic, but not among subjects who were ill. Rather, the researchers studied subjects who were in pockets of the Protectorate that the epidemic did not reach, but whose rations were cut simply because of the turmoil in budgets due to the massive losses in animal die off and as well as harvest die-off due to a lack of a labour force to tend crops and then bring the harvest in.
So you wish me to go ahead, I take it, and we can also write it up as an interesting cross-check to Reznick and Spilling's work. Very well, I will set up appointments with the camp admins through the remainder of the week.
I do think we should perhaps consider before we begin--at what point the experiment should be suspended, if the results are not what we would wish, i.e., if the percentage of deaths among the animals rises, at what level is the attrition no longer acceptable?
Remember that the workforce is not quite fully restored since Black's epidemic, which suggests that workforce overseers were not be pleased if the number of animals available to fill work quotas drops too low.
I'll be wanting reports from each of them at one month, two months, and three months. I'll re-assess at three months. Adult muggles can live entirely without food for over a month, I've read case studies. Admittedly you won't get much work out of them under such circumstances. But three months of reduced rations is only going to cull the weakest.
It would help, sir, when I talk to the camp admins if I clearly understand the purpose you have in mind in launching these experiments so that I can properly convey that purpose to them. Also, knowing exactly what you are trying to determine helps us ascertain what data to record.
Is it purely budgetary, because you wish to save as much money as possible? Are you only focusing on costs, and therefore willing to absolutely ignore the offsetting profit of work output? That might not be quite as useful a picture, for future budgetary calculations.
Is your interest more a matter of scientific curiosity, i.e., how long animals can live without food? I would have thought there were plenty of scientific studies already published which would provide such information to your satisfaction. Are there behavioural changes that you wish to have observed, or is your only interest in the speed of rising illness? Or even the death rate? (Again, we may get more resistance from those with work quotas to fill, if you simply wish to test how long it takes to starve animals to death).
Would appreciate any guidance you can give. Thank you.
I think my instructions were entirely clear -- both in terms of the food rations and in terms of data gathering. I have no desire to bias the camp admins in giving me the information they think I want.
And you can drop the melodrama. I'm not 'starving animals to death,' you bloody idiot. None of these camps is being cut back anywhere near as much as the muggles in Adur, most of which are still on their feet.
I'll have a report for you at the end of the week regarding my meetings with the administrators, and then the one month, two months and three months reports you request.
What's the point of doing this, you bloody prick? Power? The pleasure of causing misery? Killing off the weak? The thrill of saving money by killing children?
If I knew, I'd have a better chance of mitigating the effects while still not screwing up your bloody data.
And fuck you with your crack about melodrama. People are going to die because of this.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
If we find the same information, that's still good to know.
no subject
I do think we should perhaps consider before we begin--at what point the experiment should be suspended, if the results are not what we would wish, i.e., if the percentage of deaths among the animals rises, at what level is the attrition no longer acceptable?
Remember that the workforce is not quite fully restored since Black's epidemic, which suggests that workforce overseers were not be pleased if the number of animals available to fill work quotas drops too low.
no subject
no subject
Is it purely budgetary, because you wish to save as much money as possible? Are you only focusing on costs, and therefore willing to absolutely ignore the offsetting profit of work output? That might not be quite as useful a picture, for future budgetary calculations.
Is your interest more a matter of scientific curiosity, i.e., how long animals can live without food? I would have thought there were plenty of scientific studies already published which would provide such information to your satisfaction. Are there behavioural changes that you wish to have observed, or is your only interest in the speed of rising illness? Or even the death rate? (Again, we may get more resistance from those with work quotas to fill, if you simply wish to test how long it takes to starve animals to death).
Would appreciate any guidance you can give. Thank you.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Order Only
If I knew, I'd have a better chance of mitigating the effects while still not screwing up your bloody data.
And fuck you with your crack about melodrama. People are going to die because of this.