A Defense of Free-Roaming Cats from a Hedonist Account of Feline Well-being

There is a widespread belief that for their own safety and for the protection of wildlife, cats should be permanently kept indoors. Against this view, I argue that cat guardians have a duty to provide their feline companions with outdoor access. The argument is based on a sophisticated hedonistic account of animal well-being that acknowledges that the performance of species-normal ethological behavior is especially pleasurable. Territorial behavior, which requires outdoor access, is a feline-normal ethological behavior, so when a cat is permanently confined to the indoors, her ability to flourish is impaired. Since cat guardians have a duty not to impair the well-being of their cats, the impairment of cat flourishing via confinement signifies a moral failing. Although some cats assume significant risks and sometimes kill wild animals when roaming outdoors, these important considerations do not imply that all cats should be deprived of the opportunity to access the outdoors. Indeed, they do not, by themselves, imply that any cat should be permanently kept indoors

Sheep complexity outside the laboratory

Marino & Merskin’s review shows that sheep are intelligent and highly social but their methodology has some shortcomings. I describe five problems with reviewing only the academic and scientific literature and suggest how one might provide an even more compelling case for the complexity of sheep minds

Don’t Demean “Invasives”: Conservation and Wrongful Species Discrimination

It is common for conservationists to refer to non-native species that have undesirable impacts on humans as “invasive”. We argue that the classification of any species as “invasive” constitutes wrongful discrimination. Moreover, we argue that its being wrong to categorize a species as invasive is perfectly compatible with it being morally permissible to kill animals—assuming that conservationists “kill equally”. It simply is not compatible with the double standard that conservationists tend to employ in their decisions about who lives and who dies

How to Help when it Hurts: ACT Individually (and in Groups)

In a recent article, Corey Wrenn argues that in order to adequately address injustices done to animals, we ought to think systemically. Her argument stems from a critique of the individualist approach I employ to resolve a moral dilemma faced by animal sanctuaries, who sometimes must harm some animals to help others. But must systemic critiques of injustice be at odds with individualist approaches? In this paper, I respond to Wrenn by showing how individualist approaches that take seriously the notion of group responsibility can be deployed to solve complicated dilemmas that are products of injustice. Contra Wrenn, I argue that to adequately address injustice, acting individually, often within groups, is significantly more important than thinking systemically

Nonculpably Ignorant Meat Eaters & Epistemically Unjust Meat Producers

In my recent paper, “The Epistemology of Meat-Eating,” I advanced an epistemological theory that explains why so many people continue to eat animals, even after they encounter anti-factory farming arguments. I began by noting that because meat-eating is seriously immoral, meat-eaters must either (1) believe that eating animals isn’t seriously immoral, or (2) believe that meat eating is seriously immoral (and thus they must be seriously immoral). I argued that standard meat-eaters don’t believe that eating animals is seriously immoral because either they don’t believe that meat-eating causes serious and systematic harm to farmed animals, or they believe that meat-eating causes serious and systematic harm to farmed animals, but they don’t believe that this harm is unnecessary. In a response titled “Are Meat-Eaters Epistemically Unlucky?”, Bob Fischer presents five objections to my epistemic theory. In this paper, I offer responses to each of Fischer’s thought-provoking objections and develop his insightful suggestion that, according to my epistemic theory, animal protectionists are victims of epistemic injustice

Autonomic function in amnestic and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment : spectral heart rate variability analysis provides evidence for a brain–heart axis

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a heterogeneous syndrome with two main clinical subtypes, amnestic (aMCI) and non-amnestic (naMCI). The analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) is a tool to assess autonomic function. Cognitive and autonomic processes are linked via the central autonomic network. Autonomic dysfunction entails several adverse outcomes. However, very few studies have investigated autonomic function in MCI and none have considered MCI subtypes or the relationship of HRV indices with different cognitive domains and structural brain damage. We assessed autonomic function during an active orthostatic challenge in 253 oupatients aged\u2009 65\u200965, [n\u2009=\u200982 aMCI, n\u2009=\u200993 naMCI, n\u2009=\u200978 cognitively normal (CN), neuropsychologically tested] with power spectral analysis of HRV. We used visual rating scales to grade cerebrovascular burden and hippocampal/insular atrophy (HA/IA) on neuroimaging. Only aMCI showed a blunted response to orthostasis. Postural changes in normalised low frequency (LF) power and in the LF to high frequency ratio correlated with a memory test (positively) and HA/IA (negatively) in aMCI, and with attention/executive function tests (negatively) and cerebrovascular burden (positively) in naMCI. These results substantiate the view that the ANS is differentially impaired in aMCI and naMCI, consistently with the neuroanatomic substrate of Alzheimer's and small-vessel subcortical ischaemic disease

The Neuropsychological Profile of Attention Deficits of Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Update on the Daytime Attentional Impairment

none7noAbstract: Introduction: Patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) suffer from several neurocognitive disturbances. One of the neuropsychological processes most investigated in OSA patients is attention, but the results have been controversial. Here, we update the attention profile of OSA patients with the final aim to improve attention assessment, with a possible impact on clinical and medical-legal practices, in terms of which attention subdomains and parameters need consideration and which one is a high-risk OSA phenotype for attention dysfunctions. Method: For this purpose, we assessed 32 previously untreated OSA patients (26 men and 6 women) under 65 years of age (mean age 53.2 ± 7.3; mean education level 10.4 ± 3.4 years) suffering from moderate to severe sleep apnea and hypopnea (mean apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) 45.3 ± 22.9, range 16.1–69.6). A control group of 34 healthy participants matched with OSA patients for age, education level, and general cognitive functioning were also enrolled. The OSA patients and healthy participants were tested through an extensive computerized battery (Test of Attentional Performance, TAP) that evaluated intensive (i.e., alertness and vigilance) and selective (i.e., divided and selective) dimensions of attention and returned different outcome parameters (i.e., reaction time, stability of performance, and various types of errors). Data analysis: The data were analyzed by ANCOVA which compared the speed and accuracy performance of the OSA and control participants (cognitive reserve was treated as a covariate). The possible mechanisms underlying attention deficits in OSA patients were examined through correlation analysis among AHI, oxygenation parameters, sleepiness scores, and TAP outcomes and by comparing the following three phenotypes of patients: severe OSA and severe nocturnal desaturators (AHI++D+), severe OSA nondesaturators (AHI++D−), and moderate OSA nondesaturators (AHI+D−). Results: The results suggest that the OSA patients manifest deficits in both intensive and selective attention processes and that reaction time (RT) alone is ineffective for detecting and characterizing their problems, for which error analysis and stability of performance also have to be considered. Patients with severe OSA and severe hypoxemia underperformed on alertness and vigilance attention subtests. Conclusions: The data suggest the importance of evaluating attention deficits among OSA patients through several parameters (including performance instability). Moreover, the data suggest a multifaceted mechanism underlying attention dysfunction in OSA patients.openAngelelli P., Macchitella L., Toraldo D.M., Abbate E., Marinelli C.V., Ariglian M., De Benedetto M.Angelelli, P.; Macchitella, L.; Toraldo, D. M.; Abbate, E.; Marinelli, C. V.; Ariglian, M.; De Benedetto, M