Quote Originally Posted by Kurtilein View Post
i have seen studies about how to kill rhodents with CO2, however, i have never seen a study comparing CO2 to alternatives like nitrogen, helium or nitrous oxide. I say nitrogen, a noble gas, or nitrous oxide are superior, and noone has disproven that claim so far. I see them as studies about how to kill animals with a poorly chosen and problematic gas, showing that if you do everything right it can still be humane, by looking at the reactions of animals that cannot talk. I think the use of CO2 is purely based on tradition and on the fact that it works a bit faster than nitrogen or a noble gas.

Also the studies dont take into account human experience of exposure to CO2. They look at how rhodents/animals react, and when there are no apparent/conclusive signs of distress they think its fine. But that immediately flooding with pure CO2 does cause distress is obvious. Only humans can talk, and human judgement about the different gases is crystal clear. There we have test subjects that can precisely tell you how different gases feel, in modern english.

so, go ahead, show me studies that include a comparison of different gases and/or that include human experience. When i can get 4 or 5 different gases in the same pressurized cans at about the same price, i know i wont pick CO2, and i think noone should.
Sorry, but I think that the burden of proof is on you for this one.