1. Itâs true that we donât think you can take our methodology and extend it arbitrarily. We grant that itâs very difficult to draw a precise boundary. However, itâs standard to develop a model for a purpose and be wary about its application in a novel context. Very roughly, we take those novel contexts to be ones where the probability of sentience is extremely low. We acknowledge that we donât have a precise cutoff for âextremely low,â as establishing such a cutoff would be a difficult research project in its own right. There are unavoidable judgment calls in this work.
I estimate effects on soil animals would still be much larger than those on the target beneficiaries for a welfare per animal-year of exactly 0 for animals with fewer neurons than those considered in your book, and âwelfare range as a fraction of that of humansâ = ânumber of neurons as a fraction of that of humansâ^0.19, which explains very well the welfare ranges in Table 8.6 of your book (78.6 % of their variance for an exponent of 0.188). I calculate soil ants and termites have 2.91 and 1.16 times as many neurons as shrimp, so effects on them would still be relevant. I get the following increase in the welfare of soil ants and termites as a fraction of the increase in the welfare of the target beneficiaries for an exponent of 0.19 (the chicken welfare corporate campaigns would decrease animal welfare):
I estimate effects on soil animals would still be much larger than those on the target beneficiaries for a welfare per animal-year of exactly 0 for animals with fewer neurons than those considered in your book, and âwelfare range as a fraction of that of humansâ = ânumber of neurons as a fraction of that of humansâ^0.19, which explains very well the welfare ranges in Table 8.6 of your book (78.6 % of their variance for an exponent of 0.188). I calculate soil ants and termites have 2.91 and 1.16 times as many neurons as shrimp, so effects on them would still be relevant. I get the following increase in the welfare of soil ants and termites as a fraction of the increase in the welfare of the target beneficiaries for an exponent of 0.19 (the chicken welfare corporate campaigns would decrease animal welfare):
For cage-free corporate campaigns, â20.4.
For buying beef, 3.31 M.
For broiler welfare corporate campaigns, â321.
For GiveWellâs top charities, 83.6 k.
For HIPF, 65.5 k.