Cloning, embryonic research and cell reproduction have all come to the forefront of medical controversy as science improves and researchers make further strides in curing diseases and improving human life. Yet an older issue still remains a matter of debate. Animal testing long has been protested and supported, boycotted and embraced. Humane tests conducted on animals to save thousands, even millions of lives, are perfectly acceptable ends to a mean. However, if animals can be spared because effective alternatives are available, animal testing then becomes unethical and wrong.
On Friday, a forum, "Alternatives to Live Animal Labs in Medical Education," showed some medical students' opposition to an optional third year lab. In the lab, the Medical school purchases and raises approximately 70 beagles. They then are used in a lab in which students learn to perform a tracheotomy.
In itself, the process of animal testing is a horrible situation. Anytime an innocent animal must face pain unnecessarily, it is a travesty. However, many times the suffering ultimately brings some greater good -- new medicines are found to save millions, better operation techniques are discovered and perfected or a fledging doctor becomes equipped with the skills he or she needs to save countless lives.
When alternatives to live animals are available, though, the suffering is never justifiable. That is the case with the dog lab.
According to Dr. Neal Barnard with the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, three alternatives exist -- the use of the Trauma Man, cadavers or doctor shadowing. First medical students could practice on fresh cadavers. Granted it is not often that 70 fresh cadavers fall into the hands of the medical school. Students could do their work as cadavers become available and also in groups. Using cadavers would make the best out of the tragic loss of life and save other living creatures from unnecessary pain.
Second, students could use a medical training tool known as the Trauma Man. The Trauma Man is an anatomically correct human body designed to help students practice their surgical skills. It consists of simulated human tissue designed specifically for use in surgical dissections. The various organs can be filled with simulated blood and oxygen to reflect how a live human being might respond to the procedures (www.simulab.com). The American college of surgeonshas approved Trauma Man for its ability to simulate the real life procedures of tracheotomies, cut downs, and chest tubes.
Not only would the Trauma Man be beneficial because it would save the beagles, it is also beneficial financially. Each beagle costs between $5000-6000 a year. In contrast, the cost of a Trauma Man is only $125 per participant. Ethical issues aside, it would seem only fitting that a University strapped for cash by ever-increasing budget cuts would be more than happy to switch from one effective procedure to another while saving thousands of dollars a year. The University of Colorado just recently dropped their own dog labs, claiming cost issues (http://www.pcrm.org/news/issues030130.html). The Trauma Man does not, in fact, help students learn how to perform laparotomies or splenectomies; two procedures practiced in the dog lab. However, most medical students are not aptly trained to handle either procedure. Usually doctors don't learn these techniques until late in their residency, or almost five years of training and learning later. Ill-prepared students practicing these procedures on beagles are like little children allowed to sit in daddy's lap and drive the car. It may be fun and exciting, but it is certainly not practical or safe.
Thirdly, medical students can always shadow surgeons. Yes, there would be no actual hands on experience, but other universities are finding it useful. According to Jeanne McVey, also with the PCRM, Harvard University began having their students shadow doctor's after the dog lab was eliminated. McVey said both students and teachers are happier with this situation, both for the heartache it saves and for the knowledge it provides. These students are training to be doctors, not vets, and watching a skilled surgeon work on an actual human is probably more helpful then practicing on a dog. Students learn both conceptual material, by seeing the procedures, and manual skill, when they are allowed to actually perform the procedure.
The University does not officially offer any of these alternatives. Their actions speak louder than words however; the dog lab is not required for University medical students. If the skills taught in the dog lab are so crucial it would be mandated by the University. The dog lab is not mandated, which brings into question its necessity altogether. If the necessity of the lab itself is in question, then moral issues -- such as using the dogs for these experiments -- are all the more imperative.
The usefulness of this procedure aside, is it at all acceptable to use live beagles? According to the Animal Welfare Act, no. The Act states clearly and unequivocally that when alternatives exist using live animals is illegal (http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/). Good, strong alternatives exist, so the dog lab shouldn't.
The University's medical school has certain obligations as one of the finest medical schools in the nation. It must educate our future doctors. It must make sure they are trained and well-prepared for the life and death challenges they will face. It must provide doctors with the resources to be successful and helpful, and it must do so ethically and responsibly. The dog lab is neither ethical nor responsible as long other options exist. Bring in the Trauma Man and send third-year medical students out as shadows as a replacement to the dog lab or end the lab entirely. The choice is clear.
(Maggie Bowden is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. She can be reached at mbowden@virginia.edu.)
Read More
KURTZWEIL: What we lose in the name of efficiency
By Paul Kurtzweil | 15 hours agoPenicillin was discovered in a moldy petri dish — this government would have it thrown out because it was wasting space on the counter.
RASHID: U.Va. must empower faculty and students through transparency
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | YesterdayBy attempting to contain, or even eliminate uncomfortable narratives, the administration incrementally consolidates power and frays communal trust.
YOUNIS: Muslim students deserve a better Ramadan on Grounds
By Ayat Younis | 2 days agoRamadan at the University should not be a time in which students must choose between academic success and religious observance.
