Comments on: Debated Studies: Animal labs for medical students

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:39:36 +0000

I honestly think a lab like this would be very exciting, an eye-opening experience. I want to go into the medical field and to participate in a lab such as this sounds appealing, although many others are appalled at the thought.

Yes, the dogs are euthanized, but they are handled in a humane manner. There are thousands more dogs in the world today that are euthanized because there is no other place for them.

A lab like this can teach students how delicate a life is, a thought they can apply when they operate on humans in the future.

By: JJ

JJ — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 23:49:19 +0000

We teach students to think abstractly so that they can envision how the heart works and not necessarily need to feel it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:33:08 +0000

Sure, the dogs will be euthanized after the lab, and the probably will be euthanized in the animal shelter. Does it make it OK that you experiment on them just because they will eventually die? We all will eventually die. So can we experiment on each other? Patients in Oregon electively die under euthanasia. Can we experiment on them? Pain and suffering is the same…but perhaps its OK because you can’t hear the dogs cry? Lets practice humane medicine, not the cruel blood purging of ancient times.

By: ponydvm

ponydvm — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 19:41:17 +0000

I am also a vet student and we have a similar rotation at my school. As a 3rd year, we may participate in an elective “pig lab” where we receive a new pig each day (under anesthesia) to perform procedures on for the day (nephrectomies, enterotomies, cystotomies, skin flaps, etc.) that many of us may actually encounter in private practice in the future. We are not required to complete residencies or specialize, so the experience is somewhat of a necessity.
Fortunately many vet schools are extremely progressive in the humanity and ethics of medicine and animal use. The pigs used are those being sent to slaughter with no chance of survival or entrance into the food chain (several are so ill they pass after being induced) so they serve a beneficial purpose before. We also have an anesthetist to watch over them and they never have to wake up to feel any pain.
I agree that the experience was excellent for learning how to combat actual blood loss and deal with living tissues. The animals were not harmed and probably had a more peaceful exit than what sometimes go on with the stressors of a slaughterhouse.
However I have to argue with the use in medical schools. Yes, it may be great to practice a chest tube, intubation or place an IV catheter in an animal so your first time is not on a person. However each species has its own idiosyncracies and variable anatomy. Just because I can intubate a horse like a champ does NOT mean that I would be comfortable nor experienced at doing a cat or a human. I agree with the anonymous post that practice is what will prevail in any procedure.
If the value were to fit somewhere in human medical teaching, I would think it would be for those who may actually perform the procedure in the future based on their specialty and level of education. I see no need for 2nd year med students to need it as opposed to a 3rd year surgical resident.
And lastly, the human-animal bond has evolved immensely over the past 20 years. Many people view their pets as their children and family, and no one wants to hear about cruelty or abuse to them for educational or any other purposes. We are not a Third World country and so we do not view animals as such.
Frightning to me are those who laugh or joke in the expiration of any creature’s life. Pain receptors and fear are the same physiologically across the board. Realize there is a strong connection between those who abuse animals and who later abuse people…comforting to know that the newest Jeffrey Dahmer may be my future physician!
Just some food for thought…

By: docwanbe

docwanbe — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 03:05:51 +0000

(victim but not animal)is right. The state of today’s doctors i believe, i may be wrong, but the way i see it is that doctors dont care. they dont have time to see that their patients are humans, they just see them as objects that they must do something to. i have had a horrible plastic surgeon who did a procedure on someone i know very closely, which wasnt even needed at all, as the wound originally could have healed perfectly on its own. but greedy as he is, did the procedure, and now the person is in pain everyday, and there is no chance that the part of the body will heal. I feel like kicking the guy’s ass everytime i think about it, but what can u do, doctors suck, money makes the world go round and round.

By: victim but not an animal

victim but not an animal — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:40:26 +0000

i feel really bad for the dogs. this isn’t right. i have been a victim myself but am not a dog. i went in for surgery, a simple carpal tunnel surgery. the scope was handed over to a resident and he cut my ulnar nerve. i developed RSD as a result of that surgery. i’ve had 4 surgeries to try to shut down the RSD with the 4th one being an implanted stimulator. honestly, i wish i could have been euthanized. what i live with each and every day i wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. the pain is unbearable. i understand doctors need to learn, but learn on people who have given proper consent. simulators of all different kinds are out available. you don’t need dogs nor do you need unsuspecting human guinea pigs. after my surgery, i felt like a speciman laying there not a human. my trust and confidence in doctors was broken. i was a young mother with two small children. my life is forever changed. please remember next time you go to perform surgery or procedure on a patient, that the patient has a name, has hobbies, has interests, has a family, has a job. we’re not dogs laying there on that table. we aren’t just teaching/learning opportunities. we came to the hospital to get better.

By: Student Doctor Network

Student Doctor Network — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 21:54:13 +0000

Continue discussion here:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=387142

By: Aforementioned Surg Rez

Aforementioned Surg Rez — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 08:37:30 +0000

Listen…play around with your dogs all you want. When you get into the real hospital (and no, not your clinical skills instructor taking your little group on a hand-held tour of some patients to “examine”), you’ll realize how totally useless these kinds of exercises are and why there’s such a push to create realistic simulation exercises. To argue this point with anyone younger than a late MS 3 or MS 4 is sort of a waste of time…. It sounds like you’re a first-year…come back in a few years when you’ve encountered some really terrible situations in the hospital where you felt that maybe if you had been exposed to or practiced some scenarios a few times before, you might have been able to save someone’s life. And giving a sedated dog epinephrine to see his heart beat faster is unfortunately not going to be it.

By: akpete

akpete — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:20:48 +0000

““Lack of funds” is no excuse…if you can’t afford to train the next generation of students with current technology, you need to be put on probation or shut down. Simple as that. Deans of medical schools can’t go with the “cheaper” option of animal modeling while they bank 600K+ a year in salary.” – Surg Rez

Actually, the dog lab is extremely expensive to put on, and our school does also have simulators. So it is not a question of money at MCW. The dog lab continues because of the high % of participation and the student evaluations. Most schools have discontinued dog labs purely based on money, not any ethical dilemma.

By: Aforementioned Surg Rez

Aforementioned Surg Rez — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 03:46:05 +0000

Yes, a lot has come from animal modeling. Most of the drugs we enjoy today, many of the early surgical procedures perfected (especially plastics…ugh, poor bunnies), and the entire cosmetics industry up until the late 1990s had the successes they had because of animal modeling. Our knowledge of biochemical pathways in the realm of research has exploded in the last 20 years because of advanced molecular techniques…all of which draw on animal substrates for their components from an experimental and materials standpoint (i.e. ordering some goat/rabbit/hamster/dog/pig/horse anti-mouse antibody that will fluoresce when it binds to your protein on western blot). And let’s not forget about all of the physiological knowledge of the body we obtained in the early 20th century because of animal modeling (ahem…Starling curves and sleep deprivation studies, anyone?). I think the idea here is that technology has come a very long ways since animal modeling began, and to be honest technology has greatly surpassed animal modeling in many situations, including medical school education. I have no doubt that animal sacrifice for science is necessary for furtherment of our knowledge (this, of course, is subject to debate). However, we need to evaluate the tasks that necessitate animal sacrifice. Medical school education, while important, is VERY LOW on the totem pole for sacrificing animals, especially when sim technology is out there. If a med school does not have this technology, they need to stop buying pool/foosball tables for student lounges and stop throwing “med school proms” and start investing in their students. “Lack of funds” is no excuse…if you can’t afford to train the next generation of students with current technology, you need to be put on probation or shut down. Simple as that. Deans of medical schools can’t go with the “cheaper” option of animal modeling while they bank 600K+ a year in salary. Report these pricks to the local paper. Animal usage in medicine, at least in the basic science community, is here to stay at least for the time being (and believe me, the rules that govern this use is strict). However, medical schools and attendings that advocate animal testing will find themselves on a slippery slope – these animals will over time be harder to come by, their use is inferior to sim technology in almost every possible way, and that it is becoming increasingly unpopular in the public arena to sacrifice animals for a cause as abstract as “medical school education”. Med schools need to upgrade their educational regimes…if that requires redistributing money within the school’s system, so be it. But with regard to the “animal experience in medical education”, there is nothing that the students at MCW (or any other med school that has animal modeling) witnessed that cannot be more accurately and consistently portrayed with a simulator or cpu mannequin – the principles that are trying to be taught are fundamental, and the techology to demonstrate these principles exist, are accessible to schools, and are simply superior to older methods.