Katherine Lewis, Education Director
From: AAVSKL@aol.com
"She is the medical team's first patient, strapped down
to an operating table and attached to a few basic monitors to track
breathing, blood pressure, and heart rate. Various common drugs are
introduced into her veins. The team carefully notes how her internal
organs react to the drugs. The patient wakes up in the middle of the
process and cries out in pain, but the operation continues after a
higher dose of anesthesia is hurriedly injected into her vein. After
several hours, the team injects a drug that puts her out of her pain,
once and for all. The doctor's observe as she takes her last breath, and
dies." (Barnard & DeWitt, 1999)
Is this a case of medical malpractice? No. Most lawyers
wouldn't even take this case given that the patient is a dog. She is one
of the tens of thousands of animals who involuntarily participate in
what is commonly referred to as "dog labs." These labs are most often
terminal and may be performed on other animals besides just dogs. Many
of the animals that are procured for these labs are purpose bred, only
to be killed for an educational lesson. Even though alternatives exist,
these labs are still regularly
performed in over half of the 126 U.S. medical schools and in 25 out of
the 27 accredited U.S. veterinary medical schools.
Medical Schools
The case against dog labs in medical school is strongest from a
pedagogical perspective simply because dogs are not human. For this
reason more than perhaps any other, nine out of ten of the top medical
schools as reported by U.S. News & World Report have done away with the
vivisection of dogs in their medical schools. Schools such as Harvard
(1), Johns Hopkins University (2), University of Pennsylvania (3),
Washington University (4), Columbia (5), University of California - San
Francisco (6), Yale (8), University of Washington (9), and Stanford
University (10) have all stopped using dog labs in lieu of having their
students observe surgeons performing surgeries on human beings.
While the top medical schools have progressed toward
more appropriate and humane teaching, other medical schools still use
animals to teach basic physiology and pharmacology. In those
institutions, students, student organizations, and non-profit
organizations have pushed for students' choice policies. At the
University of California - San Diego's (UCSD) Medical School, dog labs
are still part of the required curriculum for first year students. When
activist and doctor, Nancy Harrison, found out that
UCSD was still using dogs (purpose-bred Dobermans), she met with
students, arranged interviews with the local press, and wrote letters to
the editor. She is currently collecting signatures from San Diego
physicians for a petition that urges UCSD Medical School to develop
alternatives to the dog labs for demonstration purposes. Thus far, over
150 physicians have signed the petition, including many UCSD faculty
members (four of whom are former medical school department chairs). She
also started the organization Doctors Against Dog Labs. In November, she
organized a meeting with all first year medical students (MSIs) to
inform them about upcoming dog vivisection labs in their physiology and
pharmacology courses. As result of that meeting, over two-thirds of the
MSIs responded to the information by opting out of the UCSD first year
dog lab.
Veterinary Schools
While vet students must learn about animals, there are a multitude of
ways to learn without the use of terminal dog labs. Tufts University
School of Veterinary Medical was the first veterinary school in the
United States to eliminate all terminal procedures for all species in
their curriculum. In February, 2000, Tufts announced plans to eliminate
their last elective course that involved the killing of dogs at the end
of the surgical procedure. Dr. Gary Patronek, head of Tufts' Center for
Animals and Public Policy, was quoted as saying, "This step is the
culmination of a series of efforts since 1989 to provide top quality
veterinary surgical training while at the same time promoting the humane
treatment of animals." Instead of using dog labs, Tufts is giving
students hands-on experience with their spay/neuter clinic, helping
animals instead of sacrificing them.
Western University of Health Sciences (WUHS) in Pomona,
California seeks to be the second veterinary school to offer a dog
lab-free curriculum. WUHS is scheduled to open in 2001. It has pledged
to offer a "non-consumptive curriculum with a reverence for life."
And while the Tufts and WUHS programs are innovative,
they are only two of many. So students, whose only wish is to help
animals, may still be confronted with terminal dog labs in other
veterinary schools. As with medical schools, students have had to rely
on student policies offering them an
alternative. An example of students working for one such policy is the
University of Illinois Veterinary School. Several vet students pushed
for a student choice policy. They met with the faculty who at first were
lukewarm to the idea. But when the Chicago Tribune heard about their
campaign, it ran a front page article "Vet Students Oppose U. of I.
Animal Killings." Almost immediately the university suspended its
terminal physiology labs and adopted a formal policy requiring that
students be informed in advance of terminal laboratories. In this
particular case, not only was a choice policy passed, but the students
also persuaded the University to eliminate the first year terminal lab.
Clearly dog labs are not essential elements of teaching
physiology or pharmacology, given that there are so many schools that do
not require or use these antiquated methods. Many doctors, nurses,
veterinarians, and even researchers agree that it is unnecessary. So why
do these labs continue?
Indeed why do many of the lessons using animals for educational purposes
continue? Simply because it has been the traditional way of teaching.
But medical and veterinary medical school professors must begin to
reexamine their teaching. There are two ways of teaching -- one that
harms animals and ourselves and one that does not. It is up to these
professors to choose, but it up to us to inform them and ask them
discontinue their unnecessary betrayal "man's" best friend.
Resources:
Other Organizations Against Dog Labs in Medical School
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
5100 Wisconsin Ave, NW
Suite 404
Washington, DC 20016
800-875-4837
Doctors Against Dog Labs
www.Doctorsagainstdoglabs.com
Dog Lab-Free Veterinary Medical Schools
Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine
200 Westboro Road
North Grafton, MA 01536
508-839-5302
vetadmissions@tufts.edu
www.tufts.edu/vet
Western University of Health Sciences
909-469-5543
Other Organizations Against Dog Labs in Veterinary
Medical School
The Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights
916-759-8106
AVAR@igc.apc.org
New England Anti-Vivisection Society
brochure Alternatives to Live Animal Labs
Ann Stauble - 617-523-6020 x13 or
astauble@ma.neavs.com
Go on to Trading
Places
Return to 9 May 2001 Issue
Return to Newsletters
** Fair Use Notice**
This document may contain copyrighted material, use of which has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law). If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your
own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.
