Should Animal Dissections be Continued at Schools?
Animal dissections have been held in schools since the 1500s but can their continuation be justified? Understanding the pros and cons of dissections at schools is crucial before forming opinions.
Pros of Animal Dissections
First-Hand Experience
One of the primary reasons we hold animal dissections is so that students can touch, feel, and understand exactly what they are learning about. According to Manipal.edu, most students stated that dissection deepens one's understanding (91.8%) and provides a three-dimensional perspective of structures (92.4%). When asked whether dissection should be eliminated from the curriculum, the majority (86%) of the students disagreed. This study was conducted among 145 undergraduate medical students.
Several biology teachers have also agreed with the fact that dissections can't truly be replaced. Susan Offner, a former Outstanding Biology Teacher Award recipient, wrote "The learning that occurs in a dissection is qualitatively different from the learning that occurs in a lecture or paper-and-pencil setting. No model, no video, no diagram, and no movie can duplicate the fascination, the sense of discovery, wonder and even awe that students feel when they find real structures in their own specimens". Vicki Besack, a high school science teacher in Florida, said that dissections “have the power to cause a student to change how they think about science and possibly what they may pursue as a career. It gives them that ‘aha’ moment.”
Not to mention, The National Association of Biology Teachers states, "The NABT acknowledges that no alternative can substitute for the actual experience of dissection or other use of animals and urges teachers to be aware of the limitations of alternatives."
A study by ncbi.gov found that the majority of the students (84.5%) perceived dissection as more interesting, and the better way to learn and understand the human body. About 87% of students also indicated that it assists in the retention of what they learned in theory. The majority of the students (74.5%) felt dissection should not be replaced by other forms of learning.
Kinesthetic Learners
It is also important to remember that everyone learns differently. Although some students might understand the lesson without having dissections, a big portion relies on the opportunity to physically touch, see, and feel the organs or animal itself. A study conducted by the National Math Foundation shows that 30-40% of school-age children are tactile/kinesthetic learners. According to BayAtlanticUniversity.edu kinesthetic learning is "a learning style during which the learner has to feel or move to learn more effectively."
Great Use of Resources
Another factor to remember is that many animals and parts used for dissection are byproducts. Dissections of animal parts are usually byproducts from the meat or other industries or were already dead. Bill Wadd, Co-Owner of Bio Corp, stated, “We just take what people would throw away. Instead of throwing it in the trash, why not have students learn from it?” Most animals used in classroom dissections are purchased from biological supply companies. Some animals, such as cats, are sourced from shelters that have already euthanized the animals. However, cats and dogs account for fewer than 1% of lab animals. Fetal pigs are byproducts of the meat industry that would have otherwise been sent to a landfill. By banning animal dissections we, as a society don't gain anything instead, we lose the opportunity to be resourceful and use all parts of the animal.
Alternatives for Animal Dissections Do More Harm
Many people believe that alternatives such as digital apps and synthetic materials could replace real animal dissections however there are several cases where they could be better. According to europeanenviornmentagency.eu synthetic materials which are by-products of petroleum are non-biodegradable, synthetic products take a long time to decompose, creating long-term pollution. Nylon is hard to recycle, making it hard to decompose, and accumulate in landfills. Polyesters are easy to recycle, which makes them less harmful to society. They also melt and burn easily causing a constant indirect threat to the students. The smallest mistake and the whole school could burn down. All it does is pollute our environment and endanger the health of animals and humans.
Also as mentioned before teachers believe that physically opening up an animal and being able to see their real-life organs can not be replaced with synthetic animal dissection or digital options.
Cons of Animal Dissections
Kills Students Health
It is common knowledge that soon-to-be-dissected animals have chemicals to keep them from molding or rotting. Some of these chemicals, Formaldehyde, Carosafe, Biofresh, and Formalin, have been classified as carcinogenic, or substances that increase the risk of cancer. For extra information check PETA.org. In the the article of PETA linked there are several studies about the actual effect that these chemicals have had on students and several studies finding higher risks of developing an autism spectrum disorder, decreased pulmonary function, and genetic mutations in certain cells. Other examples of the effect of dissections and the chemicals affecting them are
In 2003, Élan Pharmaceuticals had to stop trials of an Alzheimer's vaccine that had cured the disease in "Alzheimer's mice," after the substance caused brain inflammation in humans.
A highly touted gene therapy that cured dogs of hemophilia was discontinued because it caused liver damage and other problems in humans that were not seen in animal experiments.
An NIH clinical trial of fialuridine, a promising medication for Hepatitis B, was abruptly terminated because it caused liver failure in seven out of ten people, five of whom died and two of whom required liver transplants.
Unnecessary
In many cases students and teachers have called dissections unnecessary and ineffective. Many believe students can learn an animal’s anatomy in different ways such as synthetic materials and virtual dissection software, close alternatives to dissections.
nav’s.org says that several studies have demonstrated how students who used alternatives for dissections, computer software, models, and other forms, score as well or better on their exams and tests compared to students who had conducted the traditional form of dissections. This proves how without dissections students could still learn the same, maybe even better.
PETA.org also points out that many leading medical schools, including Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, now use innovative, clinical teaching methods instead of animal laboratories. When asked why schools say that they do not benefit from animal dissections thus they don’t require it. This shows how schools that teach the highest form of biology think that dissections are unnecessary. Procon.org also found that the inclusion of dissections in school programs discourages students from taking science or biology elective classes. So dissections are unnecessary and rob us of med and science students.
In a study by the National Center for Biotechnology Information with 834 doctors, genders split almost exactly in half, only 27% of the doctors said dissections such as the cadaver dissection are effective and increase understanding. About 38.1% of the doctors thought that cadaveric dissection could be replaced by alternative teaching methods. About 27.4% of doctors believed that cadaveric dissection in an undergraduate program can help but isn’t necessary. Around 70% of doctors disagreed with the statement that cadaveric dissection is a must for every doctor. The same amount of people believed that cadaveric dissections and other dissections are unethical. Around 71% of doctors said it was possible to practice their current specialty without the dissections in schools before med school. 95% of surgeons said that demonstration of body parts and explanation was more effective than dissections.
Animals Mistreated
In several cases, students and teachers tend to mistreat animals during dissections. Evidence of this has been found online. According to headlines.peta.org, these are some of the instances when animals have been mistreated in classrooms:
In one school a video was taken where students from Saint Antonio High School in Texas were playing jump rope with the intestines of a dissected cat. This “exercise” was sanctioned by the teacher. In South Florida, a teen who had participated in several cat dissections at school was arrested for killing over 20 cats out of school.
In another video, a science teacher at Sickles High School also in Florida is juggling three dead frogs, calling them, meant to be used for dissection, and calling them flying frogs as students laugh in the background.
In Oklahoma, a video was posted of students dancing with cat corpses to the meow mix song. The science teacher Mr. Picollo was tagged in the video.
A senior at a high school in San Diego stole a dead cat from the science lab and placed it on another student's car. A cat was found in several other cars as well until it was reported.
Conclusion
Animal dissections at schools are a very debatable topic in general. Seversl people have many different opinions. As our world modernizes and changes day by day we find out about new methods and one day this change might be made but for now all we can do is wait and be ready for what tomorrow holds.
Other Topics to Research Connected to Dissections
Pros
Cadaver dissections in med universities
Dissections that lead to career choices
The influence of dissections on the opinion of students towards science class
Cons
Hemophopic students
Religious students
States that don't let you back out of dissections
Comments
Post a Comment