Many of you have probably heard the good news regarding University of Michigan ending its live dog lab. This good news has also been verified via the UM Medical School site at http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc/media/newsroom/details.cfm?ID=1057
In a letter sent by PCRM, it seems that the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) is still caught in the past via its use of live animals - vivisection. If you read the email I pasted below you’ll see how you can help this school step into current non-animal teaching methods.
For those of you who would like to learn more about alternatives to animal testing and vivisection, including what non-animal methods are available, please visit our page on alternatives to animal testing and vivisection at – http://www.geari.org/alternatives-to-animal-testing.html
One such method mentioned below and used extensively is the TraumaMan System from Simulab. You can learn more about this at http://www.pcrm.org/magazine/gm06spring/life_or_death.html
Please read on below about the use of live animals at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of
New Jersey (UMDNJ) and how you can help end such archaic practices.
You have sent more than 20,000 e-mails to University of Michigan (U-M) administrators, asking them to use nonanimal training methods in their Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) course. The school’s Graduate Medical Education Committee recently met and decided that it agrees with you. No dogs or other animals will be killed in the school’s ATLS course, according to a university statement.
Your hard work helped end animal suffering and improve medical education in Michigan. Now we need your help to do the same thing in New Jersey. While more than 90 percent of United States and Canadian facilities no longer use animals for ATLS training, University Hospital in Newark, part of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ), continues to use live pigs for its course, despite the availability of nonanimal alternatives like the TraumaMan System from Simulab. The hospital’s next ATLS course is scheduled for March 13.
Please e-mail, call, or write to UMDNJ president William Owen Jr., M.D., and politely ask him to end animal use in University Hospital’s ATLS course. Being polite is the most effective way to help these animals. Send an automatic e-mail.
William Owen Jr., M.D.
President
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey
65 Bergen St., Room 1535
University Heights
Newark, NJ 07107-3007
Phone: 973-972-4400
E-mail: wfowenmd@umdnj.edu
Showing posts with label vivisection medical schools. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vivisection medical schools. Show all posts
Friday, February 27, 2009
Friday, March 28, 2008
Group Calls for Johns Hopkins University Medical School to Join Majority of Medical Schools and End Live Animal Labs: Calls for End to Live Pig Labs
As the article points out below, “…Hopkins will be the lone holdout among medical schools in U.S. News & World Report's annual Top 20 ranking….Overall, just 10 of the nation's 126 M.D.-granting medical schools use live animals during surgical rotations, according to the physicians' group.”
This by itself proves that live animal labs aren’t necessary in medical training. If it was, the majority of schools would use them. Yet, they don’t. As stated below, "The ethical argument is that you should not use sentient creatures to our purposes unnecessarily," said Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist affiliated with group. "The reasons to use live animals, whatever they were, are no longer valid."
Article:
Medical use of live pigs criticized
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pigs27mar27,1,3004653.story
A physicians' group takes aim at Johns Hopkins University for using the animals to train its surgical students.
By Jonathan Bor, The Baltimore Sun
March 27, 2008
BALTIMORE -- Taking aim at one of the last bastions of live-animal training for medical students, a physicians' group that champions animal rights renewed its call Wednesday for Johns Hopkins University to stop using live pigs to teach operating-room techniques.
Calling the practice inhumane and unnecessary, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine noted that Hopkins is one of just two top-tier medical schools still convening live-animal labs.
"The ethical argument is that you should not use sentient creatures to our purposes unnecessarily," said Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist affiliated with group. "The reasons to use live animals, whatever they were, are no longer valid."
With Case Western University's decision to hold its last live-pig labs this semester, Hopkins will be the lone holdout among medical schools in U.S. News & World Report's annual Top 20 ranking.
Overall, just 10 of the nation's 126 M.D.-granting medical schools use live animals during surgical rotations, according to the physicians' group. A larger number of teaching hospitals use animals to train postgraduate surgical residents, and animals are widely used to test medical devices and surgical techniques.
Hopkins said it had no plans to end the use of live pigs, despite a flood of e-mails from animal rights activists and an editorial in the undergraduate student newspaper.
This by itself proves that live animal labs aren’t necessary in medical training. If it was, the majority of schools would use them. Yet, they don’t. As stated below, "The ethical argument is that you should not use sentient creatures to our purposes unnecessarily," said Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist affiliated with group. "The reasons to use live animals, whatever they were, are no longer valid."
Article:
Medical use of live pigs criticized
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pigs27mar27,1,3004653.story
A physicians' group takes aim at Johns Hopkins University for using the animals to train its surgical students.
By Jonathan Bor, The Baltimore Sun
March 27, 2008
BALTIMORE -- Taking aim at one of the last bastions of live-animal training for medical students, a physicians' group that champions animal rights renewed its call Wednesday for Johns Hopkins University to stop using live pigs to teach operating-room techniques.
Calling the practice inhumane and unnecessary, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine noted that Hopkins is one of just two top-tier medical schools still convening live-animal labs.
"The ethical argument is that you should not use sentient creatures to our purposes unnecessarily," said Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist affiliated with group. "The reasons to use live animals, whatever they were, are no longer valid."
With Case Western University's decision to hold its last live-pig labs this semester, Hopkins will be the lone holdout among medical schools in U.S. News & World Report's annual Top 20 ranking.
Overall, just 10 of the nation's 126 M.D.-granting medical schools use live animals during surgical rotations, according to the physicians' group. A larger number of teaching hospitals use animals to train postgraduate surgical residents, and animals are widely used to test medical devices and surgical techniques.
Hopkins said it had no plans to end the use of live pigs, despite a flood of e-mails from animal rights activists and an editorial in the undergraduate student newspaper.
Monday, January 28, 2008
The Medical College of Wisconsin Continues To Use Live Pigs in Teaching: Group Calls To End of Unnecessary and Cruel Practice
According to the article below, here are some key points:
Thirty-six pigs are to be opened, examined and killed at the Medical College at the end of February.
According to the physicians committee, which is based in Washington, D.C., the American College of Surgeons and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education support elimination of live animal laboratories and stress the use of alternatives, including human simulators.
More than 100 other medical schools, including Harvard, Yale and Cornell, have discontinued use of live laboratory animals.
Article:
Medical College urged to stop using live pigs in labs
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/
article?AID=/20080128/GPG0101/80128041/1206/GPGnews
By SUSANNE RUST
srust@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Jan. 27, 2008
Not satisfied with the decision by the Medical College of Wisconsin to stop using dogs as live teaching tools, an animal rights group is now calling on the school to stop using pigs.
In a letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is calling on the Medical College, as well as eight other U.S. medical schools, to get live animals out of the teaching curriculum.
Thirty-six pigs are to be opened, examined and killed at the Medical College at the end of February.
The group, which says the use of live animals is unnecessary and cruel, has erected a billboard on Highway 45 that calls on the school to stop.
More than 100 other medical schools, including Harvard, Yale and Cornell, have discontinued use of live laboratory animals.
This is the first year the Medical College has used pigs instead of dogs in its introductory physiology laboratory - a course designed for first-year medical students.
Although the physiology course began in January, the animal laboratory isn't scheduled until the end of February.
Richard Katschke, the associate vice president of public affairs at the Medical College, said the pigs come from local farmers and were not bred as laboratory animals.
He also said the American Physiological Society, the governing body for physiology education nationwide, endorses the use of animals in medical education.
"The definition of 'physiology' is 'the study of living systems,' " Allen Cowley, professor and chairman of physiology, said in an internal Medical College memo. "The Medical College's cardiovascular laboratory provides students with an exceptional learning experience."
He said it was the "only opportunity that students will have in their medical education to experience the cardiovascular function of a large animal with similar responses as humans before they begin clinical work with patients."
Katschke said the college has received 600 to 700 letters of protest about the pigs. About 50 of those letters came from residents of Wisconsin.
Other colleges still using live animals include the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, the University of Minnesota Medical School and Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Human simulators
According to the physicians committee, which is based in Washington, D.C., the American College of Surgeons and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education support elimination of live animal laboratories and stress the use of alternatives, including human simulators.
In 2005, the Medical College unveiled a $2.5 million high-tech clinical training and teaching center, which includes three human simulators - a man, woman and child.
Katschke said the simulators are also used in the course, and students uncomfortable with the live-animal laboratory are not required to participate.
As for the letter to the USDA, Katschke said he wasn't worried.
He said the USDA was at the school this month on a surprise inspection and the agency "gave us a clean bill of health."
Thirty-six pigs are to be opened, examined and killed at the Medical College at the end of February.
According to the physicians committee, which is based in Washington, D.C., the American College of Surgeons and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education support elimination of live animal laboratories and stress the use of alternatives, including human simulators.
More than 100 other medical schools, including Harvard, Yale and Cornell, have discontinued use of live laboratory animals.
Article:
Medical College urged to stop using live pigs in labs
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/
article?AID=/20080128/GPG0101/80128041/1206/GPGnews
By SUSANNE RUST
srust@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Jan. 27, 2008
Not satisfied with the decision by the Medical College of Wisconsin to stop using dogs as live teaching tools, an animal rights group is now calling on the school to stop using pigs.
In a letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is calling on the Medical College, as well as eight other U.S. medical schools, to get live animals out of the teaching curriculum.
Thirty-six pigs are to be opened, examined and killed at the Medical College at the end of February.
The group, which says the use of live animals is unnecessary and cruel, has erected a billboard on Highway 45 that calls on the school to stop.
More than 100 other medical schools, including Harvard, Yale and Cornell, have discontinued use of live laboratory animals.
This is the first year the Medical College has used pigs instead of dogs in its introductory physiology laboratory - a course designed for first-year medical students.
Although the physiology course began in January, the animal laboratory isn't scheduled until the end of February.
Richard Katschke, the associate vice president of public affairs at the Medical College, said the pigs come from local farmers and were not bred as laboratory animals.
He also said the American Physiological Society, the governing body for physiology education nationwide, endorses the use of animals in medical education.
"The definition of 'physiology' is 'the study of living systems,' " Allen Cowley, professor and chairman of physiology, said in an internal Medical College memo. "The Medical College's cardiovascular laboratory provides students with an exceptional learning experience."
He said it was the "only opportunity that students will have in their medical education to experience the cardiovascular function of a large animal with similar responses as humans before they begin clinical work with patients."
Katschke said the college has received 600 to 700 letters of protest about the pigs. About 50 of those letters came from residents of Wisconsin.
Other colleges still using live animals include the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, the University of Minnesota Medical School and Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.
Human simulators
According to the physicians committee, which is based in Washington, D.C., the American College of Surgeons and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education support elimination of live animal laboratories and stress the use of alternatives, including human simulators.
In 2005, the Medical College unveiled a $2.5 million high-tech clinical training and teaching center, which includes three human simulators - a man, woman and child.
Katschke said the simulators are also used in the course, and students uncomfortable with the live-animal laboratory are not required to participate.
As for the letter to the USDA, Katschke said he wasn't worried.
He said the USDA was at the school this month on a surprise inspection and the agency "gave us a clean bill of health."
Friday, October 19, 2007
More Proof Emerges of Animal Cruelty at University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center
The charges include “…inadequate anesthesia, unnecessarily painful procedures and substandard basic care, including a lack of food and water.”
Article:
PETA, whistle-blower file animal-cruelty complaint against CU-Denver lab
http://dailycamera.com/news/2007/oct/18/peta-whistle-blower-file-animal-cruelty-against/
Associated Press
Thursday, October 18, 2007
DENVER — A whistle-blower and an animal-rights group have accused a University of Colorado research lab of mistreating test animals, including inadequate anesthesia, unnecessarily painful procedures and substandard basic care, including a lack of food and water.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals filed two complaints Tuesday with the federal government using documents, photos and video footage from Karl Mann, a former animal care technician at the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center.
They allege numerous violations of the federal law and guidelines that Mann said he witnessed between August 2005 and March 2007.
University spokesman Steve Krizman said animals used for research and education aren't mistreated.
"In order to get good research, you need to have well-cared-for animals," Krizman said. "We have a state-of-the-art facility. We have employees specially trained to care for the animals."
He said the university's standards are higher than what is required and complaints are investigated and corrections are made when necessary.
But Mann, who left the lab in March after five years on the staff, said he contacted PETA last fall after his complaints to supervisors didn't change anything. He said he used hidden cameras to photograph and videotape lab conditions, animals being prepped for surgery and having blood drained.
"It really sort of surprised me that no one was willing to do anything about it within the lab," said Mann, 42, who previously worked at the Denver Zoo.
The complaints were filed with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which enforces the federal Animal Welfare Act, and the National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare.
USDA spokesman Jim Rogers said he hadn't seen Mann's allegations. He said the agency looks into all complaints from private citizens or groups.
"We certainly take them seriously," Rogers said.
NIH spokesman Joe Balintfy said the agency investigates all allegations but doesn't discuss specific complaints or ongoing investigations.
PETA's complaint alleges the university and an oversight committee violated federal law and NIH's guidelines by giving inadequate veterinary care, failing to respond to Mann's complaints, failing to require procedures to minimize pain and distress and failing to ensure that workers were properly qualified and trained.
Among PETA's allegations:
In August 2005, a veterinarian did not arrive at the lab until four hours after Mann reported a bonnet macaque monkey had a prolapsed colon, and the veterinarian didn't euthanize the monkey until more than an hour after that.
Earlier this year, Mann reported that cats being prepped for back surgery didn't appear to be fully anesthetized, and that the anesthetic used was inadequate. Video footage submitted to the federal agencies shows a cat lying on its side and making running motions. PETA added that using cats to study lower back injuries in humans isn't necessary because research is being done on humans.
Krizman said the school's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, which includes outside veterinarians, investigated a complaint from PETA in July about back-injury research on cats. The committee determined that proper anesthesia was used and the running motions videotaped were a reflex that didn't occur during surgery.
Mice and rats, the majority of the lab animals, were kept in crowded cages, some of which were dirty. Some rodents drowned when their cages were flooded by malfunctioning water bottles.
Rodents sometimes went without food and water, and seven rats died in February when their cage wasn't correctly connected to the ventilation system.
Kathy Guillermo, PETA's research director, acknowledged that her organization opposes research on animals. She said even if people believe the research is worthwhile, the way it's being done raises questions about its effectiveness.
"There are laws and guidelines in place to protect these beings who have essentially no rights other than those written in the law," Guillermo said.
Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist who works full-time for a group that advocates alternatives to animal research, said animal experimentation is "inhumane and cruel" despite the best intentions of researchers.
"The PR departments of schools and other facilities that do this research have a standard response to all such complaints: They take animal welfare issues very seriously, they follow the law and so on," Pippin said. "Any time you take a close look, that's not the case."
Pippin works for the Washington-based Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. The group isn't participating in the complaint against the CU lab.
Pippin said he used to conduct research on dogs but stopped about 20 years ago after deciding it wasn't ethical or scientifically sound. He said breakthroughs in medicine and science typically happen after research with humans because most of the results in animals don't transfer.
"I do believe that most people on the research side of things believe in what they're doing," Pippin said. "I also think, by and large, that looking at the big picture, they have tunnel vision."
The CU Health Sciences Center, which recently moved from Denver to a new campus in Aurora, has come under fire in the past for its treatment of monkeys and use of live dogs in physiology labs.
The monkeys were transferred last year to Wake Forest University in North Carolina, and the school quit using live dogs in 2003 because of budget cuts.
Article:
PETA, whistle-blower file animal-cruelty complaint against CU-Denver lab
http://dailycamera.com/news/2007/oct/18/peta-whistle-blower-file-animal-cruelty-against/
Associated Press
Thursday, October 18, 2007
DENVER — A whistle-blower and an animal-rights group have accused a University of Colorado research lab of mistreating test animals, including inadequate anesthesia, unnecessarily painful procedures and substandard basic care, including a lack of food and water.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals filed two complaints Tuesday with the federal government using documents, photos and video footage from Karl Mann, a former animal care technician at the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center.
They allege numerous violations of the federal law and guidelines that Mann said he witnessed between August 2005 and March 2007.
University spokesman Steve Krizman said animals used for research and education aren't mistreated.
"In order to get good research, you need to have well-cared-for animals," Krizman said. "We have a state-of-the-art facility. We have employees specially trained to care for the animals."
He said the university's standards are higher than what is required and complaints are investigated and corrections are made when necessary.
But Mann, who left the lab in March after five years on the staff, said he contacted PETA last fall after his complaints to supervisors didn't change anything. He said he used hidden cameras to photograph and videotape lab conditions, animals being prepped for surgery and having blood drained.
"It really sort of surprised me that no one was willing to do anything about it within the lab," said Mann, 42, who previously worked at the Denver Zoo.
The complaints were filed with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which enforces the federal Animal Welfare Act, and the National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare.
USDA spokesman Jim Rogers said he hadn't seen Mann's allegations. He said the agency looks into all complaints from private citizens or groups.
"We certainly take them seriously," Rogers said.
NIH spokesman Joe Balintfy said the agency investigates all allegations but doesn't discuss specific complaints or ongoing investigations.
PETA's complaint alleges the university and an oversight committee violated federal law and NIH's guidelines by giving inadequate veterinary care, failing to respond to Mann's complaints, failing to require procedures to minimize pain and distress and failing to ensure that workers were properly qualified and trained.
Among PETA's allegations:
In August 2005, a veterinarian did not arrive at the lab until four hours after Mann reported a bonnet macaque monkey had a prolapsed colon, and the veterinarian didn't euthanize the monkey until more than an hour after that.
Earlier this year, Mann reported that cats being prepped for back surgery didn't appear to be fully anesthetized, and that the anesthetic used was inadequate. Video footage submitted to the federal agencies shows a cat lying on its side and making running motions. PETA added that using cats to study lower back injuries in humans isn't necessary because research is being done on humans.
Krizman said the school's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, which includes outside veterinarians, investigated a complaint from PETA in July about back-injury research on cats. The committee determined that proper anesthesia was used and the running motions videotaped were a reflex that didn't occur during surgery.
Mice and rats, the majority of the lab animals, were kept in crowded cages, some of which were dirty. Some rodents drowned when their cages were flooded by malfunctioning water bottles.
Rodents sometimes went without food and water, and seven rats died in February when their cage wasn't correctly connected to the ventilation system.
Kathy Guillermo, PETA's research director, acknowledged that her organization opposes research on animals. She said even if people believe the research is worthwhile, the way it's being done raises questions about its effectiveness.
"There are laws and guidelines in place to protect these beings who have essentially no rights other than those written in the law," Guillermo said.
Dr. John J. Pippin, a Dallas cardiologist who works full-time for a group that advocates alternatives to animal research, said animal experimentation is "inhumane and cruel" despite the best intentions of researchers.
"The PR departments of schools and other facilities that do this research have a standard response to all such complaints: They take animal welfare issues very seriously, they follow the law and so on," Pippin said. "Any time you take a close look, that's not the case."
Pippin works for the Washington-based Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. The group isn't participating in the complaint against the CU lab.
Pippin said he used to conduct research on dogs but stopped about 20 years ago after deciding it wasn't ethical or scientifically sound. He said breakthroughs in medicine and science typically happen after research with humans because most of the results in animals don't transfer.
"I do believe that most people on the research side of things believe in what they're doing," Pippin said. "I also think, by and large, that looking at the big picture, they have tunnel vision."
The CU Health Sciences Center, which recently moved from Denver to a new campus in Aurora, has come under fire in the past for its treatment of monkeys and use of live dogs in physiology labs.
The monkeys were transferred last year to Wake Forest University in North Carolina, and the school quit using live dogs in 2003 because of budget cuts.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Duke University Stops Using Live Pigs in Third Year Surgery Course: Five Other Medical Schools Continue to Use Live Animals in Surgery Courses
This was passed onto me. As you will read, a large majority of medical schools do not use live animal labs. You will also see below a list of those who do in their surgery courses. Contact information is posted with them for you to contact.
Article:
We have wonderful news from North Carolina: I am happy to report that Duke University School of Medicine recently confirmed that it has stopped using live pigs in its third-year surgery course. This means that only 13 medical schools (of 125) continue to use live animals in medical student courses. PCRM physicians worked hard to explain the educational and ethical advantages of non-animal alternatives to the school, and Duke deserves praise for this wise and compassionate decision.
But we still need your help. Five medical schools continue to use live animals in surgery courses. Please send a polite e-mail to these schools and ask them to follow Duke's lead and stop using live animals to teach surgery. You can send an e-mail or write to the five medical schools that use live animals for surgery courses at the addresses below:
TAKE ACTION: http://support.pcrm.org/site/R?i=9XhW1ZZgPEBRUYmjzuNPHQ..
Stony Brook University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine
Richard Fine, M.D., Dean
The Health Sciences Level 4
Stony Brook, NY 11794-8430
T: 631-444-1785
Richard.Fine@stonybrook.edu
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Edward D. Miller, M.D., Dean School of Medicine
733 North Broadway
Baltimore, MD, 21205
T: 410-955-3180
emiller@jhmi.edu
University of Tennessee College of Medicine
Steve J. Schwab, M.D., Executive Dean
62 South Dunlap St., Room 405
Memphis, TN 38163
T: 901-448-5529
sschwab@utmem.edu
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
Pamela B. Davis, M.D., Ph.D., Interim Dean
10900 Euclid Ave, BRB 113
Cleveland, OH 44106
T: 216-368-2825
pbd@case.edu
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences School of Medicine
Larry Laughlin, M.D., Ph.D., Dean
4301 Jones Bridge Rd.
Bethesda, MD 20814
T: 301-295-3016
llaughlin@usuhs.mil
Please forward the e-mail to your friends and family and ask them to contact the schools as well.
Tell a friend: http://support.pcrm.org/site/R?i=zabpJXjt2PsEuJAHLzeN2w..
Medical faculty and practicing physicians know that students do not need to train on live animals to become successful physicians or surgeons. In fact, last year the American College of Surgeons (ACS) stopped using live animals in any of its own surgery educational and training programs. It also established a new certification program, the Accredited Education Institutes, which does not include live animal use in its surgery training guidelines. In addition, the American Medical Student Association recently took a major step toward modernizing medical education by passing a resolution strongly encouraging the replacement of live animal laboratories with non-animal alternatives in undergraduate medical education.
Learn more about the use of animals in medical education. Thank you so much for your support and for your compassion for animals. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at rmerkley@pcrm.org.
Best regards,
Ryan Merkley
Research Program Coordinator
Article:
We have wonderful news from North Carolina: I am happy to report that Duke University School of Medicine recently confirmed that it has stopped using live pigs in its third-year surgery course. This means that only 13 medical schools (of 125) continue to use live animals in medical student courses. PCRM physicians worked hard to explain the educational and ethical advantages of non-animal alternatives to the school, and Duke deserves praise for this wise and compassionate decision.
But we still need your help. Five medical schools continue to use live animals in surgery courses. Please send a polite e-mail to these schools and ask them to follow Duke's lead and stop using live animals to teach surgery. You can send an e-mail or write to the five medical schools that use live animals for surgery courses at the addresses below:
TAKE ACTION: http://support.pcrm.org/site/R?i=9XhW1ZZgPEBRUYmjzuNPHQ..
Stony Brook University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine
Richard Fine, M.D., Dean
The Health Sciences Level 4
Stony Brook, NY 11794-8430
T: 631-444-1785
Richard.Fine@stonybrook.edu
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Edward D. Miller, M.D., Dean School of Medicine
733 North Broadway
Baltimore, MD, 21205
T: 410-955-3180
emiller@jhmi.edu
University of Tennessee College of Medicine
Steve J. Schwab, M.D., Executive Dean
62 South Dunlap St., Room 405
Memphis, TN 38163
T: 901-448-5529
sschwab@utmem.edu
Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
Pamela B. Davis, M.D., Ph.D., Interim Dean
10900 Euclid Ave, BRB 113
Cleveland, OH 44106
T: 216-368-2825
pbd@case.edu
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences School of Medicine
Larry Laughlin, M.D., Ph.D., Dean
4301 Jones Bridge Rd.
Bethesda, MD 20814
T: 301-295-3016
llaughlin@usuhs.mil
Please forward the e-mail to your friends and family and ask them to contact the schools as well.
Tell a friend: http://support.pcrm.org/site/R?i=zabpJXjt2PsEuJAHLzeN2w..
Medical faculty and practicing physicians know that students do not need to train on live animals to become successful physicians or surgeons. In fact, last year the American College of Surgeons (ACS) stopped using live animals in any of its own surgery educational and training programs. It also established a new certification program, the Accredited Education Institutes, which does not include live animal use in its surgery training guidelines. In addition, the American Medical Student Association recently took a major step toward modernizing medical education by passing a resolution strongly encouraging the replacement of live animal laboratories with non-animal alternatives in undergraduate medical education.
Learn more about the use of animals in medical education. Thank you so much for your support and for your compassion for animals. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at rmerkley@pcrm.org.
Best regards,
Ryan Merkley
Research Program Coordinator
Monday, March 05, 2007
Medical Doctor Speaks Out: Dissection and Live Animal Labs Are No Longer Required or Even Hailed As Superior Teaching Tools
This is an excellent article that truly shows that medical schools that require live animal labs like dissection or vivisection are using outdated, inferior and wasted resources that are not producing good results. In essence, dissection and vivisection are not necessary parts of a good medial schools curriculum.
Article:
Animals are not meant for medical research
http://www.tribune-georgian.com/articles/2007/
03/02/news/opinion/letters/4letter3.2.txt
Dear Editor, As medical advisor for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, I'd like to clarify some misleading statements made about our efforts to promote humane alternatives to animal dissection in a recent letter ("Much ado about nothing by animal rights activists," Feb. 23).
Contrary to Dr. Paul Cosenza's letter, PCRM is a respected nonprofit health and research advocacy organization and is led by physicians, dietitians and scientists who publish their work in peer-reviewed academic journals, present their findings before scientific conferences and serve as consultants on government panels.
For more than 20 years, we have worked to educate the public about the need to move away from using animals in medical research and education.
Most physicians, like me, complete their medical education without ever cutting into an animal. In fact, more than 85 percent of U.S. medical schools have eliminated live animal labs in favor of more effective and humane teaching methods, such as human patient simulators, virtual computer programs and physician mentoring and observation.
The America College of Surgeons no longer uses live animals in its clinical training programs and has endorsed the use of simulation technologies to replace live animal use in surgery training programs.
I almost did not pursue medicine because I thought I might have to dissect and harm animals in the process. I am now a double-board certified neurologist and public health specialist.
Unfortunately, I do know many people who considered pursuing careers in biology and medicine, but chose not to because they believed they might be required to dissect animals. Today, dissection and live animal labs are no longer required or even hailed as superior teaching tools. To imply that dissecting animals is a necessary part of any education is simply wrong.
Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H.
Senior Medical and Research Advisor
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
Washington, D.C.
Article:
Animals are not meant for medical research
http://www.tribune-georgian.com/articles/2007/
03/02/news/opinion/letters/4letter3.2.txt
Dear Editor, As medical advisor for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, I'd like to clarify some misleading statements made about our efforts to promote humane alternatives to animal dissection in a recent letter ("Much ado about nothing by animal rights activists," Feb. 23).
Contrary to Dr. Paul Cosenza's letter, PCRM is a respected nonprofit health and research advocacy organization and is led by physicians, dietitians and scientists who publish their work in peer-reviewed academic journals, present their findings before scientific conferences and serve as consultants on government panels.
For more than 20 years, we have worked to educate the public about the need to move away from using animals in medical research and education.
Most physicians, like me, complete their medical education without ever cutting into an animal. In fact, more than 85 percent of U.S. medical schools have eliminated live animal labs in favor of more effective and humane teaching methods, such as human patient simulators, virtual computer programs and physician mentoring and observation.
The America College of Surgeons no longer uses live animals in its clinical training programs and has endorsed the use of simulation technologies to replace live animal use in surgery training programs.
I almost did not pursue medicine because I thought I might have to dissect and harm animals in the process. I am now a double-board certified neurologist and public health specialist.
Unfortunately, I do know many people who considered pursuing careers in biology and medicine, but chose not to because they believed they might be required to dissect animals. Today, dissection and live animal labs are no longer required or even hailed as superior teaching tools. To imply that dissecting animals is a necessary part of any education is simply wrong.
Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H.
Senior Medical and Research Advisor
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
Washington, D.C.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search for More Content
Custom Search
