Virtual Dichotomy

Dissection in science classrooms is an experience that almost every student has to go through, but one that many will regret. It is estimated that six million vertebrate animals are dissected in high schools each year, and another 5.7 million are used in college laboratories. The issue of educational dissection has become a national concern. Many groups such as PETA and The Humane Society have been lobbying for years to outlaw such practices, and implement new and safe dissection alternatives. Alternatives to dissection have become more popular in recent decades and may be the future of modern science and education.

Using animals for medical experimentation and education is a controversial subject that often leads to a heated debate. The issues are complex, but the suffering and waste involved in animal experimentation are painfully obvious. Vivisection, the act of cutting into a live animal, has led the nation down countless scientific dead ends, while detracting funds and attention from more applicable scientific research. The practice of animal experimentation at NYU continues, not because it has been proven to be an accurate and reliable means of research (which it has not) but rather, because of tradition and promotion from those with strong vested interests (i.e. Lynne Kiorpes). These values have

Ever since the late 1960’s and the early 1970’s, animal research has been under extreme fire for what they do. This is mainly due to the many changing perspectives on the relationship between humans and the other aspects of the world that are surrounding them. There are many main reasons for this change, but the main reason is the different ideas that surrounded the use and exploration of animals in laboratories is what is being brought into question.

Balcombe argues that many students are not equipped to make an informed decision as to whether or not they want to participate in dissections. Students who are regularly and spontaneously confronted with animal use in their studies may not be able to develop a balanced attitude towards the use of animals in their field (Balcombe, 2000). Balcombe stresses that students should always have a choice between using animals and using alternative methods. Before making a decision, students should have ethical training to make an informed decision at the very least (Balcombe,

Scientists use animals in order to make medical advancements to help humans however, it is often difficult to get the same results in both animals and humans. The biology of humans and animals is not the same, although there are some similarities. According to Akhtar, in an article titled “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”, “Annually, more than 115 million animals are used worldwide in experimentation or to supply the biomedical industry” (Akhtar). Millions of animals are used, against their will, to try to help humans. Although there are some instances in which the experiments have helped humans, is it really worth the pain and suffering that all of those animals have had to suffer. Akhtar also stated “Although it is widely accepted that medicine should be evidence based, animal experimentation as a means of informing human health has generally not been held, in practice, to this standard” (Akhtar). There has been some cases in which testing medicine on animals has benefitted humans, however this type of result is hard to duplicate. Often when a result is achieved in the lab, there are many influences that can cause these

Ever since the late sixties and early seventies, animal research has been under fire for what they do. This is mainly due to the changing perspectives on the

Most people have dissected an animal at some point in their education, be it a frog, pig, cat, or another animal. Every year in the United States, roughly ten million animals are killed and used for dissection in schools (“Animals Used in Education” 1).The surplus of students dissecting animals in class has led to this substantial number. Dissection is said to increase student understanding of biology and an interest in careers in science (Edulab 1), which is why countless schools have their students dissect animals. However, others advocate for methods that don’t involve cruelty to animals. Why use a learning technique if other methods are less expensive, and some tactics equally or more effective regarding student learning? Essentially, an abundance of schools incorporate animal dissection as an educational tool, but they seldom think of how negatively the lives of countless animals are impacted. People don’t fathom the cruelty that happens to animals before they land on the dissection table, and that is something that needs to be changed.

In the field of scientific research, animal subjects have become a primary source of medical testing. Investigating the effects of these procedures and chemical experiments to generate evidential conclusions is widely disputed by opposing audiences today. Advocates propose the necessity of animal usage in scientific testing for the advancement of human welfare, while critics argue on behalf of the rights available to such animals used in these procedures. Despite the controversial debates and publications written about this topic, the harsh realities of its practice continue to linger. A statistic often supplemented to the context of this issue, reported by the nonprofit organization PETA, says “More than 100

Medicine veterinarian, Larry Carbone, in the article, The Utility of Basic Animal Research, published in 2012, addresses the topic of animal research/testing and asserts that there are benefits to this testing but there could also be exploitation of the animals, thus a new method or model should be developed in order to continue this research without harming the animals. In this article, Carbone states that he does not defend the morality of using animals in experiments nor does he defend not using the animals at all, but solely focuses on the justification of their utility. He talks about the benefits that come with animal research such as that it aids in making medical advances. Carbone gives various examples in history in which animal research

Animal dissection is very common in classrooms and although having hands on experience exploring the anatomy of animals, I want to look at the bigger picture on this spectrum. Back in high school my favorite part about science class was defiantly the dissection lesson. I was that one kid who was most excited to make the first cut into whatever organism we were dissecting that day. I enjoyed learning about different animals and how their bodies worked. Not once though did I think what I was doing was inhumane or unnecessary. I’m very interested in this issue because I think it is a controversy not really brought about. Animal dissection in classrooms is a significant topic to discus and should be well educated to the public in a exposing way. Because I see both sides to this issue along with the little knowledge I have about this topic, I have yet been able to reach a satisfactory answer.

PETA believes that dissection can even dissuade some people from pursuing careers in science. Many animal rights groups think that classroom dissection desensitizes students to the sanctity of life. Reports from MLive (a Michigan broadcast network) show that serial killer Jeffery Dahmer dissected a frog when he was younger and then went to a dog and then became an infamous serial killer. Now, I'm not saying that since we are dissecting a cat we will become serial killers, but it shows that someone thought it was okay to treat other beings like so because they were told it was okay to do in school. Students who plan to go into the medical field would do better with human cadavers or any of the non-animal methods. This would more accurately reflect what they would encounter in medical school, since according to CNN, more than 90 percent of US medical schools have abandoned animal dissection in their

Animal experimentation by scientists can be cruel and unjust, but at the same time it can provide long term benefits for humanity. Animals used in research and experiments have been going on for 2,000 years and keep is going strong. It is a widely debated about topic all over the world. Some say it is inhuman while others say it’s for the good of human kind. There are many different reasons why people perform experiments and why others total disagree with it.

For as long years pass, there has been a progressing warmed confrontation with probes creatures for the advantage of medicinal and logical research. Whether it is or isn 't, the vast majority trust that some type of advantage test ought to be performed to figure out, whether the activity is correct. These incorporates cost creature agony, misery and passing whereas the accumulation of new learning or the improvement of new therapeutic treatments for people. Investigating more into detail, these distinctive parts of the experimentation is a vast crevice for contention between the diverse researchers ' perspectives. A notable researcher from."Animal Research Is Wasteful and Misleading." Scientific American 276.2 (1997) named Neal Barnard expressed "The use of animals for research and testing is only one of many investigative techniques available. We believe that although animal experiments are sometimes intellectually seductive, they are poorly suited to addressing the urgent health problems of our era, such as heart disease, cancer stroke, AIDS, and birth defects" (80,p1).In detail,acknowledge creature examinations neglect foresee any dangerous impact on medications. The lion 's share of creatures in labs is utilized for hereditary control, surgical mediation or infusion of outside substances.

Every year millions of animals are used as human food, in human sports for fun, to make clothing and to make test cosmetics, drugs, new-found treatments, and chemicals on humans. Among all these, the most contentious issue in the twenty-first century is the usage of animals in laboratories. Science is the most powerful field from which all new knowledge comes, and being the prime source of new technologies, more judgment, and science, the United States has a big responsibility to accomplish one or more of what the American Humane Society calls the “Three Rs”- reduce, replace, and refines: “They replace the use of animals in a scientific procedure; they reduce the number of animals used

Animal experimentation is one of the many things leading to animal extinction. According to Humane Society of the United States, an estimated six million animals are dissected in American high schools each year. In 2004, a survey was taken of 749 members of National Science Teachers Association that showed nearly eighty percent of educators think dissecting is important for science learning, but animal experimentation opponents believe that “even if the animals are well cared for in laboratories the practice is inhumane”. In schools, when students are dissecting mice, they first rinse off the mouse with water to remove the chemicals used to preserve it. Then it is placed in a dissecting pan so they can observe its external body characteristics. The mouse’s skin is removed with scissors and