What would you do?

[Shadows Mom]

For the last 7 years I've noticed a huge beagle population on my campus, it was reported that these dogs were being bred as companion dogs for the elderly. However, after talking to several staff members I found out something that horrifies me... the beagles are being bred as dogs for students to learn surgeries on. I talked to a couple other SPCA / animal rights folks around and found out they're used to teach the student how to do non-common surgeries.. like removing parts of livers, removing limbs, etc.. yeah here is where I puked. Heres where I'd like your opinions, and yes I know it will be a heated topic (not usually my style, I hate debate =/) Should my provinces animal ethics laws allow this type of thing to happen?

 

My own opinion is that this is completely wrong, and these surgeries can be taught on cadaver pups and cats from the SPCA and donated bodies... I want to see the government show the college what our long fight has done to the ethics laws.

[WyoBC]

I agree that surgerys like that should be done on dogs/cats that have passed away or been put to sleep. There's no reason to breed more dogs just to use them as test dummies. More dogs is the last thing this world needs right now. I'm not saying that people should get them fro mthe shelters or anything but come on that's kind of the extreem.

 

The part about them removing legs and other body parts about made me sick.

[shatchp]

Should my provinces animal ethics laws allow this type of thing to happen?

 

My own opinion is that this is completely wrong, and these surgeries can be taught on cadaver pups and cats from the SPCA and donated bodies... I want to see the government show the college what our long fight has done to the ethics laws.

 

It's revolting. I recently read an interesting book called "Stiff" by Mary Roach...a light-hearted but morbid look at the historical and current role dead bodies play in societies. She spends a great deal of of time looking at the role of cadavers in the development of surgical science...and also, how domesticated animals, dogs in particular, were used in experiments historically...and not as cadavers. Some terrible stuff. I don't think this happens in the US anymore...I'm curious enough now to find out. I really know nothing about Canada's laws in this regard.

 

I think fresh tissue is preferable to cadaver tissue for learning some medical procedures...but why breed to kill? And why dogs, a domesticated animal that is arguably capable of emotional connection with a human being? It just doesn't make sense, particularly if you consider all the dogs already being euthanized every year...sad all around.

 

How about raccoons, or possums...

[smileyzookie]

That is horrible. You should break this story open on the news or something. Not let it be a secret that most dont know anymore.

[Lizmo]

but why breed to kill?

 

Totally agree. I see no point in breeding dogs just to make them "test dummies" It's sick and wrong

[Dixie_Girl]

I remember when I was around 12 I read a poem. I don't remember the title or author, nor word by word of the poem, simply because once I read it, I could not bring myself to read it again. Basically what it was about was a soldier that had a GSD in the army. The dog and him were a team in a war. Went through all sorts of things together. And the dog saving him on numerous occasions. When he got out of the army, the dog was guvment property so he could not take him with him. So, a few years later the man was in college to become a vet. They were all going into the lab to learn a surgical procedure on a dog. When he saw the dog, it was strapped on his back with all four legs spread eagle. The dog was laying there and they recognized each other. It was his old pal from the war. He went up to the dog and the dog licked his hand and died.

 

I will never understand.

[Geoffrey]

From what I understand, it's not that uncommon. Purposely breeding the dogs for that is, but not the idea of doing surgery on an animal that doesn't actually need it (for learning purposes).

[Bo Peep]

A dog is not a lab rat

[PaddyPaws]

From what I understand, it's not that uncommon. Purposely breeding the dogs for that is, but not the idea of doing surgery on an animal that doesn't actually need it (for learning purposes).

 

 

Just having a nosey about and came across this thread. I'm applying to university in the next onth or so to become a vet, and I have also looked at over seas universities. Some of these over seas universities purposely breed animals (usually pigs) for the purpose of practising surgical procedures. We had an interesting debate about this in a lecture and apparently (depending on the place) there is no law against harming an animal when it is under GA and then euthanising it.

 

Needless to say, I won't be applying to these universities!!

[AK dog doc]

Having been on the other side of this situation - and perhaps being the ONLY person on the Boards who has (anyone else on here graduated from vet school yet?) - I have to add a little perspective.

 

It is NOT possible to learn what hemostasis is on dead tissue. You can't do it. Also, even very recently-deceased tissue does not handle the same as live tissue in a surgical sense. It just doesn't. If you're going to learn surgery, by all means, do as much as you can without the use of live animals. The University I attended did several things to minimize the number of animals that were used to teach: amongst other things, they plastinated organs (a process that infuses a flexible polymer of some kind into the organs, to preserve them so that the same organ can be used for gross anatomy study for several years, until it essentially wears out); they used cadavers of dogs and cats recently euth'd at the local shelter and brought over post-mortem for us to learn surgical techniques on; they made models that pumped red food-colored water through tubes to help us learn to both work in a hole and tie off bleeders; they made other models to help us learn how to anastamose gut and close abdomens; and they offered an all-cadaver surgery rotation (all surgeries were taught on cadaver animals). And we also used pigs for some of the surgery labs, rather than dogs; but the anatomy is different, the skin doesn't handle the same, the circualtion is different than dogs and cats. Pigs are not dogs, and most of the time, we're doing a lot more surgeries on dogs than pigs. At least in my practice.

 

I thought long and hard about not doing any non-recovery surgeries. However, in the end, having been in surgical rotations and seen that there's a huge difference between tissue that still bleeds and tissue that doesn't, and knowing that the day I graduated I would be eligible to work on people's beloved pets, I figured I'd DAMN well better know how to stop bleeding if I was doing surgery on someone's devoted companion or champion stockdog (or what have you). So I elected to do the non-recovery surgery rotation. No one who did that found it easy; it wasn't any consolation knowing that the animals that we were working on were ones slated for death at the shelter (the ones who were non-adoptable and who would be euth'd later that day at the shelter if we hadn't taken them.) It's not really much comfort knowing that they were treated as gently and respectfully as possible by the staff and students while they were alive (or that for some of those animals, that that was a first.) It's not any more comfort to know that they are kept completely pain-free by being held at a very deep plane of ansethesia (much deeper than you'd risk for an animal that you were planning to recover), nor that they are spared any postoperative discomfort because they're euthanized on the table before they're allowed to wake up. It doesn't matter that what you're doing with non-recovery surgeries is euthanizing the dog - the fate that it was already doomed to in the shelter - and that the only difference is that you're delaying the stage between loss of consciousness and death, and in that pause you're learning something that will later help you save countless lives. None of that matters: it's still extremely difficult emotionally to do this. But in my estimation, I could not learn what I learned from those dogs (who I honor and bless for what they taught me) by any means more moral. Doing the surgeries and then recovering them would be to expose them to pain and discomfort, and for what? There were no homes for these dogs. That would mean recovering them from surgery in order to kill them another day. I could have elected not to learn surgery on live animals.... and by consequence, out of ignorance or inexpereince, killed someone's pet, someone's working dog, someone's guide dog or best friend or only companion.

 

As for purpose-breeding dogs for non-recovery surgery... for me, it makes more sense to take advantage of the unfortunate excess of unhomed, unadoptable dogs who are already on that day's euthanasia schedule. But depending on the laws in a given area, this may not be possible. Purpose-bred animals may be the only legal option. Ask yourself if you'd want to take your dog to be spayed by a vet who'd never done it before on a live animal. Would you want your dog to be the first? Insist all you like that vet students should have to do 4 years of internship and residency after vet school, so that they (like MDs) can learn surgery on actual patients while under the supervision of more experienced doctors. But remember that if you do that, the cost of veterinary care will go so high that most people will not be able to afford it, and then what are you going to do when your pet needs care? Are you willing to pay $10,000 to have your dog spayed? How about $40,000 for an exploratory surgery?

 

We have the same skills and do the same surgeries that MD's do, with two differences: One, we are not confined to a single species. And two, we do it for a tenth the cost... or less. There's a reason why this is possible. Think that over a bit before you decide how you want to approach this situation.

[Dixie_Girl]

Akdogdoc, you put a different and meaningful perspective on the whole idea. When I was a little kid, I tried to drag home every animal I could get my hands on. Out of 7 kids, I was the only one who actually owned dogs growing up. Mom let me out of self defense. But, I also took gophers my dog would catch, or rats or mice, and cut them open. Because I wanted to know how things worked inside. I needed to know how they worked. I almost died once when my mom found a jar with gopher fetuses I had removed. All I had ever wanted to be was a vet. Then, when I was around 12, I read that poem. I wish I had someone like you to talk to when I did. I never wanted to be a vet after that. Your point is well done, and I can see the reasoning behind the purpose. And, I also agree with that reasoning.

 

I really wish I had never read that poem.

[juliepoudrier]

Thank you for a great, thoughtful post, AK Dog Doc.

 

J.

[border_collie_crazy]

poor things the vet school here uses the publics dogs for practice, like they do the actual procedures, and dogs that actually NEED the procedures done. its a win win situation, the students get the practice on animals that require the procedure, and the public gets their dogs fixed up for a reduced rate.

[IronHorse]

Thank you for a great, thoughtful post, AK Dog Doc.

 

J.

Ditto

[Shadows Mom]

These dogs aren't being killed though.. most of them are operated on numerous times, bred numerous times, and spend their lives in the basement of the vet college. There's always someone out walkng the dogs, bandaged and donning e-collars.. THAT is what bothers me, they're bred to be surgery dummies.

[bettilu]

I remember when I was around 12 I read a poem. I don't remember the title or author, nor word by word of the poem, simply because once I read it, I could not bring myself to read it again. Basically what it was about was a soldier that had a GSD in the army. The dog and him were a team in a war. Went through all sorts of things together. And the dog saving him on numerous occasions. When he got out of the army, the dog was guvment property so he could not take him with him. So, a few years later the man was in college to become a vet. They were all going into the lab to learn a surgical procedure on a dog. When he saw the dog, it was strapped on his back with all four legs spread eagle. The dog was laying there and they recognized each other. It was his old pal from the war. He went up to the dog and the dog licked his hand and died.

 

I will never understand.

 

 

Wow, you read some pretty serious stuff at 12! I'm agreeing though that this is a horrible thing that is going on and the public should be made aware of it. Can't imagine that the school would or could continue with serious public outcry...

[AK dog doc]

poor things the vet school here uses the publics dogs for practice, like they do the actual procedures, and dogs that actually NEED the procedures done. its a win win situation, the students get the practice on animals that require the procedure, and the public gets their dogs fixed up for a reduced rate.

 

That is very probably only for certain procedures, like spays and neuters (my University did that, too - oh, and also dentals.) The fact of it being a teaching hospital DOES typically mean that the cost of other types of surgery is less to the public, but I'm as certain as I can be without actually going and watching them that they are NOT letting vet students do orthopedic surgeries and brain surgeries and limb-sparing procedures and tricky tumor resections or GI foreign bodies and partial mandibulectomies and patrial pancreatectomies and total nephrectomies (etc). The board certified specialists and the residents and occasionally the interns are doing those, and the students are watching them and/or assisting. The University would be liable for disasters and very vulnerable to lawsuits if it did it any other way. The University I graduated from has a very high reputation amongst vets in practice (who are hiring their graduates) for producing graduates who are competent surgeons, and they didn't let us do those things on client animals - many of whom would have died or been crippled had students attempted those surgeries. We were in there being the human retractors, making the opening incision, providing suction and tying off bleeders, closing the body wall and the subcutis and the skin - but the way we learned how to repair a lacerated ureter was in non-recovery surgery lab. (It must also be borne in mind that what surgeries you get to see on rotation are those that walk in the door, and there's no guarantee that you'll see ANYTHING in your two weeks on surgery rotation, or that you'll see a normal variety of things. Maybe you'll see 5 dogs with a giant lipoma in their armpit and that's it. Then how are you going to learn the rest of the stuff? The reason surgical residency takes an extra THREE YEARS is that there's a lot to learn, and you can't just order up a nice juicy hepatic tumor so you can learn to do a lobe resection. You have to wait til one comes in. And trust me, those teaching cases are going to the residents who are specializing in surgery, NOT to the students just going for their DVM.)

 

Linda, I'm sorry you read that poem, too. You have all the heart in the world and it completely sucks that you were discouraged from pursuing a dream because of a horrifying image like that. However, you've found other ways of helping animals, and I'm sure we all bless you for that.

 

Julie and IronHorse, thank you. And FWIW, a few students developed major crushes on their surgery strays; if they told that to the surgeon running the rotation before surgery, they'd use the dog to teach a minimum of two (and as many as four) students something like how to do a spay or a gastric foreign body or something - a procedure that would produce no later harm - and recover the dog and adopt it out to the student. So a few greyhounds (who sadly also, as cull animals, were sometimes used in the nonrecovery surgery lab) and some strays that no one wanted to give a chance actually DID find homes as a result of the non-recovery surgery lab. Two got adopted during my week on. I'd bet it averaged about one every other week... maybe 25 dogs a year. That's not a ton, but that's 25 more dogs than would otherwise have found homes. I almost did it myself, but my own dog was ill at the time and I didn't want to divide my attention. I had little to spare, being in vet school. I still kind of wish I had done otherwise, though.

 

Shadow's Mom, if I were you, I'd make 100% certain my facts were strait (and I mean 100% sure, from unassailable sources, or else you weaken your argument and look foolish), and then I'd find out who was the person in charge of making the decisions about the disposition of the animals in the non-recovery surgery labs. You might have to talk to the director of the hospital, or maybe the dean of the vet school. Then I'd make up a proposal of some kind, and take it to them with a REASONED argument (if you go in and get shrill or hostile or overly emotional they aren't likely to listen to you) and suggest that there might be better alternatives. State your case - and here you might point out that you know that as veterinarians and teachers of future veterinarians, the well-being of animals is of paramount importance to them - and then point out that putting an animal through surgery after surgery and all the associated recovery pain and/or whatever dysfunction they might undergo postoperatively is perhaps not the most humane thing that can be done, and suggest alternatives (perhaps reminding them taht you know they are concerned about prevention of pain and suffering, and that you know that they hold their ethics to a high standard. This is undoubtedly true, so it's not lying or manipulating them to get your way - but it doesn't hurt to bring that back to their attention at that point). Maybe before you go in you can contact the local government and find out if it's even legal to use shelter dogs in his way - there might not be that option legally. By all means contact other vet schools where other options are used and see what they have to say before you go in, and present their programs as examples or possible models. Try to avoid words like "animal welfare" because those have come to be nearly synonymous with extreme left-wing animal rights groups (at least in the States) and may cause them to instantly stop listening to you. If they say no, ask them in a calm and reasonable fashion WHY they are saying no, and if there's something you can do to move things a step or two in a more human direction. Volunteer concrete ideas for that - like you'll petition the local government for a change to the law, or something of that nature. You'll be more likely to succeed if you are rational and calm and can offer viable alternatives, and can take "No" as an opportunity to gain information and thence to solve that problem, rather than as an excuse to go postal. See if there's an ethics course taught in the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University in question, and contact them for assistance. And good luck with that. Beaurocracies are sometimes ponderous and slow to move, but remember that somewhere in there are doctors who are only there in the first place because they care about animals. Look for that part of the organization and you'll find allies. However, BE VERY CAREFUL what you do in regards to informing "the public". Remember that there's a reason that it doesn't currently cost you $10K to spay your dog. If you damage the vet school - rather than change an internal policy, which is what you want to do, I think - then you risk moving things to a place where NO ONE can get veterinary care at a reasonable cost. Public outcry is all very well and good, but it's also quite often misinformed and shortsighted and fully unaware of the consequences of its outrage. Think about the consequences you want, but also bear always in the front of your mind those consequences you DON'T want, and tread carefully.

[bettilu]

That is very probably only for certain procedures, like spays and neuters (my University did that, too - oh, and also dentals.) The fact of it being a teaching hospital DOES typically mean that the cost of other types of surgery is less to the public, but I'm as certain as I can be without actually going and watching them that they are NOT letting vet students do orthopedic surgeries and brain surgeries and limb-sparing procedures and tricky tumor resections or GI foreign bodies and partial mandibulectomies and patrial pancreatectomies and total nephrectomies (etc). The board certified specialists and the residents and occasionally the interns are doing those, and the students are watching them and/or assisting. The University would be liable for disasters and very vulnerable to lawsuits if it did it any other way. The University I graduated from has a very high reputation amongst vets in practice (who are hiring their graduates) for producing graduates who are competent surgeons, and they didn't let us do those things on client animals - many of whom would have died or been crippled had students attempted those surgeries. We were in there being the human retractors, making the opening incision, providing suction and tying off bleeders, closing the body wall and the subcutis and the skin - but the way we learned how to repair a lacerated ureter was in non-recovery surgery lab. (It must also be borne in mind that what surgeries you get to see on rotation are those that walk in the door, and there's no guarantee that you'll see ANYTHING in your two weeks on surgery rotation, or that you'll see a normal variety of things. Maybe you'll see 5 dogs with a giant lipoma in their armpit and that's it. Then how are you going to learn the rest of the stuff? The reason surgical residency takes an extra THREE YEARS is that there's a lot to learn, and you can't just order up a nice juicy hepatic tumor so you can learn to do a lobe resection. You have to wait til one comes in. And trust me, those teaching cases are going to the residents who are specializing in surgery, NOT to the students just going for their DVM.)

 

Linda, I'm sorry you read that poem, too. You have all the heart in the world and it completely sucks that you were discouraged from pursuing a dream because of a horrifying image like that. However, you've found other ways of helping animals, and I'm sure we all bless you for that.

 

Julie and IronHorse, thank you. And FWIW, a few students developed major crushes on their surgery strays; if they told that to the surgeon running the rotation before surgery, they'd use the dog to teach a minimum of two (and as many as four) students something like how to do a spay or a gastric foreign body or something - a procedure that would produce no later harm - and recover the dog and adopt it out to the student. So a few greyhounds (who sadly also, as cull animals, were sometimes used in the nonrecovery surgery lab) and some strays that no one wanted to give a chance actually DID find homes as a result of the non-recovery surgery lab. Two got adopted during my week on. I'd bet it averaged about one every other week... maybe 25 dogs a year. That's not a ton, but that's 25 more dogs than would otherwise have found homes. I almost did it myself, but my own dog was ill at the time and I didn't want to divide my attention. I had little to spare, being in vet school. I still kind of wish I had done otherwise, though.

 

Shadow's Mom, if I were you, I'd make 100% certain my facts were strait (and I mean 100% sure, from unassailable sources, or else you weaken your argument and look foolish), and then I'd find out who was the person in charge of making the decisions about the disposition of the animals in the non-recovery surgery labs. You might have to talk to the director of the hospital, or maybe the dean of the vet school. Then I'd make up a proposal of some kind, and take it to them with a REASONED argument (if you go in and get shrill or hostile or overly emotional they aren't likely to listen to you) and suggest that there might be better alternatives. State your case - and here you might point out that you know that as veterinarians and teachers of future veterinarians, the well-being of animals is of paramount importance to them - and then point out that putting an animal through surgery after surgery and all the associated recovery pain and/or whatever dysfunction they might undergo postoperatively is perhaps not the most humane thing that can be done, and suggest alternatives (perhaps reminding them taht you know they are concerned about prevention of pain and suffering, and that you know that they hold their ethics to a high standard. This is undoubtedly true, so it's not lying or manipulating them to get your way - but it doesn't hurt to bring that back to their attention at that point). Maybe before you go in you can contact the local government and find out if it's even legal to use shelter dogs in his way - there might not be that option legally. By all means contact other vet schools where other options are used and see what they have to say before you go in, and present their programs as examples or possible models. Try to avoid words like "animal welfare" because those have come to be nearly synonymous with extreme left-wing animal rights groups (at least in the States) and may cause them to instantly stop listening to you. If they say no, ask them in a calm and reasonable fashion WHY they are saying no, and if there's something you can do to move things a step or two in a more human direction. Volunteer concrete ideas for that - like you'll petition the local government for a change to the law, or something of that nature. You'll be more likely to succeed if you are rational and calm and can offer viable alternatives, and can take "No" as an opportunity to gain information and thence to solve that problem, rather than as an excuse to go postal. See if there's an ethics course taught in the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University in question, and contact them for assistance. And good luck with that. Beaurocracies are sometimes ponderous and slow to move, but remember that somewhere in there are doctors who are only there in the first place because they care about animals. Look for that part of the organization and you'll find allies. However, BE VERY CAREFUL what you do in regards to informing "the public". Remember that there's a reason that it doesn't currently cost you $10K to spay your dog. If you damage the vet school - rather than change an internal policy, which is what you want to do, I think - then you risk moving things to a place where NO ONE can get veterinary care at a reasonable cost. Public outcry is all very well and good, but it's also quite often misinformed and shortsighted and fully unaware of the consequences of its outrage. Think about the consequences you want, but also bear always in the front of your mind those consequences you DON'T want, and tread carefully.

[bettilu]

That makes a lot of sense AK, sorry I didn't read your post before I replied earlier....so many times we respond with the emotional BEFORE thinking about the rational. I know that many medical advances both for pets and humans have been facilitated in ways that not everyone will always agree on, but sometimes the end does justify the means......

[AK dog doc]

Well, it's a complex and troubling subject, and causes one to wrestle with ones' morals and ethics, which is always difficult - but always valuable. There's no easy answer to these questions, and they do always disturb me to think on. But thank God it DOES trouble me to think about these things; I don't ever want to lose sight of what's REALLY important here, nor to take lightly the sacrifices these animals have made in the furtherance of my education. It is due in no small part to them that I can go out and make the world a better place, every day that I get up. Maybe just a little better today, but still... every little bit helps.