Spring Break
The most basic creed
Issue date: 3/27/08
It's heartening to see that at least some in the medical community have decided to take a stand against cruel and unethical practices that violate the physicians' most basic creed: Do no harm.
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) staged a small protest Wednesday in front of the Hopkins School of Medicine, which remains one of only 10 (soon to be nine) medical schools in the country that still use live pigs for surgery practice.
The vast majority of medical schools have renounced the practice, and the consensus in the medical community is that the practice is unnecessary, outdated and wrong. And yet the School of Medicine has clung stubbornly to this cruel and archaic tradition, sustained by the thoroughly outdated belief that practicing surgery on live animals has some genuine educational value. It does not.
The vast majority of medical institutions use simulators or human cadavers instead, which are more accurate rehearsals for the experience of operating on human patients. And surgical students get the bulk of their practical training when they become residents and fellows, so what little educational value operating on live animals may have is irrelevant in the course of their career.
It certainly isn't worth the needless deaths that this practice requires. The pigs are purchased and delivered for the express purpose of surgical training, anaesthetized, operated on and discarded when they are no longer useful. The surgery is not beneficial to the pigs in anyway and, to put it bluntly, pointless.
It is also ethically indefensible, and perhaps that's why the School of Medicine has chosen not to actively defend it. Their obstinate refusal to consider the objections raised by professional organizations such as PCRM, and to explain the perceived necessity of their actions to media organizations such as the News-Letter, says more about the damning ethical implications of their policy than words ever could.
PCRM has mounted an organized campaign to challenge the University's live-animal policy, and we commend them for their efforts. We urge Hopkins medical students to contact them through their animal-abuse hotline and report their objections to the practice. And we call on the School of Medicine, again, to join the broad professional consensus in the medical community and abandon this cruel and outdated practice. Failure to do so would marginalize Hopkins, currently a leader in the medical community, for its embrace of plainly unethical practices. It would also be a violation of the physician's most basic creed.
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) staged a small protest Wednesday in front of the Hopkins School of Medicine, which remains one of only 10 (soon to be nine) medical schools in the country that still use live pigs for surgery practice.
The vast majority of medical schools have renounced the practice, and the consensus in the medical community is that the practice is unnecessary, outdated and wrong. And yet the School of Medicine has clung stubbornly to this cruel and archaic tradition, sustained by the thoroughly outdated belief that practicing surgery on live animals has some genuine educational value. It does not.
The vast majority of medical institutions use simulators or human cadavers instead, which are more accurate rehearsals for the experience of operating on human patients. And surgical students get the bulk of their practical training when they become residents and fellows, so what little educational value operating on live animals may have is irrelevant in the course of their career.
It certainly isn't worth the needless deaths that this practice requires. The pigs are purchased and delivered for the express purpose of surgical training, anaesthetized, operated on and discarded when they are no longer useful. The surgery is not beneficial to the pigs in anyway and, to put it bluntly, pointless.
It is also ethically indefensible, and perhaps that's why the School of Medicine has chosen not to actively defend it. Their obstinate refusal to consider the objections raised by professional organizations such as PCRM, and to explain the perceived necessity of their actions to media organizations such as the News-Letter, says more about the damning ethical implications of their policy than words ever could.
PCRM has mounted an organized campaign to challenge the University's live-animal policy, and we commend them for their efforts. We urge Hopkins medical students to contact them through their animal-abuse hotline and report their objections to the practice. And we call on the School of Medicine, again, to join the broad professional consensus in the medical community and abandon this cruel and outdated practice. Failure to do so would marginalize Hopkins, currently a leader in the medical community, for its embrace of plainly unethical practices. It would also be a violation of the physician's most basic creed.
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 7
Jason
posted 4/02/08 @ 1:28 PM EST
Overall I agree with the author. The use of human based simulators, and when available, cadavers provides us with a more accurate outcome than operating on an animal with a different physiology. (Continued…)
ISABEL
posted 9/18/08 @ 12:44 PM EST
I RECENTLY READ AN ARTICLE IN THE SAN ANTONIO EXPRESS NEWS ABOUT THE ARMY BASE HERE LOCALLY TRAINING MEDICS WITH THE USE OF LIVE GOATS.
Master's thesis writing
posted 2/12/09 @ 4:21 AM EST
PCRM has mounted an organized campaign to challenge the University's live-animal policy, and we commend them for their efforts. It is an obvious fact. (Continued…)
Holly Colburn
posted 2/20/09 @ 1:55 AM EST
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a non-profit organization that promotes preventive medicine, conducts clinical research, and encourages higher standards for ethics and effectiveness in research
Admission Essay
posted 4/07/09 @ 7:55 AM EST
I find this article very interesting!
custom term papers
posted 10/26/09 @ 4:50 PM EST
I think that the world needs a smart and qualified doctors nowadays than ever
Alex
posted 10/29/09 @ 1:53 PM EST
PCRM is kind of biased:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicians_Committee_for_Responsible_Medicine
http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/vegetarian_foods. (Continued…)
Post a Comment