More on the medical college
-
- March
- 29
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is trying to put more pressure on New York Medical College in Valhalla to stop killing dogs for practice labs for medical students. I wrote about a student group encouraging schools to replace the lab with non-animal alternatives. According to the committee, New York Medical is one of eight medical schools in the country that still use live animals to teach physiology. Here’s a letter that went to the dean of the medical school:
Ralph A. O’Connell, M.D.Dean, School of Medicine
Administrative Building
New York Medical College
Valhalla, NY 10595Dear Dr. O’Connell:
I am writing on behalf of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), and its membership of 6,000 physicians and over 100,000 other medical professionals, scientists and laypersons. The purpose of my letter is to bring to your attention an important new position statement from the American Medical Student Association (AMSA).
On March 10, 2007 the AMSA House of Delegates voted unanimously in favor of a resolution stating that AMSA “strongly encourages the replacement of animal laboratories with non-animal alternatives in undergraduate medical education� (underlining added). This clear and strong position by the country’s largest medical student organization relates directly to the use of live dogs in the M1 physiology course at New York Medical College, and makes it clear that America’s medical students want to end live animal use in their courses.
Three of the four medical students who introduced the resolution personally worked with their schools’ administrations to end the use of live animals in medical school courses. Each of their schoolsâ€â€Mount Sinai, the University of Virginia, and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonioâ€â€has joined the overwhelming majority of U.S. medical schools that have eliminated live animal use.
Today New York Medical College is one of only eight U.S. medical schools that continue to use live animals for physiology education. Not only are excellent alternatives available, they have been adopted by more than 90% of your peers. The rationale your faculty has presented for continuation of the dog lab has of course been considered, and has been rejected as inadequate reason to continue such labs, by these same peers. My previous communications with Dr. Francis Belloni and Dr. Susan Kline are unanswered.
Now AMSA has added its voice on behalf of America’s medical students. We ask you to address this issue in the larger context of medical education reform and standards in the U.S., and to prevail upon your physiology faculty to replace the use of live dogs in the M1 physiology course.
Sincerely,
John J. Pippin, M.D., F.A.C.C.
Senior Medical and Research Adviser
This entry was posted
on Thursday, March 29th, 2007 at 2:08 pm by Noreen O'Donnell.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
Playing Devil’s advocate. Just what should medical schools use to learn? Think of the 1500-1800’s. Medicine only started getting better when humans were allowed to be used.
If the animal is already dead and not a pet or at the owner’s permission. I dont see the issue. Instead of killing the animals maybe they should be like a morgue and work on roadkill etc.
Just like human bodies found. if they are unclaimed they should be used.
Countless unwanted animals are euthanized in shelters every year. Is it really better for them to be killed and dumped than to be used to teach future doctors how to better cure people? The key factor is humane treatment. As long as we have a surplus of animals (and we do), using them for medical training in a way that does not cause unnecessary suffering is reasonable and appropriate. As a general matter, no simulation can take the place of a living being when it comes to medical training.