One of the breadth requirements for every student in college is to take a biological or life science course. When it comes to Biology, Anatomy, and few other sciences, one needs to learn about the body parts and the functions. Books explain all the information, but hands on learning is better so animal specimen are used for dissections and experiments. But is this the only way to learn about the body?
There are students that find it disturbing when they look at a dead corpse or are against using animals. With the technology we have now, there are 3-D virtual programs as well as models that can take the place of the specimens. The University of California, Riverside should replace traditional animal dissection and experimentation with alternatives for the biological and life science courses. Not only alternatives make good replacements, but it will be for a good cause, cheaper, and can improve student's learning than dissection.
By replacing traditional dissections with alternatives, lives of animals would be saved. According to National Anti-Vivisection Society's Jodie Wiederkehr, "biology is the 'study of life' not death"(132,Fleischmann). They would no longer have to suffer and be killed. They would be in pain and distress (Balcombe). There are some people that don't follow the ethics on treating animals. Using animals for dissections can have a great risk of them being extinct. Dissection for a course that no one is studying in the biological and life science is causing unneeded deaths of animals.
Animal dissection is expensive and time consuming, especially that it can only be used once and then must be properly thrown away. The price range depends on the animal that is used with the addition of the equipments. Frogs cost between fifteen to nineteen dollars, cats around forty-three to one hundred and five dollars, and the fetal pig approximately sixteen to twenty-seven dollars. Then one must multiply it with the number of students and the supplies must be bought every year. With the alternatives, it will be cheaper and can be reused over. A program would cost around nine hundred dollars, but it is a lifetime license. It can be bought only once and there's no need to buy another one. Also unlike dissecting the animal once and then disposing it, even clay models can be reused.
Clay models provides a "constructive process" that can be helpful for students to "develop surgical and tissue-handling skills", which can't be presented in dissection (68, DeHoff Clark). Dissection only contain a destructive process, that it destroys the structures inside the specimen when trying to get deeper into it. Students can also repeat the process when using the alternatives since it won't get destroyed. According to Dr. Jonathon Balcombe, who has a PhD in ethology and three biology degrees, in his article, "Dissection: The Scientific Case for Alternatives", he claims that dissection is "weak in concept learning and problem solving". Students would just...