DescentBB

In our sanatized world of pre packaged meat and television news, here's a little something that opens the window and lets a little odor of the real world in:
A biology class lesson in Gunnison, Utah involving the dissection of a live dog has outraged some parents and students, according to a report.

"I thought that it would be just really a good experience if they could see the digestive system in the living animal," Biology teacher Doug Bierregaard said.

Biology teacher Doug Bjerregaard, who is a substitute teacher at Gunnison Valley High School, wanted his students to see how the digestive system of a dog worked.

The school's principal, Kirk Anderson, said notifications went to parents explaining the dog was going to be euthanized and that the experiment would be done with the dog's organs still functioning."

http://www.local6.com/news/4480144/detail.html

So, either from your city bred protected existance or from ones rural reality life, should we be exposing high school students to such bloody realism? Will these student now be so traumatised that they will go on to be serial pediphilic axe murders? Or should we close the window permanently?

they could turn into murders .

yeah or uh... DOCTORS (you big dummy ).


i was freaked out until i read the dog was sedated. i don't see anything wrong with a teaching experience like that from the proper hands - ie: being performed by someone with vetenary training.

so if this teacher is a qualified vet. then it's good.

but if the teacher isn't a qualified vet, then he shouldn't be doing that to a live animal.

the article didn't think to give us this information. personally i find it hard to believe the school would be so fine about this if the guy WASN'T a trained vet. so my gut feeling (heh) is that he's got the nessesary vetenarian training, and the news article left that information out because they are fuckers.

That is overboard and completely unessesary. I mean come on there are other ways to skin the cat (pun not intended).

That is absolutely ridiculous. Why in the hell would they use a dog? I'm not a dog fan by any means, but that's just sick. I don't approve of vivisection, but if you're going to do it, at least do it to something like a frog.

Top Gun wrote:That is absolutely ridiculous. Why in the hell would they use a dog? I'm not a dog fan by any means, but that's just sick. I don't approve of vivisection, but if you're going to do it, at least do it to something like a frog.

Why a frog and not a dog? If vivisection is unapproval worthy, it is unapproval worthy. I don't understand the distinction you are making.

I don't really understand it myself, to be honest; it's just that I feel that there's a line drawn between something like a dog and something like a frog. It could be because dogs are generally seen as human companions; to me, dissecting one while it's still alive seems a little bit inhuman. I'd also assume that dogs would have a much greater sensitivity to pain than frogs, but I could be wrong. While I've heard of many people dissecting frogs while still alive, I've never heard of it being done on a dog, so the very idea was kind of a shocker. At any rate, I don't really think that vivisection is right for any type of animal; that's something you'd expect in the eighteenth century, not the twenty-first.

hmm yeah maybe it'd be a better idea to just let the kids go on an excursion to a veternary training school to watch from the spectator seats alongside the other vets in training - let them watch the real vets performing these procedures on animals.