Most of us have experienced it before. We walk into the classroom preparing ourselves for what were about to do. The teacher looks over the class and cheerfully asks, “So, everyone ready for the dissection?”

Dissecting animals has been a part of America’s educational system for decades. Chances are if you’ve been taking science classes all throughout you’re educational career, you have taken a course that requires a dissection.

But in today’s modern society questions are arising about the source of the animals used in various dissections. According to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), a wide variety of animals used in dissections including amphibians, birds, fish, snakes, turtles and invertebrates are taken from their natural habitat, even though certain species could be declining in population.

After learning this, Junior Becky Zunich said, “I don’t think it hurts to take them from the wild if there are enough. However, if the population is decreasing then removing them from their habitat isn’t right.”

Another problem researchers are facing is that the demand for dissection specimens has never been higher. Researchers from the World Conservation Union reported that in 2004 a third of all amphibian species around the globe, including frogs, were threatened with the possibility of extinction. Frogs play a vital role in the well being of not only nature but people as well.

A decrease in frog populations means an increased demand for pesticides. As told by the HSUS, frogs eat well over their body weight in insects every day, by taking frogs from the wild this means that the population of certain insects, including disease carrying ones, will skyrocket.

According to National Geographic’s website, before pesticides came about farmers relied on frogs to keep their crops pest free. But a decline in frog populations in recent years has caused more and more farmers to switch to pesticides. Researchers are now realizing that the use of pesticides comes with a hefty price tag, not only a financial one but an environmental one as well.

Chemicals used in pesticides take their toll over an extended period of time and can eventually poison water wells that lie below the surface of the ground. Researchers from the Illinois Pesticide Review are also concerned about the effects pesticides have on the frogs that remain in the crops. In recent years more and more frogs have been found with extra limbs, missing limbs, growth development problems, and various other deformities. Scientists believe that the chemical cocktail contained in pesticides is causing this.

Another questionable environmental issue associated with dissection is the actual chemicals used in the preservation fluids for the specimens, a chemical called formaldehyde is a potent and dangerous ingredient contained in the preservation fluid. Formaldehyde has been proven to cause nausea, headaches, and breathing difficulties in people. Formaldehyde has even been linked to some forms of cancers if a person is exposed to the chemical over an extended period of time.

Teachers and students involved in frequent dissections are exposed to it regularly, furthermore according to the HSUS; schools discard millions of formaldehyde laden specimens each year raising concerns about how safe it is to discard such chemicals into the neighboring ecosystems.

This may lead you to ask what could possibly be done about this. The Smithsonian Institute Researcher’s surveyed 14 major dissection catalogs, and of the 14 they found only 1 that offered “farm raised” amphibians; none of the others verified the source of their specimens. By encouraging science educators to purchase their specimens only from sources who specify the animals are in fact farm raised; schools could greatly impact this growing problem of specimen depletion.

There is also a new technology called “digital dissection”. There are various computer dissection programs becoming more readily available, programs such as Drylab Dissections and Catworks take students through an actual dissection using realistic graphics, as well as a full-motion video. Each CD-ROM takes students step-by step through the dissection process. Programs exist for many commonly used dissection specimens, including frogs, rats, earthworms, fetal pigs, and even cats.

Other programs, such as Digital Frog 2 and Visifrog, use high-quality computer animation to show students a simulation of an actual animal dissection. Animal rights organizations such as the National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) applaud this new technology and have started free-of-charge loan programs through which schools can try out software that does not rely on the use of real animal specimens, they most commonly endorse the computer-animated Digital Frog 2 program.

Digital dissection programs can be expensive, but with so many animal rights groups offering loans it is becoming easier for schools to get their hands on this new technology. Various scientists are becoming more and more accepting of this new high tech method of dissection, especially since in recent years our medical research has began to rely more and more on computer modeling.

When approached with the idea of digital dissection, Junior Patty Cauthen said, “I agree with the idea of digital dissection. Then we wouldn’t have to kill animals, and students wouldn’t be forced to perform actual dissections.”

Our very own biology/anatomy educator Dr. Gaunt was approached with the concept of digital dissection as well and said, “I think it’s a great idea. A lot of good things could come from it.” At this point, however, DHS lacks the technology to do digital dissections, and have instead secured real specimens for dissecting. Most recently, Dr. Gaunt’s classes dissected mullet.

Students agree, educators agree, and researchers are jumping on the bandwagon, so schools what are you waiting for?