An alternative to the use of animals to teach diabetes mellitus

Abstract

We developed an alternative approach to teach diabetes mellitus in our practical classes, replacing laboratory animals. We used custom rats made of cloth, which have a ventral zipper that allows stuffing with glass marbles to reach different weights. Three mock rats per group were placed into metabolic cages with real food and water and with test tubes containing artificial urine, simulating a sample collection of 24 h. For each cage, we also provided other test tubes with artificial blood and urine, simulating different levels of hyperglycemia. The artificial "diabetic" urine contained different amounts of anhydrous glucose and acetone to simulate two different levels of glycosuria and ketonuria. The simulated urine of a nondiabetic rat was prepared without the addition of glucose or acetone. An Accu-Chek system is used to analyze glycemia, and glycosuria and ketonuria intensity were analyzed by means of a Urocolor bioassay. In the laboratory classroom, students were told that they would receive three rats to find out which one has type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. To do so, they had to weigh the animals, quantify the water and food ingestion, and analyze the artificial blood and urine for glycemia, glycosuria, and ketonuria. Only at the end of class did we reveal that the urine and blood were artificial. Students were instructed to plot the data in a table, discuss the results within their group, and write an individual report. We have already used this practical class with 300 students, without a single student refusing to participate.

Perceptions of undergraduate students on the use of animals in practical classes

“…Nevertheless, the use of animals for teaching and research has started to be nationally regulated by the National Board of the Animal Experimentation Control (15), and our universities are now trying through their animal ethics committees to restrict the use of animals, not only for research but also for teaching purposes. This has generated several discussions between educators, with some already implementing alternatives and others refusing to replace the use of live animals or preferring to abolish their use due to the controversy (3,8,12,13,15). However, it is still rare to find studies about the perception of students on this subject.…”

Home-based vs. laboratory-based practical activities in the learning of human physiology: the perception of students

“…In 1994, Samsel et al (18) proposed a new approach to teaching practical physiology, using computer simulations to teach cardiovascular physiology, instead of animals. Since then, more strategies have been proposed to replace the use of animals for teaching purposes (2,16). Nonetheless, practices occasionally need to be adequate according to the available resources and the structure of the laboratory/room/university, which has made professors use alternative methods of practical teaching (16,18) or other methods instead.…”

Teaching Animal Physiology: a 12-year experience transitioning from a classical to interactive approach with continual assessment and computer alternatives

“…Recent efforts aimed at improving science education at the university level range from supplementing traditional courses with interactive activities, through the development of more engaging courses that enhance student interest in and appreciation of science, to complete restructuring of courses (17). Initiatives specifically aimed at improving animal physiology teaching include several models for enhancing student learning, such as alternatives to the use of animals (2,9,12,13), interactive computer-assisted learning (14), self-made and graphic imagery models explaining specific physiological processes (18,19), inquiry-based laboratories (6), and team-based learning in a laboratory course (21), among others.…”