UW veterinary school professor wins lifetime achievement award for canine research JEFF GLAZE. Wisconsin State Journal. July 25, 2011.Now, the rest of the story...
A professor and orthopedic surgeon from the UW-Madison veterinary school received a prestigious award for lifetime achievement in canine research.
Peter Muir was honored with the American Veterinary Medical Foundation/American Kennel Club Career Achievement Award in Canine Research from the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA).
Some of Peter Muir's lifetime of research includes invasive experiments on living dogs' and rats' bones.
Here are some excerpts from one of his papers:
Schmiedt CW, Lu Y, Heaney K, Muir P, Amodie DM, Markel MD. Comparison of two doses of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein in absorbable collagen sponges for bone healing in dogs. Am J Vet Res. 2007.
The University of Wisconsin Animal Care and Use Committee approved all study procedures prior to subject enrollment. The study was conducted by use of a randomized complete block design involving 3 treatments and 9 dogs/treatment group...
The 27 adult female mixed-breed dogs used in the study were owned by the university. Allocation of dogs to treatment groups was done in 2 steps. First, dogs were weighed, ranked in descending order of body weight, and grouped into blocks of 3. Each dog in each block was randomly allocated to 1 of 3 treatment groups. In all dogs, mid-diaphyseal osteotomy (1-mm transverse defect) was performed on the right tibia ... [an osteotomy is the surgical removal of bone.]...
The surgical procedure was performed on the right hind limb of each dog by the same surgical team. ... A 1-mm transverse mid-diaphyseal osteotomy was performed by use of an oscillating saw under copious irrigation with saline (0.9% NaCl) solution. The osteotomy gap was confirmed by use of a 1-mm-thick shim. A 1-cm section of the fibula was removed with rongeurs (pliers), both proximal and distal to the osteotomy....
After surgery, staff who were unaware of treatment allocations examined each dog twice daily. Hydromorphone (0.2 mg/kg) was administered SC if signs consistent with excessive postoperative pain (eg, excess vocalization, signs of pain elicited during manipulation of the operated limb, or high heart or respiratory rates) were evident, as determined by a veterinarian who was also unaware of treatment. Any abnormality including discharge from the incision site, swelling at or discharge from a pin site, or swelling at the osteotomy site was noted in the medical record. If an orthopedic surgeon who was unaware of treatment considered that subjective evidence of infection (increasing redness, signs of pain, heat, swelling, discharge at the surgery site, or fever) was present, dogs were administered [an antibiotic.]...
Every 2 weeks during an 8-week period after surgery, outcome measures were assessed via radiography and clinical lameness evaluation (which involved assignment of a lameness score by use of a VAS). Dogs were evaluated daily for development of complications or adverse effects. [VAS: visual analog scale, which Muir has said elsewhere isn't a reliable measure of lameness.]...
Lameness score—Before and at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery, dogs were evaluated for clinical evidence of lameness by an independent observer who was unaware of treatments. Dogs were assessed while trotting in a straight line and turning to the left and right. The observer assigned scores for the severity of lameness by use of a VAS (0 [sound] to 100 mm [could not be more lame]), as previously described.12 Dogs that were more severely lame received higher VAS scores....
Then the dogs were killed.
This guy is no friend of dogs.
Can you say, J. Marion Simms?
