Functional educational characterisation of the utility of embalming fluids for anatomical education and research

Human cadavers have long been used to teach human anatomy and are increasingly used in other disciplines. Different embalming techniques have been reported in the literature; however there is no clear consensus on the opinion of anatomists on the utility of embalmed cadavers for the teaching of anatomy. To this end, we aimed to survey British and Irish anatomy teachers to report their opinions on different preservation methods for the teaching of anatomy. In this project eight human cadavers were embalmed using formalin, Genelyn, Thiel and Imperial College London- Soft Preserving (ICL-SP) techniques to compare different characteristics of these four techniques. The results of this thesis show that anatomy teachers consider hard-fixed cadavers not to be the most accurate teaching model in comparison to the human body, although it still serves as a useful teaching method (Chapter 2). In addition, our findings confirm that joints of cadavers embalmed using ICL-SP solution faithfully mimics joints of an unembalmed cadaver compared to the other techniques (Chapter 3). Embalming a human body prevents the deterioration in the quality of images and our findings highlight that the influence of the embalming solutions varied with the radiological modality used (Chapter 4). The method developed as part of this thesis enables anatomists and forensic scientists to quantify the decomposition rate of an embalmed human cadaver (Chapter 5). Formalin embalming solution showed the strongest antimicrobial abilities followed by Thiel, Genelyn and finally by ICL-SP (Chapter 6). The overarching viewpoint of this set of studies show that it is inaccurate to state that one embalming technique is ultimately the best. The value of each technique differs based on the requirement of the particular education or research area. Hence we highlight how different embalming techniques may be better suited to certain fields of study.

Transhuman education: Sloterdijk's reading of Heidegger's Letter on Humanism

Peter Sloterdijk presented a reading of Heidegger's Letter on Humanism at a conference held at Elmau in 1999. Reinterpreting the meaning of humanism in the light of Heidegger's Letter, Sloterdijk focused his presentation on the need to redefine education as a form of genetic ‘taming’ and proposed what seemed to be support for positive eugenics. Although Sloterdijk claimed that he only wanted to open a debate on the issue, he could not have been surprised at the level of opposition this suggestion aroused. In the weeks following, he blamed Habermas for raising this opposition and for refusing to engage with him openly. Although Luis Arenas has chronicled the aftermath of Sloterdijk's paper, it may be of interest to educators to examine how Heidegger's text is presented. What is this new humanism? If Heidegger's new humanism was based on a mystical attitude towards Being, so Sloterdijk's new humanism was to be based on the materialist principles of a biotechnological age. Unlike Heidegger who rejected technology as yet one further example of the forgetfulness of Being, Sloterdijk seems to embrace technology and the enhancement of the human body and mind as the next great step forward in educational theory. Could he possibly be right? Is education in these times a partner or an opponent of the technological enhancement of the human being? This article tries to identify Sloterdijk's disagreements with Heidegger on the question of the human.