"The Wild World of Animal Prostheses"

            Upon first glance at the title I imagined the article to be about all the different and unique prosthetics doctors were designing to improve the animal’s self- esteem.  This original thought was due to the alliteration in the title.  I took wild to be these crazy, bizarre, ideas for prosthetics.  However, that was not the case.  After reading, I am now aware that there are surgeries for animals that may truly improve their way of life.  On the other hand, I question are some of these inventions really for the animals or for the advancement of human prosthetics.

            The article opens with a strong appeal to pathos.  The thought of animals getting injured pulls on the strings of our heart and instantly draw in the reader, making us believe that this necessity operation for animals.  Nevertheless, further along Dr. Erick Egger, an orthopedic surgery professor, comments, “We need to help them, and more important, we need to help people” (“The Wild World of Animal Prostheses”).  This comment throws in a red flag!  Are we really trying to help the animals?  Or is this just another form of animal testing?  Throughout the article there are uplifting stories on how animals are benefiting from these surgeries, but then immediately following are how it further helps humans.  Yes, it may benefit both, but looking at it from a different angle, if the animal suffers does the human?  Based on common knowledge we know humans won’t suffer, which is a good thing.  But is it fair to make animals suffer more, when really do they actually need the procedure?  I think Kayla makes a fair assumption, why try to improve an animal that is disabled if they are happy.  Just like humans, animals learn to adapt with the hand they are given, and find different ways to survive, so maybe these procedures aren’t as necessary as we once thought.