The Plastination Process.
The specimen is impregnated with a reactive polymer whilst the specimen is in a vacuum. The type of polymer used determines how flexible and transparent the specimen will be. Specimens, which have undergone this process, are dry and odourless, they feel the same and are identical to how they looked before they under went the process, and microscopic analysis of the specimen is still possible.
The plastination process replaces bodily fluids and fat with reactive polymers such as silicone, rubber, epoxy resins and polyester. First, solvent gradually replaces bodily fluids. The specimen is then placed into a polymer solution, the solvent is brought to the boil in a vacuum, as the solvent evaporates, it creates a volume deficit within the specimen. This draws the polymer into the tissues. Once this process is completed, the specimen is ‘cured’ using gas, light or heat depending on which polymer has been used.
A slightly different technique is used to plastinate cross sections. Whole bodies or body parts are deep-frozen and cut or sawed into 2-8 mm thick slices. The slices are placed between wire nettings and then plastinated using the process above. In addition to this process, the plastinated slices are ‘cured’ between sheets of film or they are casted with additional polymers in a flat chamber to give them a smooth surface.
Specimens produced with epoxy resin are transparent with good colouration of the individual tissues. Polyester resins are used for brain tissues as they give good distinction between the white and grey brain matter.
On the 20th of November, Gunther von Hagens carried out a public autopsy in London to a paying audience, the autopsy was shown by Channel 4 later that night. Gunther von Hagens’ subject was a 72 year old man, who had drunk and smoked heavily since he was 50. The body was first treated with formaldehyde to decrease any health and safety risks. Scotland yard warned that his show would be illegal and would intervene if it went ahead. He was sent a letter from Dr Jeremy Metters (HM inspector of anatomy) telling him that the planned event would be a criminal offence under the Anatomy Act because neither the venue nor himself had post-mortem examination licences. A Scotland yard spokeswoman said that the event would be closely monitored to see if it breached the law.
There are a lot of different opinions about the Autopsy, ranging from one extreme to the other. The most obvious morals that were brought up, were whether or not it was right to cut up a once living human being. Most religions object to autopsies being carried out, it hinders the medical profession an awful lot as by law post-mortems should be carried out after all mysterious, industrial or accidental deaths. So the public autopsy created some uproar, because it was done on a men whose death was known, he was a chronic drinker and smoker and died of heart failure. A lot of religious people who watched the 12 pm screening by Channel 4 condoned it as disrespectful. It was defended by the fact that the gentleman had donated his body so that it could be added to those already on display. So why shouldn’t Gunther von Hagens use it to teach the British more about themselves? The autopsy was denounced by the British Medical Association as degrading and disrespectful. They said that the Body works Exhibition was grotesque and that the autopsy made a sham of the arguments, which said that the autopsy was in the interest of public education. They argued that education was not the main interest of the show, but as a means to make money. The British Medical Association also said that if you were to compare the public autopsy with a real one done in a mortuary, you would be disgusted by the mockery that Gunther von Hagens makes of the procedure. The average autopsy will last several hours, it’s normally between 1 hour if it is an extremely routine case such as an elderly lady passing away in her sleep and 3 or more hours for a death which is not easily diagnosed. The cause of death for Gunther von Hagens’ subject was stated as heart failure, but other than showing us that his lungs had been infected as they were stuck to his rib cage, and that his heart had hypertension, he did not seem to check for any more evidence of the cause of death. In a normal autopsy, all other organs would have been checked for signs of disease or other problems, which may have contributed to the cause of death.
Most of the members of the public who watched the show were thoroughly impressed by what occurred, although some were disappointed because the cameras spent more time on the crowds faces than the body in the centre of the room, but almost everyone who posted on various Internet sites said how good it was to be able to see what actually happens to a body which goes through an autopsy.
One 13-year-old girl thought the program was excellent. She said that the program had made her more interested in Biology and that she would like to do something similar as a career. There are many opinions from celebrities such as Steffi Graf, Andre Agassi, Tina Turner, Mario Andorf, Byörk, Dustin Hoffman. These opinions all pertain to the exhibition and are all in the positive, so Gunther von Hagens must be doing something right.
Many people supported Channel 4 for showing the program even though there was so much controversy over whether or not the showing would be illegal. Some berated it for doing so, but as one viewer, Ian Nichol posted, and quite rightly I think “I am stunned at all the people complaining about this. Why on earth did they watch it, there were very clear warnings at the start of each part. Perhaps they should have stuck to ITV (at the time showing something about [apparently] the most violent Bond film to date) or BBC1 (showing a drama about murdering police officers). Surely this factual programme (however badly filmed) has a much more worthy place on our screens than the made-up violence and death that was showing on the other channels at the same time. I certainly applaud Channel 4 for showing this, and advise everyone to do what I do when another tedious football program comes on ... I turn over!” as I said before, I agree with Ian’s comment, I think that there are more violent programs on tv and cinema which are completely fictional. I also think that people will get more ideas from fictional programs, which only seem to show (to borrow from the phrase “there is more than one way to kill a cat”) how to deliver violence to a person. The public autopsy shows what happens to that person once they have been killed. I think the event, no matter how badly it was actually shown, is more educational than any film you can show me. If more things like this were shown on tv, then people would be more open minded towards death. I wholeheartedly support Gunther von Hagens work and look forward to seeing more of it around.
