Animal transplants coming 'soon'

[Still Waters 53,585]

Are pigs about to migrate from the dinner table to the operating table?

Using animals as a source of organs for transplantation into humans was once one of medicine's next big things - a solution to transplant waiting lists.

However, there have been problems with rejection - and recently stem cells have been grabbing the spotlight.

But some researchers are now saying that transplants from animals "could soon become a reality", but not necessarily as originally expected.

There is still a pressing need for organs. In the UK there are 8,000 people on the waiting list - three die every day.

Several technologies are trying to meet the demand. In August, a patient from London was the first in the UK to have his heart replaced with a mechanical one while stem cells have been used for simple structures such as the windpipe.

However, using stem cells to build more complicated organs such as a heart is a long way off and mechanical body parts are used in the short term before an actual transplant.

Using animals as a source - known as "xenotransplantation" - is another potential solution.

Read more...

[Verneph 0]

I'm sorry but I just can't agree with this idea. Eating meat is one thing. Using animal hide for leather is one thing. But ripping out an animal's organ to put into ourselves? I'm sorry, but something about that just feels wrong to me.

[crystal sage 275]

Previously

Traditional tissue valves, made of pig heart valves, will last on average 15 years

It looks like it has been going on for at least 15 years... http://www.heureka.clara.net/gaia/x-trans.htm

The first known pig-to-human transplant was carried out in India in December 1996 by Dhaniram Baruah who transplanted a pig's heart. The patient died. Dhaniram Baruah has been charged under India's 1994 Organ Transplant Act and faces a maximum fine of 10,000 rupees.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/AIDS%20and%20Population%20Elimination/secret_origin_of_aids.htm

Conveniently forgotten by scientists and medical journalists was the fact that surgeons had been transplanting chimpanzee parts into human beings for decades.

When Keith Reemtsma died in June 2000, at age 74, he was hailed as a pioneer in cross-species organ transplants (now known as xenotransplantation). By 1964 he had already placed six chimpanzee kidneys into six patients. All his patients died, but eventually Reemtsma succeeded in many successful human-to-human organ transplants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_Voronoff

Between 1917 and 1926, Voronoff carried out over five hundred transplantations on sheep and goats, and also on a bull, grafting testicles from younger animals to older ones. Voronoff's observations indicated that the transplantations caused the older animals to regain the vigor of younger animals.[4] He also considered monkey-gland transplantation an effective treatment to counter senility.[5]

His first official transplantation of a monkey gland into a human took place on June 12, 1920.[6] Thin slices (a few millimetres wide) of testicles from chimpanzees and baboons were implanted inside the patient's scrotum, the thinness of the tissue samples allowing the foreign tissue to fuse with the human tissue eventually.[6] By 1923, 700 of the world's leading surgeons at the International Congress of Surgeons in London, England, applauded the success of Voronoff's work in the "rejuvenation" of old men.[7]

Voronoff's early experiments in this field included transplanting thyroid glands from chimpanzees to humans with thyroid deficiencies. He moved on to transplanting the testicles of executed criminals into millionaires, but, when demand outstripped supply, he turned to using monkey testicle tissue instead

In November 1991, one of the oldest peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, The Lancet, suggested that the file on Voronoff's work be reopened and in particular that "the Medical Research Council should fund further studies on monkey glands."[

[xYlvax 4,053]

I agree with Verneph. They have as much right to live as we.

[FlyingAngel 265]

And in the next generation, we'd breed babies with animal organ at born. Maybe in the 10th generation, we'd have wings to fly like birds...

[Paracelse 414]

I'm sorry but I just can't agree with this idea. Eating meat is one thing. Using animal hide for leather is one thing. But ripping out an animal's organ to put into ourselves? I'm sorry, but something about that just feels wrong to me.

most of organs end up in haggis or pet food, so what the difference.

[puckmomma 8]

They say that some reciepents of organs mimic or act like the doner. Example someone that recieves a liver might start to pick up smoking even though they never smoked in their life. With that theory if we have an ape heart are we going to be hooked on banannas?

[voidla 15]

I could agree with this if it was used in the same way as human donors - their organs are used in another body when the donor dies.

I can (just about) live with myself knowing an animal has been born to feed me, but to know an animal will be bred to be slaughtered just for it's organs is beyond inhumane.

Edited October 24, 2011 by voidla

[FLOMBIE 3,350]

I don't see the difference. An animals are killed so we can survive. If it's for food or whatever, same thing for me.

[heavenlymessanger 0]

ever see the movie animal,lol

[brainiac 2]

Hmmm. Maybe, but they have to consider the lifespan of the animals.

[marharthm 1]

Killing animals is fine, but using their organs to save human lives in immoral and evil.

**** LOGIC.

Seriously people, it might sound wrong but get over it. It can save a ton of people who will die otherwise.

[AsatroGubbe 0]

I dunno, having a pig valve in my heart might save my life, and yet kill my soul. tough choice. and normally i would err on the side of life.

[gatekeeper32 89]

Is it about saving lives or how much money these companies can make?

[RavenEyes19 46]

I could agree with this if it was used in the same way as human donors - their organs are used in another body when the donor dies.

I can (just about) live with myself knowing an animal has been born to feed me, but to know an animal will be bred to be slaughtered just for it's organs is beyond inhumane.

I honestly don't see the difference. I find it hypocritical for meat eaters to be against this. Why is slaughtering an animal for food better than slaughtering it for its organs? What if a single animal was killed and the meat and organs were used for these two separate purposes? Would that be okay then?

I wonder how many people (who are against this) would cave in and support or use this option if they had a child or other loved one in desperate need of an organ.

Edited October 25, 2011 by RavenEyes19

[Wyrdlight 70]

We have been using Pig's hearts in transplants for at least a decade in the UK, this is old news.

[FLOMBIE 3,350]

Well, maybe a pig's heart valve, but not the full organ. That is not yet possible.

[None of the above 1,082]

I wonder how many people (who are against this) would cave in and support or use this option if they had a child or other loved one in desperate need of an organ.

Sorry but that's a non argument. Most people would do anything including sacrificing themselves or another person to save their own child. Doesn't make it a moral choice!

This is just another examples of mankinds inhumanity. The more that we realise how closely related we are to our animal cousins the more we can exploit them.

[FLOMBIE 3,350]

What is 'inhuman' about this? That mankind eats and uses animals to our benefit has always been around, and is very much human.

[jbefumo 16]

Could give new meaning to the term "hung like a horse"... sign me up!

[Dom3434 1]

We are playing tomuch "GOD" right now and we are going to get a big kick in the "***" when we realize What we did was wrong. Don't get me wrong here, saving lives is a great thing. Before we try to manipulate animal organs for our own. Lets try and fix the issues that are causing these problems. for example our eating habbits, pollution and just basic health as in exercise. then we can look into this type of science. stop trying to put a bandaid over an open wound people. I guess my rant is over now

[minera 219]

I honestly don't see the difference. I find it hypocritical for meat eaters to be against this. Why is slaughtering an animal for food better than slaughtering it for its organs? What if a single animal was killed and the meat and organs were used for these two separate purposes? Would that be okay then?

I wonder how many people (who are against this) would cave in and support or use this option if they had a child or other loved one in desperate need of an organ.

I have been on the transplant list for the past three years. Even if it was available I would not want an animal donor. In fact even a human donor makes me feel uncomfortable. Why? Because someone had to die to make that organ available. Also I see all the problems other post donor patients have. Getting an organ transplant is not necessary the end but usually the beginnings of other problems like kidney failure, rejection and haveing to be monitored closely for the rest of ones life, anti rejection drugs that destroy your immune system and you could die from a common cold. Extending my life is one thing but at what cost?

[RavenEyes19 46]

I have been on the transplant list for the past three years. Even if it was available I would not want an animal donor. In fact even a human donor makes me feel uncomfortable. Why? Because someone had to die to make that organ available. Also I see all the problems other post donor patients have. Getting an organ transplant is not necessary the end but usually the beginnings of other problems like kidney failure, rejection and haveing to be monitored closely for the rest of ones life, anti rejection drugs that destroy your immune system and you could die from a common cold. Extending my life is one thing but at what cost?

Personally, I wouldn't take a transplant either. I'd prefer to die rather than have to deal with all the health problems that would come with a transplant. But if I had a loved one who wanted to live and wanted to do everything possible to give herself/himself a chance (even with all the problems that would come with it) I'd support their decision and wouldn't look down on them for choosing an animal donor.

I wouldn't judge them for the same reason I don't judge my friends who hunt their own food. I'd like to know how many posters in here (who consider this immoral) are strict vegetarians? How is this any worse than killing animals for sustenance? How many think that meat consumption should be banned as well? I think if you're going to use one part of an animal, you might as well use it all..doesn't matter for what purpose. It's not like the animal will care once it's dead.

Edited November 1, 2011 by RavenEyes19

[H.H. Holmes 30]

Everyone knows that it is alright to eat a pig's heart, but to put it in one's body to stay alive is completely, absolutely, positively WRONG.