xenotransplants

[IPbrown]

Xenotransplants are organ or tissue transplants from non-human species to humans (or any species to a different species). There is currently a massive need for donated human organs with thousands waiting on transplant lists. Xenotransplants are one suggested way of meeting this demand. There are technical difficulties that would have to be overcome first (such as overcoming the risk of endogenous retroviruses - a posibility according to a team in boston).

But, even if this procedure was utterly risk-free and guarenteed to give patients the cure that need, should it be done? Is it a case of using our intelectual gifts and resources to heal fellow human beings or a severe meddling with nature. Is it a simple extension of non-vegetarianism and human-human transplants or does the cross-species element and genetic modification required cross some horrific ethical boundry?

I'd be really interested in any view on this.
Thanks
Isla

 

[MarkSB]

Xenotransplants are organ or tissue transplants from non-human species to humans (or any species to a different species). There is currently a massive need for donated human organs with thousands waiting on transplant lists. Xenotransplants are one suggested way of meeting this demand. There are technical difficulties that would have to be overcome first (such as overcoming the risk of endogenous retroviruses - a posibility according to a team in boston).

But, even if this procedure was utterly risk-free and guarenteed to give patients the cure that need, should it be done? Is it a case of using our intelectual gifts and resources to heal fellow human beings or a severe meddling with nature. Is it a simple extension of non-vegetarianism and human-human transplants or does the cross-species element and genetic modification required cross some horrific ethical boundry?

I'd be really interested in any view on this.
Thanks
Isla

Hi Isla, and welcome to CF.

Interesting topic. At a glance I would say no, though I'm not too familiar with the procedure. If someone could say, use a pig heart until a human heart is available, I don't see a problem.

But you say that some genetic modification is required? When people start adding human genes to animals that begins to cross lines. As far as I know, such genetic modification is banned in the U.S. (though I could be wrong)

 

[True_Blue]

I have no problem whatsoever with xenotransplants in general. God has given us the power to rule over nature and subdue it. He places no limits on the use of animals as sources of replacement organs. There are a few caveats, of course.

The first is disclosure. People should know the source the organ they are receiving, and they should be fully informed of the risks and benefits. They should also be appraised of any genetic modifications (which should not be illegal either).

The second is consent. No one should receive such an organ without their consent. There are some sick doctors out there using human embryos as test subjects for human/animal synthesis. The unborn cannot give informed consent. There are actually people out there who approve of this, believe it or not.

The third is unnecessary cruelty. Animals that are bred for replacement organs should not be made to suffer. They should be taken care of, be treated humanely, and be put down in a manner that is reasonably compassionate.

 

[MarkSB]

I have no problem whatsoever with xenotransplants in general. God has given us the power to rule over nature and subdue it. He places no limits on the use of animals as sources of replacement organs. There are a few caveats, of course.

Rule over and use nature, but with ethical guidelines.

I agree with the cautions you have posted, but the creation of part-human animals puts up a huge red flag for me. I wonder to what extent these animals need to be modified. The creation of half-human organisms from my view just reeks of mad science:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)#Chimeras_in_research

 

[True_Blue]

Rule over and use nature, but with ethical guidelines.

I agree with the cautions you have posted, but the creation of part-human animals puts up a huge red flag for me. I wonder to what extent these animals need to be modified. The creation of half-human organisms from my view just wreaks of mad science:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)#Chimeras_in_research

Yes, I agree with you. The research at your link is disgusting and should be criminal:

During November 2006, UK researchers from Newcastle University and King's College London applied to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority for a three-year license to fuse human DNA with cow eggs. The proposal is to insert human DNA into a cow's egg which has had its genetic material removed and then create an embryo by the same technique that produced Dolly the Sheep. The resulting embryo would be 99.9% human; the only bovine element would be DNA outside the nucleus of the cell.

These British scientists have apparently learned nothing from the Nazis. I've read about other, even more disgusting, lines of scientific research combining humans and rats. If people want to graft various animal organs onto consenting adults, that's fine. But doing such things with non-consenting human embryos is pure filth.

 

[visionary]

Blurring the lines.. the Lord was very clear on not mixing... for a reason... Not saying I am wise as to all the reasons... just believe God knows the beginning to the end and He still tells us not to mix in the beginning.. so it must be because of the end result.

 

[True_Blue]

Blurring the lines.. the Lord was very clear on not mixing... for a reason... Not saying I am wise as to all the reasons... just believe God knows the beginning to the end and He still tells us not to mix in the beginning.. so it must be because of the end result.

The Bible is clear that bestiality is wrong, requiring a death penalty (Lev. 20:15). It's easy to extend that principle to any kind of reproduction involving humans and animals. But the Bible says nothing on organ transplants from animals, and it says nothing about cross-breeding different types of animals, unless you have scripture you would like to share with us.

 

[visionary]

The Bible is clear that bestiality is wrong, requiring a death penalty (Lev. 20:15). It's easy to extend that principle to any kind of reproduction involving humans and animals. But the Bible says nothing on organ transplants from animals, and it says nothing about cross-breeding different types of animals, unless you have scripture you would like to share with us.

Leviticus 20:25
Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

I assumed it meant in any manner including scientific methods.

 

[wannabeadesigirl]

I have three words: Stem Cell Research.

It's a case of derned if you do, derned if you don't. Xenotransplants could reduce the need to use human stem cells from embryos to make human organs.
People don't seem to have a problem with the idea of using mouse stem cells to replace embryonic stem cells. I know it's not xenotransplants, but it's along the same lines as interspecies grafting.

 

[IPbrown]

as i understand it, the main genetic modification required would be to:
a.) remove genes coding for certain cell surface proteins that human blood attacks (a bit like it attacks blood transfusion from someone of a different blood type)

b.) insert human genes for a cell surface protein that we have but pigs don't which stops a particular type of immune attack (again stopping rejection just as human organs can be rejected within a human - after transplant or even without a transplant in some diseases such as type 1 diabetes)

c.) removing genes that could potentially "release" new viruses

are these modifications ethical?

which is worse (if the treatments worked perfectly): xenotransplant, transplant of organs grown from human stem cells, or leaving someone to die of organ failure when we have the capabilities to save them?

Visionary, i'm interested as to where you see this passage as drawing a line. are you against the use of life-saving pig insulin in diabetics? how about insulin from genetically-modifed bacteria? are you against eating meat as surely the animal constituents are becoming functioning parts of our bodies? but God called for animal sacrifice and eating in the Old Testament didn't he?

 

[visionary]

as i understand it, the main genetic modification required would be to:
a.) remove genes coding for certain cell surface proteins that human blood attacks (a bit like it attacks blood transfusion from someone of a different blood type)

b.) insert human genes for a cell surface protein that we have but pigs don't which stops a particular type of immune attack (again stopping rejection just as human organs can be rejected within a human - after transplant or even without a transplant in some diseases such as type 1 diabetes)

c.) removing genes that could potentially "release" new viruses

are these modifications ethical?

which is worse (if the treatments worked perfectly): xenotransplant, transplant of organs grown from human stem cells, or leaving someone to die of organ failure when we have the capabilities to save them?

Visionary, i'm interested as to where you see this passage as drawing a line. are you against the use of life-saving pig insulin in diabetics? how about insulin from genetically-modifed bacteria? are you against eating meat as surely the animal constituents are becoming functioning parts of our bodies? but God called for animal sacrifice and eating in the Old Testament didn't he?

Yep.. there are other ways of dealing with diabetes without using pig insulin....http://medgadget.com/archives/2006/07/kosher_insulin.html

We are to see the law as spiritual in this generation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We are not to follow it via letter of the law.. so now the application of the spirit and intent God has.. includes todays technology.

 

[IPbrown]

Thanks for the link, Visionary. It's brilliant to see alternatives that more people can be comfortable with. but if this alternative wasn't available, would you see it as ethically more sound to let a diabetic child die than use insulin from genetically modified bacteria?

and i don't see how that covers the eating meat question. please could you elaborate?

thank you
isla x