Eugenics debate (original) (raw)
This new form of treatment might benefit millions Editor-Fano has written a response in the eBMJ (and published here, the third letter) commenting on Vanderpool's article on xenotransplantation. 1 2 He advocates a ban on xenotransplantation, largely on the grounds of the risk of the transfer of infection. Cells taken from carefully screened pigs have been used in the treatment of patients with diabetes, certain neurological diseases, and liver failure. There has been no definite evidence of the transfer of a porcine infection to human recipients. Nevertheless, as with almost every medical or scientific advance, it will be impossible to exclude all risk, even if this is related only to hitherto unknown pig bacteria or viruses. The ultimate decision whether to use any new therapeutic agent or procedure rests on an assessment of the risk to benefit ratio. As the potential benefits to individuals or society increase, the acceptance of slightly increased risk becomes warranted. We must not reduce our obligation to take all possible steps to minimise any perceived risk to society, but we have a moral obligation to accept a small risk to the community if the new treatment leads to great benefit to many individuals in that community. The potential benefits of xenotransplantation are immense. Many millions of people with such diverse conditions as diabetes and degenerative brain disease may have the quality of their lives vastly improved, and in those with advanced organ failure xenotransplantation will be lifesaving. In the United States over 60 000 people currently await a human donor organ but only 20 000 organs will become available this year. At least 10 people die every day while waiting. Similar figures could be quoted for other regions of the developed world. This new form of treatment may ultimately benefit millions of patients. Rather than calling for a ban on it we suggest that support should be given to the great efforts being made to ensure that it will be not only successful but also safe.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
Eugenics debate. Eugenics principles are there
PubMed, 2000
This new form of treatment might benefit millions Editor-Fano has written a response in the eBMJ (and published here, the third letter) commenting on Vanderpool's article on xenotransplantation. 1 2 He advocates a ban on xenotransplantation, largely on the grounds of the risk of the transfer of infection. Cells taken from carefully screened pigs have been used in the treatment of patients with diabetes, certain neurological diseases, and liver failure. There has been no definite evidence of the transfer of a porcine infection to human recipients. Nevertheless, as with almost every medical or scientific advance, it will be impossible to exclude all risk, even if this is related only to hitherto unknown pig bacteria or viruses. The ultimate decision whether to use any new therapeutic agent or procedure rests on an assessment of the risk to benefit ratio. As the potential benefits to individuals or society increase, the acceptance of slightly increased risk becomes warranted. We must not reduce our obligation to take all possible steps to minimise any perceived risk to society, but we have a moral obligation to accept a small risk to the community if the new treatment leads to great benefit to many individuals in that community. The potential benefits of xenotransplantation are immense. Many millions of people with such diverse conditions as diabetes and degenerative brain disease may have the quality of their lives vastly improved, and in those with advanced organ failure xenotransplantation will be lifesaving. In the United States over 60 000 people currently await a human donor organ but only 20 000 organs will become available this year. At least 10 people die every day while waiting. Similar figures could be quoted for other regions of the developed world. This new form of treatment may ultimately benefit millions of patients. Rather than calling for a ban on it we suggest that support should be given to the great efforts being made to ensure that it will be not only successful but also safe.
Starting clinical trials of xenotransplantation--reflections on the ethics of the early phase
Journal of Medical Ethics, 2000
What kind of patients may be recruited to early clinical trials of xenotransplantation? This is discussed under the assumption that the risk of viral infection to the public is non-negligible. Furthermore, the conditions imposed by the Helsinki declaration are analysed. The conclusion is that only patients at risk of dying and with no alternative treatment available should be recruited to xenotransplantation trials in the early phase. For some of the less dangerous cell or islet cell xenotransplantation other categories might be recruited. The risk of cell and islet cell xenotransplantation should, however, be weighted against the development of other technologies. In order to safeguard the public, the opt-out clause in the Helsinki declaration should not be fully applied. Legally binding rules on obligatory monitoring and restrictions should be imposed-before clinical trials start.
A Utilitarian approach to Xenotransplantation
With news breaking that US scientist are attempting to grow human organs in pigs, the ethical concerns regarding xenotransplantation have been brought into the public consciousness. This paper (wrote in my first term at KCL) aims to explore these concerns from a utilitarianism perspective.
Ethical rejections of xenotransplantation?
EMBO reports
ene editing and stem cell biotechnologies are being applied to create chimeric animals with human organs, which could alleviate the current shortage of human organs for transplantation. While the medical benefits of xenotransplantation appear to be significant, we discuss specific ethical, medical, cultural, and financial challenges and potential solutions that need to be addressed before clinical trials using organs from human-animal chimeras should begin.
[Ethical aspects of xenotransplantation]
Tidsskrift for den Norske lægeforening : tidsskrift for praktisk medicin, ny række, 2002
The motivation for research on animals as a source of cells, tissues and organs for human transplantation (xenotransplantation) is the scarcity of suitable donors for patients with end-stage organ failure. Use of animals in both experimental and clinical settings raise considerable ethical concerns, especially when non-human primates are used. The pig may represent an acceptable source animal for xenotransplantation and is today regarded as the animal of choice. Xenotransplantation seems defensible from an ethical perspective, but should not be performed in humans until preclinical animal-to-animal xenotransplantations have a predictable rate of success and the risk to society at large is negligible. For the individual patient and his or her next of kin involved, issues of autonomy and proper consent procedures must be given high priority. Safeguards must be established, for the patient and for society at large, in relation to health hazards from infectious organisms, particularly r...
Case Study: The Promise of Xenotransplantation
The one of the focal points of philosophy stems from the desire to answer fundamental questions about our own humanity and morality in order to improve the quality of life for all. In the case of utilitarianism, this ideology centers on the concept of “many over one”, making this a quantitative philosophy. Based on the concept that a decision should be based in order to benefit the majority, it also neglects the minority. This problem inherently lies in the practice of xenotransplantation, or the use of animal tissue for transplant purposes. It may help or even save lives; however, it too neglects a minority. This paper will discuss the backgrounds of both utilitarianism and xenotransplantation; however, I will go one-step further and discuss the viability of xenotransplantation as applied to utilitarianism. Perhaps, by utilizing philosophy to understand a medical technique, we may be able to attain a solution that truly benefits the human race.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.