Pigs as organ donors

[BeRational]

You advocate eating meat and animal experimentation. Perhaps in your la-la Ladybird land these things don't cause suffering, but in the real world they do on unimaginable scales. Therefore you advocate suffering and don't have the minerals to admit as much.

LIAR

[Shaker]

Then you have no argument.

It is just emotion for the pigs.

I do not care that pigs are harvested (without suffering), so there is nothing to discuss.

That was pretty obvious as soon as you fetched up on this thread with your joke of a name.

[Shaker]

LIAR

Oooh, the capitals are out now, I'm in big bother.

[BeRational]

Oooh, the capitals are out now, I'm in big bother.

You are a liar.

[BeRational]

You advocate eating meat and animal experimentation. Perhaps in your la-la Ladybird land these things don't cause suffering, but in the real world they do on unimaginable scales. Therefore you advocate suffering and don't have the minerals to admit as much.

I can make the same sort of allegation to you.

You advocate humans suffering to the point of death, rather that give them a pig organ.

[floo]

I can make the same sort of allegation to you.

You advocate humans suffering to the point of death, rather that give them a pig organ.

Humans before other animals species.

[BeRational]

Humans before other animals species.

I agree with you.

Shaker would rather humans die than receive a pigs organ.

[floo]

I agree with you.

Shaker would rather humans die than receive a pigs organ.

If that is really true that is TERRIBLE!

[BeRational]

If that is really true that is TERRIBLE!

Well I do not think it is true, but it is like his claim that I advocate suffering of animals just because I am fine with eating them.

I am sure he has the welfare of humans in mind as well, perhaps not as much as me, as I would be prepared to use pigs organs if they make the procedure safe and effective.

[Shaker]

If that is really true that is TERRIBLE!

Goodness me, the capital letter brigade are out in force this afternoon.

[BeRational]

Goodness me, the capital letter brigade are out in force this afternoon.

Is it true that you would rather humans not have pigs organs, even if it was shown that those organs would be perfectly good for the patient?

[Shaker]

Is it true that you would rather humans not have pigs organs, even if it was shown that those organs would be perfectly good for the patient?

My position was stated long, but given your penchant for repetition ... a system of presumed consent renders the use of pig organs superfluous. Unnecessary. Redundant. Otiose.

Pigs are being considered only to address the shortage of donors, but with an opt-out system this is no longer a consideration. We know that this is the case on the basis from the evidence of those countries where such a system already exists ... our immediate neighbours for starters.

[Rhiannon]

Isn't the biggest difference that potentially there is no need (or a much reduced need) to wait for a suitable match and have dialysis, possibly for years?

[Shaker]

Isn't the biggest difference that potentially there is no need (or a much reduced need) to wait for a suitable match and have dialysis, possibly for years?

Not sure I understand?

[Rhiannon]

Not sure I understand?

“It’s going to make such a huge difference that I don’t think it’s possible to conceive of it,” says Cooper. Organ transplants would no longer have to be emergency surgeries, requiring planes to deliver organs and surgical teams to scramble at any hour. Organs from pigs can be harvested on a schedule, and surgeries planned for exact times during the day. A patient that comes in with kidney failure could get a kidney the next day—eliminating the need for large dialysis centers. Hospital ICU beds will no longer be taken up by patients waiting for a heart transplant."

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/pig-organs-for-humans/536307/

Personally I think this scenario is unlikely. But it is where the researchers are trying to head.

[Shaker]

Would none of those things be the case with opt out?

[Rhiannon]

I doubt it. There's still the requirement that each of the 3,500-5,000 people who die in circumstances where they can donate is a match to people on the waiting list. It would be a vast improvement of course but I don't think it is the same kind of fix as having replacement organs ready and waiting for each and every emergency as they arise.

There are other variables. What if driverless cars radically reduce the numbers of road deaths for example?

[Shaker]

I doubt it. There's still the requirement that each of the 3,500-5,000 people who die in circumstances where they can donate is a match to people on the waiting list.

Isn't this the whole point of opt-out, though? Currently there aren't enough of such people, hence the organ shortage; but with opt-out that available pool of potential donors increases massively from (at best) 5,000 to who knows what - that's the idea of it. I don't know what the increase would be specifically; you'd need somebody like Professor Davey on the case to crunch the numbers and to quantify it in terms of hard data. But I'd put my house on the increase being huge.

[Rhiannon]

Isn't this the whole point of opt-out, though? Currently there aren't enough of such people, hence the organ shortage; but with opt-out that available pool of potential donors increases massively from (at best) 5,000 to who knows what - that's the idea of it. I don't know what the increase would be specifically; you'd need somebody like Professor Davey on the case to crunch the numbers and to quantify it in terms of hard data. But I'd put my house on the increase being huge.

I've been doing a spot of googling. Yes the increase is huge but not enough on its own to solve the issue. Plus we'd still probably have a family veto with an opt out - it's easier to legislate against that with an opt in as the donor's wishes are clear - and we don't have the infrastructure to cope with a huge increase in donation as is the case in Spain. It'll help, hugely, clearly. But it won't fix everything.

[Robbie]

If that is really true that is TERRIBLE!

Not terrible, just his pov.  We all do die eventually.  One could still die with a pig's organ donation, might not even survive the surgery.   

[Gordon]

I expect that the thinking goes along the line of since transplant surgery only occurs in specialist centres, and where the recipients are already very ill and will probably require intensive care post-surgery, whereas potential donors could be in any major hospital site then both the suitability of the organs and practicalities of getting a donor organ to the recipient in time for use.

Presumably the idea is that since transplant patients often have a long history of illness then when the need for a donor organ is needed then (assuming the science works) one sourced from pigs could be arranged without the need to await the death of a suitable human donor, even where the practicalities of acquiring and transporting the organ are do-able.

In essence some pigs will be bred as organ donors, possible for specified patients, and then slaughtered at the point (or nearby) when the organ is needed.

It sounds a bit ghoulish I suppose, but probably no more so than slaughtering pigs to a schedule needed to supply supermarkets with bacon - of course there are different views on this whether using animals as a resource (such as for food) at all.

[Shaker]

I've been doing a spot of googling. Yes the increase is huge but not enough on its own to solve the issue.

How so (or not so)?

It'll help, hugely, clearly. But it won't fix everything.

Unfortunately not everything can be fixed.

[floo]

People like Shaker are entitled to refuse to have a pig organ inserted in their body, if it is abhorrent to them. Just as those of us who don't have a problem with eating meat from pigs should be entitled to have a pig organ transplant, if needed and it was deemed suitable.

[Robbie]

Yes.  If people eat meat there's no reason not to use parts of the body for other things.   However there's nothing terrible in having an opposite opinion.

In this country in recent years pigs have been well looked after.  They have a better life than they used to and though they end up on the table, they don't know that.  I wouldn't like to read of animal welfare standards slipping, there's no reason why they should.  If any of our lives depended on a pig, the least we can do is ensure it has been as happy as possible.

But lets hope we don't need a transplant in the first place.

[Rhiannon]

I think most of us know someone who is or has been in this situation. It's wrong to assume that this isn't personal to any of us here to some extent. We just don't know.