Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 731 posts

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#481

Post by odiroot »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #194
tricky wrote: post #26

You might be asking, why a pig? I don't know, but forever ago I wrote software for a cardiovascular imaging lab and pigs were their primary test subjects. I was like, "why pigs?" and the PI was like, "Imaging-wise, pig hearts aren't too different from humans. Plus, we can give them a heart attack in the scanner and not go to jail. Some labs use dogs. I just can't do that."

I was only recently acquainted with the idea that there are many people on the internet who become very angry that some people eat dog meat, but do not with say cow meat or pig meat. — I find this rather strange and do not understand this.

Some cultures still eat monkeys and it's not really a taboo.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#482

Post by gherkinnn »

Sporktacular wrote: post #215
OJFord wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously it's very culture specific, but pigs are quite far from 'man's best friend'.

Arbitrary standard gets drawn and then pigs get condemned to failing to meet it

Pigs don’t pull sleds. They don’t hunt. They don’t play with children. They can’t manoeuvre a flock of sheep. They won’t even try to ward off a bear. They’re bad at sniffing truffles, because they eat them. They won’t run ahead of a fire engine, clearing the way. And they most certainly won’t cuddle up in camp.

Dogs are extremely versatile and have helped humans over thousands of years. Pigs, on the other hand, are tasty.

It’s not that arbitrary.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#483

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

hulitu wrote: post #426
graderjs wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird that these statements are made (and I don't mean by you, it's a trope to make them by people in general in discussions like this, I'm not picking you out) that it somehow justifies, or ameliorates, the awfulness of experimenting then dissecting (as someone said) a helpless intelligent creature. I think these statements justify animal trials and using it to benefit humans definitely. But it doesn't justify or ma…

If you think that humans make terrible things to animals, you should check what they do to other humans. There are "beautiful, human" stories about a certain Dr. Mengele, or Unit 731 or Guantanamo...

The weird thing was, the parties from the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese Army, responsible for atrocious experiments on humans, were pardoned by the allies in exchange for their findings and research results.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#485

Post by Lio »

watwut wrote: post #446
deltaonefour wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Evolutionary biology is overused as justification for human behavior. Let me get one thing straight. I am not justifying anything. My angle is, what's the point? Don't justify anything at all. We're evil for killing, so be it. I am looking at it from a completely dispassionate angle. I do not need to somehow merge and mutate my moral framework to make it work with the existing reality. >We were not "designed" to eat…

> Other animals have also been shown to "befriend"/care for/grieve over animals of different species, so our own capacity to sympathize for animals should be no surprise. This part is actually true. Some animals do befriend, cooperate with or grieve over animals of different species. Not all animals are bugs and spiders. > Empathy evolved to aid in survival of our genome, but when empathy evolves to the point where w…

Yep, I've seen a few people chucking around phrases like "designed by nature" which are both wrong and confusing. "Design" implies intent before the fact, which is not the case.

We, as a species, are not "finished" in any way or "more evolved" than other species. There is no destination evolution as such.

We have plenty of traits that are not useful but also not a hindrance and so they remain.

On the subject of cooperation between species I'm always fascinated by inter-tree species communication. You might think that trees in a forest are all individually fighting each other for resources but it's more complex than that.

https://e360.yale.edu/features/exploring_how_and_why_trees_t...

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#486

Post by puchatek »

deltaonefour wrote: post #392
_nothing wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chasing an animal down, killing it, and eating it is in my opinion a significantly different activity than subjecting it to thirty likely-invasive procedures over the course of its life and then continuing to perform experiments on its dead body. Not saying it's more or less morally questionable, but significantly different. Evolutionary biology is overused as justification for human behavior. We were not "designed"…

>Evolutionary biology is overused as justification for human behavior. Let me get one thing straight. I am not justifying anything. My angle is, what's the point? Don't justify anything at all. We're evil for killing, so be it. I am looking at it from a completely dispassionate angle. I do not need to somehow merge and mutate my moral framework to make it work with the existing reality. >We were not "designed" to eat…

You would say that a species advanced enough to throw quantum computing at theoretical math problems would be able to develop and act in ways that are not dictated by the laws of evolution.

After all we manage successfully to abstain from actual reproduction in much of the developed world to a degree that makes our societies shrink. Not exactly fit, from an evolutionary point of view.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#487

Post by theplumber »

JetAlone wrote: post #334
theplumber wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My advice stands: The key(word )that you're looking for is "delusional". Find its meaning and it will set you free the way the creator intended.

This advice only "stands", for apostasy and betrayal of the people I love in my community, and of the martyrs and saints who underwent beatings and who gave their lives for God being tortured to death in the colosseum. To give up and let their view, consumed with love for God and each other die in me... All because I couldn't endure a little hostility from some unknown people on the internet who thought I was silly f…

You built just a narrative that makes you comfortable with your life. It's not like the "saints" were the only ones tortured at the colosseum but as usually people remember and care only about the ones sharing the same beliefs(i.e pack mentality).

People are bing killed and tortured today as well for various reasons(i.e "god" doesn't like their orientation or behaviour). See also Rohingya genocide. Do something for these people and I'm sure that your life will be more worthy by any ethical standard than if you don't eat pork or whatever dietary/religious convictions you follow. Maybe you even become a "saint" for them.

You don't need historical events to build a way of life. History is happening right now.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#488

Post by larodi »

gtsop wrote: post #466
larodi wrote: post #139

Pigs caring, saving and dying to support human lives and well being on so many levels. We should definitely worship them much more.

Not meaning to be dissregarding, but literally everything works like that. We use almost everything (even at the expensw of comoletely consuming it (resources) or killing it (plants/animals)) to live ourselves. And it's pretty much the way of life even without humans. Now, all these don't mean we shouldn't be appreciative, and we definitely arent enough. But we should worship? I don't think so

Well, it is a play of words, perhaps not entirely appropriate, but point was made. Definitely not proposing to have the image of the Holy Mother replaced with one of a pig in holy places... Still, pigs are killed (is it okay to say 'give their lives'?) for food, for clothing, for medicine now, and in the future. It's not about pigs, really - but sheep also treated similarly (save for the medicine yet), while horses and chimps not so much. Dogs - as many pointed is difficult to imagine having dogs for food or waist-belts or ... heart donors.

Should we wrap up things with "it's about life to kill things to live", well, it'd be a dramatic over-simplification of what life is about. And it's not as much the way of "life without humans", because (afaik) no animal is known to mass produce or mass kill and definitely not using other animals fur/skins for clothing. What we can say is that humanity is very much accustomed to this perpetual exploitation, but it is a very long discussion before it can be justified as the 'way of life'.

Of course - this is my position, and not trying to impose it, just making a point really. Not trying to convince anyone to quit meat, or to not buy a nice purse.

Just taking a moment to reflect.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#489

Post by the_other »

Sporktacular wrote: post #230
dexwiz wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pigs are really common in biomedical testing. They are physically a similar size and weight to humans. They also reach maturity in about 6 months. Much cheaper to raise than primates, and more likely to get approval for testing. My friends in biomed grad school named one of theirs cyber pig because it has about 30 different experiments ran on it before it was killed, and afterwards it was portioned out for further te…

Weird how this is said without a shred of sympathy or concern for an intelligent, helpless creature. Weirder how it can be said without a sympathetic or concerned response. I hope we can someday move beyond seeing animals as a mere resource.

Some of us need to learn to see one another as more than mere resource first.

Re: U.S. surgeons transplant pig heart into human patient

#490

Post by the_other »

chii wrote: post #329
theplumber wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find such a remark weird given that "you" are serving such "helpless" creatures at your favorite restaurant. I think it's the ultimate hypocrisy. Not to mention that we have a situation where helpless creatures are sacrificed for the science/common good of human beings and the other situation where they are murdered for the taste of their meat & bones.

Both food, or medical, is a use of a resource that is created by and for humans. The pig wouldn't have been born had their purpose for food, or medical use, not been there. it's not like humans are capturing wild pigs and using them. I would say that wild animals deserves the right to exist and not hunted (unless they're threatening human interests), but the same cannot be said for bred animals.

Would you police other animals from hunting each other?
Post reply on HN