111–120 of 527 posts
His victim's family (yes, really) doesn't like that he was the first to get a heart transplant. https://nypost.com/2022/01/13/historic-pig-heart-recipient-w... PETA doesn't like that anyone got a pig heart transplant. https://www.peta.org/media/news-releases/first-heart-transpl...
"...and a tremendous waste of resources that could be used to fund research that might actually help humans." Hey PETA, source?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are. The victims family is saying “Our principle is that people who stab Ed should not get a heart, therefore David should not get a heart.” The doctor is saying “Our principle is that we don’t use the patient’s past violence or convictions to determine whether they should get a heart or not, so the stabbing doesn’t disqualify Davi…
People who commit crimes should not get a heart can be transformed to Only people who have not committed crimes should get replacement hearts . The problem is, who hasn't committed crimes? Which crimes count? Who decides? That question makes the more-topical issue When the ER fills up, should unvaccinated people be treated by administering carbon monoxide in the hospital parking garage? look trivial to resolve, in co…
If you have one hospital bed and two COVID patients that are looking like they will die if they don’t get admitted you treat the one with the greater chance of survival. Being vaccinated is predictive of a higher survival rate…
His victim's family (yes, really) doesn't like that he was the first to get a heart transplant. https://nypost.com/2022/01/13/historic-pig-heart-recipient-w... PETA doesn't like that anyone got a pig heart transplant. https://www.peta.org/media/news-releases/first-heart-transpl...
Read the article. Sadden he took such drastic actions & that it led to someone’s suffering for so many years until their eventual death, but he served his time in jail. Isn’t that how we repay criminal debts in society? Not a very good argument to deny anyone life saving care after they served their sentencing(or because for their past actions for that matter). If the family believed the sentencing wasn’t accurate th…
I could see him being all over the press being annoying for the victim's family, but I don't see this as him being rewarded with anything. What he got is one of the worst option, though the fact that he's survived this far makes it better in hindsight. Then again 2 weeks means nothing, let's see if it actually lasts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. This brings us back to tribal times; kill the animal or starve, or in this case, kill the animal or die of a heart attack.
Maybe you could at least address the points I gave instead of plainly ignoring them and repeating the same argument? I already addressed this - we aren't in tribal times. We can even grow organs in the lab. We can also coordinate complex routes to securing organ donations. There are so many available options. And again, if a heart from a pig that died naturally could be found, I'd be all for it. I think it adds a mor…
Using complex routes to secure organ donations isn't a great option, because the viability of organs decrease as time goes on, so there is an effective limit on how far they can travel. It also doesn't help people who are currently ineligible for organ transplants, because their current scarcity means that only prime candidates can get them (otherwise it would be wasteful).
We could change the organ donation system from opt-in to opt-out, but I get the impression that wouldn't be as ethical from a vegan point of view. That also doesn't help the afformentioned distance problems.
Lab grown organs could be a great solution that would actually be better than animal organs, but they're not a viable option yet.
Basically, if we had good options other than xenotransplantation, I would probably agree that it's unethical to use their organs. However, we don't have better options right now (especially ones that can scale to treat everyone that needs an organ), so in my opinion, xenotransplants are better than nothing.
(Also as a side note, a pig that died from natural causes wouldn't be viable for organ transplantation. The pig needs to be physiologically alive for the organs to be viable, and it needs to be genetically modified to not have animal proteins that the immune system can detect).
His victim's family (yes, really) doesn't like that he was the first to get a heart transplant. https://nypost.com/2022/01/13/historic-pig-heart-recipient-w... PETA doesn't like that anyone got a pig heart transplant. https://www.peta.org/media/news-releases/first-heart-transpl...
> was charged with intent to murder and openly carrying a concealed weapon, among other charges. I know what a concealed weapon is, but what is 'openly carrying a concealed weapon'?
I don't like the wording of that charge(if it even really exists), but that's all I can come up with.
His victim's family (yes, really) doesn't like that he was the first to get a heart transplant. https://nypost.com/2022/01/13/historic-pig-heart-recipient-w... PETA doesn't like that anyone got a pig heart transplant. https://www.peta.org/media/news-releases/first-heart-transpl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.
Is there a limit to this impartiality? Should we have saved Hitlers life with a breakthrough transplant?
We have a justice system to make these calls. Let the doctors treat everyone and the justice system decide who lives and dies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>“The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “We are not in the business of sorting sinners from saints. Crime is a legal matter.” This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that.
> The key principle in medicine is to treat anyone who is sick, regardless of who they are. The victims family is saying “Our principle is that people who stab Ed should not get a heart, therefore David should not get a heart.” The doctor is saying “Our principle is that we don’t use the patient’s past violence or convictions to determine whether they should get a heart or not, so the stabbing doesn’t disqualify Davi…
>Neither party can offer a valid argument as to why their principle is true, because both of their principles are normative.
I'm pretty sure someone mentioned that the Dr's pov is that the doctors don't punish crime. Someone else does that. If they have a crime worthy of death, someone else determines that and administers that punishment. The Dr's stay out of that conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't get talk about people "feeling" the person from whom they received the transplant inside them? If so, how would a pig seem?
There is an Indian movie which beautifully explores this concept. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1773764/ Worth watching with subtitles if you do not understand the language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems pretty damn simple to me. If you wouldn’t put someone to death for a crime, you shouldn’t deny them medical care in a manner that will kill them for the same crime. It’s functionally and legally the same as putting them to death. Withholding necessary medical care is the same as withholding food, water, air, or shelter.
We deny people waiting for organ transplants medical treatment regularly. there simply aren't enough organs to go around. In the case that people are already having life saving organs withheld from them, it makes sense to prioritize. I think people have the ethical issue in this case backwards: the reason this guy got this transplant is because it was an experiment . We effectively used an ex-con as a guinea pig. (Pe…
Yeah. There is no shortage of pig organs which is kinda the whole point. Rationing limited care is different than denying perfectly available care simply out of retribution. I thought the context made that distinction rather self-evident.