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

Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

irishtimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 527 posts

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#131

Post by siva7 »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #108
drenvuk wrote: post #21

I'm a full on speciesist. let's do more of this. since we're already eating them I feel like this even a more reasonable usage of their lives. can we do kidneys next please? we can basically shut down most dialysis clinics after that.

The next logical step is to breed pigs with organs that especially suit humans, maybe with some genetic engineering to optimise them. I really can't see anyone needing an organ complaining that they're GMO. As long as we treat animals well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

As long as we treat humans well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#132

Post by mapme »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #108
drenvuk wrote: post #21

I'm a full on speciesist. let's do more of this. since we're already eating them I feel like this even a more reasonable usage of their lives. can we do kidneys next please? we can basically shut down most dialysis clinics after that.

The next logical step is to breed pigs with organs that especially suit humans, maybe with some genetic engineering to optimise them. I really can't see anyone needing an organ complaining that they're GMO. As long as we treat animals well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

Wouldn’t you need to kill the animal in the prime of its life, causing a moral issue?

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#133

Post by roywiggins »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #108
drenvuk wrote: post #21

I'm a full on speciesist. let's do more of this. since we're already eating them I feel like this even a more reasonable usage of their lives. can we do kidneys next please? we can basically shut down most dialysis clinics after that.

The next logical step is to breed pigs with organs that especially suit humans, maybe with some genetic engineering to optimise them. I really can't see anyone needing an organ complaining that they're GMO. As long as we treat animals well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

That's what they've done here, this are GMO pigs designed to be more compatible with human biology.

> The heart transplanted into Mr. Bennett came from a genetically altered pig provided by Revivicor, a regenerative medicine company based in Blacksburg, Va.

> The pig had 10 genetic modifications. Four genes were knocked out, or inactivated, including one that encodes a molecule that causes an aggressive human rejection response.

> A growth gene was also inactivated to prevent the pig’s heart from continuing to grow after it was implanted, said Dr. Mohiuddin,who, with Dr. Griffith, did much of the research leading up to the transplant.

> In addition, six human genes were inserted into the genome of the donor pig — modifications designed to make the porcine organs more tolerable to the human immune system.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/10/health/heart-transplant-p...

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#134

Post by d110af5ccf »

siva7 wrote: post #102
unmole wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there a limit to this impartiality? No. > Should we have saved Hitlers life with a breakthrough transplant? Yes. It really is not complicated: Doctors are not in the business of judging their patients.

It’s not that simple. Doctors judge, at least in their own mind and that influences survival decisions.

> Doctors judge, at least in their own mind and that influences survival decisions.

That isn't intentional or desirable though. It's a flaw. Doctors are people and people are imperfect.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#135

Post by agumonkey »

ahevia wrote: post #15
benatkin wrote: post #5

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 understand the family though. The unfairness is heavy.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#136

Post by Pxtl »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #108
drenvuk wrote: post #21

I'm a full on speciesist. let's do more of this. since we're already eating them I feel like this even a more reasonable usage of their lives. can we do kidneys next please? we can basically shut down most dialysis clinics after that.

The next logical step is to breed pigs with organs that especially suit humans, maybe with some genetic engineering to optimise them. I really can't see anyone needing an organ complaining that they're GMO. As long as we treat animals well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

In TFA that's actually what they describe - the pig was genetically engineered to reduce rejection and to control the growth of the heart to stay human-sized.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#137

Post by deelowe »

xupybd wrote: post #117
smrtinsert wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a limit to this impartiality? Should we have saved Hitlers life with a breakthrough transplant?

I would suggest the following limit, unless the state has already sentenced to death. We have a justice system to make these calls. Let the doctors treat everyone and the justice system decide who lives and dies.

This. All these arguments over ethics miss the point. Doctors shouldn't be placed in the position of making morale decisions. Their job is to render care and given the grave consequences of malpractice, we should always expect them to do so to their fullest abilities. FULL STOP.

Let the legal profession handle how to deal with criminals. Punishment and medical care have no place existing together.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#138

Post by agumonkey »

mannykannot wrote: post #64
ahevia wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> If the family believed the sentencing wasn’t accurate that’s a different matter. It probably depends on what you mean by 'accurate'. They almost certainly do not believe this person has repayed a debt to the victim, the victim's family or society in general. Phrasing the issue as one of repaying a debt is problematical when it is beyond the means of the perpetrator to make amends. Note that this is not an argument…

Considering the situation, a very important medical experiment but over a socially sensitive patient, would it help to keep the guy anonymous ?

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#139

Post by Pxtl »

mapme wrote: post #132
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next logical step is to breed pigs with organs that especially suit humans, maybe with some genetic engineering to optimise them. I really can't see anyone needing an organ complaining that they're GMO. As long as we treat animals well while they're alive (and why wouldn't you, you want high quality low stress organs) then there's really no limit here, morally.

Wouldn’t you need to kill the animal in the prime of its life, causing a moral issue?

Food animals are killed in adolescence for far less noble reasons.

I'm a vegetarian.

Grow me a goddamned lung pig.

Re: Two weeks later David Bennett is alive, his pig’s heart beating soundly

#140

Post by Aeolun »

woodruffw wrote: post #87
burrows wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The majority of ethicists agree that normative statements can express true statements. What do you think is a good candidate for such a statement? My impression is that arguments must proceed from axioms, positive axioms aren’t helpful because the statement is normative and normative axioms just reproduce the issue. > medical ethics is a prescriptive and lexical ethics, one that you must follow if you are to practi…

> What do you think is a good candidate for such a statement? Here's an intuitive one: "you shouldn't kick puppies." Most people think that expresses a true statement (not that "most people" is itself indicative of truth value). In terms of my own ethics: "act only in a way that you can will be universal law." Of course, not everybody agrees with that one, but I think it's an awfully good candidate. We can talk about…

> a book of rules that doctors (broadly) are not allowed to disagree with.

They’re allowed to disagree, as long as they still follow them.

Post reply on HN