A month after a pig heart transplant, man works to regain strength with no rejection so far::It’s been a month since a Maryland man became the second person to receive a transplanted heart from a pig — and hospital video released Friday shows he’s working hard to recover.

  • AccidentalLemming@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    139
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Growing genetically modified pigs with human-like hearts to save human lives? The ethics of that are a bit complicated, but from a STEM perspective it’s a really fascinating idea. What a time to be alive.

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      153
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s nothing ethically wrong with this until we consider eating meat unethical. As a society, we’re nowhere near that.

      If you personally don’t want to use this, you can opt out.

      • AccidentalLemming@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re breeding and killing an animal for its organs, and some would find that unethical. But you are doing it to save a human life, so it’s a bit of a trolley problem I suppose.

        • Grass@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s literally what the meat industry is though. I guess in americanized cultures more of the animal is seen as waste parts rather than food, but those probably become hot dogs anyways.

          Anyways, the way I see it meat for eating, and even pig organ transplants are both raising a pig to put parts of its body into a human’s body.

      • sock@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        eating meat is unethical

        capitalism doesnt care for ethics if government banned meat and news articles said moderately disparaging things about it for a week the entirety of the US would likely change their stance

        because everyone is an AI that parrots what (they think) smarter people say

        if you think im wrong lets talk about how people feel about drugs or literally any problem thats sensationalized. you idiots will believe anything if the news says it.

        • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ethics are not an absolute and are defined by the society in which they occur.

          YOU think it’s unethical. I happen to agree. We are in the minority.

          And all of that is irrelevant to my point, which is that growing animals for organs is not LESS ethical than growing them for meat, and everyone seems fine with that.

    • ℛ𝒶𝓋ℯ𝓃@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      65
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      As much as I love animals (more than most people I meet), as a species we must value human life over animal life to some extent. Suffering for corporate exploitation? No, that’s cruel and evil. Minimal suffering in an organism to save a human life? I wish there was a way to keep it from being sentient (so no suffering is felt), but I believe it’s a fair trade for a human life. But yes, we must always strive to minimize the suffering we cause.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m not vegan, though I do recognize the issues. I have reduced my meat intake, but I’m not at zero. I’m perfectly aware I’m a hypocrite, but it doesn’t make the claim above (which I agree with but did not author) any less accurate.

          • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            So what is true of the pig that if it was also true of the human would make it morally okay to kill the human for their organs?

            • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              this is the"name the trait" line of argument and it suffers from the line-drawing fallacy.

                • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  there are many stops on the spectrum from pig to human, and an inability to draw a specific distinguishing line doesn’t change the fact that there is a big difference between humans and pigs.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s mostly about how cruely we treat food animals normally that I have an issue with. Hunting, for example, I view as a morally acceptable method to get meat. It’s natural and the animal is living a life as a natural animal should. If the pig isn’t raised cruely, I think raising them to help a person live a life is a moral good. That person took a lot of resources to get where they are, and they have the potential to do a lot of good. The pig did not take nearly as many resources to raise and does not have much, if any, capacity to do good besides by dying. Whether they should exist at all is the real question, and I’d say probably yes, again if it isn’t cruel.

              • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Is your answer to my previous question “Potential to do good”?

                If a human person was sufficiently mentally disabled to have as much or less potential to do good as the pig, would it then be morally ok to kill that person and harvest their organs?

                • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, probably, or at least similarly equally moral. For example if they’re born without a brain, which does happen, they don’t meet the definition most people use for personhood. I don’t see what the difference would be other than they have human DNA and look similar to us, but why should that matter?

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        74
        ·
        1 year ago

        I definitely don’t value humans enough to use an animal as an incubator for a heart. It’s cruel and extremely unethical. Nothing will ever convince me otherwise that animals don’t also deserve life just the same as humans.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s good for your beliefs, but a useless argument for anyone who eats meat. Raising and slaughtering a pig to provide a human a heart is even more useful than raising one for its meat, and chances are that the one raised for its heart was taken much better care of before being killed.

        • xpinchx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          This only really tracks if you’re vegan, which you may be. But if we slaughter a million pigs for meat is that really any different? We already incubate them for bacon, are you really so against this that you’d let a family member die than slaughter a pig for its heart?

          • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            He’s not that against it. He’s just posturing online. Very few people, maybe 0.1%, would choose a pig’s life over their grandmother’s. (No I don’t care if your grandma was a dick. Pick another beloved family member or friend.)

          • jennraeross@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            Even as a vegan, it’s pretty up in the air imo. It’s well established that if your life saving medication contains animal products, you take the medication. This is more complicated for sure, but an argument can probably be made. I’m not sure what I feel about it.

    • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I hope we get to mass manufacturing lab grown hearts quickly. No need to harm sentients.

      1 Star Trek replicator please!

    • FrostbyteIX@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Spider Pig, Spider Pig, Does whatever a Spider Pig does…”

      I’m surprised and mildly disappointed no one else commented this.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pig organs are approximately the same size and configuration as human ones. They also share a very similar immune system and biochemistry. We also have experience breeding and genetically modifying them. This makes them the easiest option to modify for human use. Still not easy, but easiest.

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The pig is the result of a lot of selective breeding. It’s pure fluke that it matches well enough to use their organs. The wild boar is the ancestor of the pig, and it’s less suited to organ use.

          • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Technically the wild boar and the pig have the same ancestors but we changed the environment for the pig and bread selectively while the environment of the wild boar only changed slightly so natural selection probably didn’t need to change as much as we did to the pig to be adapted to the environmental changes of today.

  • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Maryland team last year performed the world’s first transplant of a heart from a genetically altered pig into another dying man.

    What is this sentence? The word “another” implies either this man wasn’t the first or that a “genetically altered pig” is legally considered dying man.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The man in the first four paragraphs of the article, Lawrence Faucette, is the second dying man to receive a genetically modified pig heart. The first dying man, referred to in your quote, only survived two months but the heart failed, possibly due to a virus in the heart that came from the pig.