Ethical Ethics Of Xenotransplantation

In America, there are currently 122,198 candidates on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) waiting list (“OPTN”). Due to a lack of available organ donors, around 18 waiting list candidates will die every day (“OPTN”). This has prompted the development and investigation of xenotransplantation—the transplantation of animal tissue and organs to potential human candidates. Currently in its early phases of development and study, xenotransplantation is controversial for its high failure rate, with only a few cases successful. This is attributed to the human immune system rejecting those animal donated organs, thereby potentially causing immediate death to the human candidate. On the one hand, pre-clinical trials have broadened the understanding of the human immune system, as well as furthered xenotransplantation research. However, because xenotransplantation has achieved little success, opponents of the procedure argue that it is unethical to continue its practice. It is also important to note that trials often use baboons in place of humans, which presents several variables to be examined before further human trials can begin. Moreover, the potential acquisition of zoonotic infection is a serious risk that cannot be fully determined without the use of human subjects. Thus, not only will xenotransplantation require more extensive study, it will also require hundreds of animal lives, all in an effort to create nothing more than a last resort.

Pre-clinical trials have focused on swine and baboons as potential donation sources. At first thought, baboons may be the obvious choice over swine considering that they are closer both genetically and immunologically to humans. However, in comparison to swine, baboons are toug...

... middle of paper ...

...imit animal suffering, but also to ensure that the human candidate has minimal risk in acquiring a zoonotic infection. Of particular concern is the possible transfer of porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERV) from swine to humans. PERV is found in the genome of all swine. It is inactive in swine but according to Wilson, there are two types capable of infecting human cells (“Viral Safety Studies”). Admittedly, in 1999, researchers found that none of the human and non-human primate test subjects that received swine tissue (or organs in some non-human primate cases) acquired PERV infection (Sharma 28). Nevertheless, PERV cannot be ruled out as a potential infectious agent since it is part of the genus gammaretrovirus, which according to the OP-ED piece “A Case of Chronic Denial”, includes several virus species that have cross-species infection implications (Johnson).