May 5, 2004
MAN AS MEAT:
Parents with sick kids turning to siblings' stem cells (Rita Rubin, 5/05/04, USA TODAY)
Couples who need a stem cell donor for a child desperately ill with leukemia or anemia are turning to reproductive genetics clinics to help them conceive one, says a report Wednesday about the controversial approach.Some ethicists have expressed concern about using technology to create children who would be tissue donors for siblings. They cite a lack of information about the impact on the children involved.
The clinics use a technique called preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, to screen embryos created by in vitro fertilization to see if their tissue matches the sick child's. Each embryo has a 1-in-4 chance of being a perfect match — not the best of odds for couples trying to conceive a donor naturally.
Only embryos with the same tissue type as an ailing sibling are transferred to the mother's uterus. After birth, blood from the baby's umbilical cord could be used to treat the sick sibling.
It's an evil practice which will only lead to worse--ban it. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 5, 2004 9:40 AM
Evil is the right word.
Posted by: Paul Cella at May 5, 2004 10:06 AMIn its full implications, yes. Not in the trite sense we use it today.
Posted by: Chris at May 5, 2004 10:21 AMRemember the T-shirts for pregnant women that have the word "BABY" and an arrow pointing to the belly?
I once saw a cartoon about a feminist (identified by the butch looks, perpetually-angry expression, and woman's-symbol-and-fist pendant) with a similar shirt that read "SPARE PARTS".
And when you cannibalize a piece of equipment (i.e. strip it for parts), don't you discard the remaining carcass?
Posted by: Ken at May 5, 2004 12:25 PMKen,
The sci-fi ideal is to be able to grow "only" the
necessary parts.
I understand they can grow human teeth and ears (for implantation) on mice now, using stem cells... not sure what I think of that, other than that the images of a mouse with a human ear growing out of his back are more surreal than disturbing.
Posted by: mike earl at May 5, 2004 1:16 PMThink "Slig Meat" from the Dune serious which I believe was borrowed from the novel "The Space Merchants".
Orrin demands big families, except that . . . sometimes.
See, it's all relative. There are no certain Truths.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 5, 2004 11:35 PMFamilies.
Posted by: oj at May 5, 2004 11:38 PMI didn't have anything to do with it, but my paper ran an adoring story a few weeks ago about siblings donating kidneys to siblings.
Is that different? If so, how?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 6, 2004 2:06 AMHarry:
Behold the voice of the compassionate, incremental eugenicist.
Where exactly would you stop?
Posted by: Peter B at May 6, 2004 6:26 AMSomewhat interestingly enough the whole issue of cloning people in order to use their clones as spare parts turned up in the Superman comics of the mid-80's where it was widely used by the populace of Krypton to sustain and extend their natural lifespans.
It eventually led to a war between pro and anti-cloners which devestated the planet and laid the seeds for the planet's eventual destruction.
Who knew you could find social relevance in comics?
Posted by: M Ali Choudhury at May 6, 2004 7:05 AMHarry:
There's nothing wrong with it. There's something very wrong with having a child for the sole purpose of harvesting its organs.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2004 7:51 AMI dunno where I'd stop, Peter. It would sort of depend on circumstances.
Should we all give up one kidney just because we can?
If the Intelligent Designer was so darned intelligent, why didn't he give up a spare liver instead of a spare kidney?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at May 6, 2004 3:06 PMNobody in the US is conceiving children to be brought to term, then "harvested".
They're only using parts that regenerate, such as bone marrow, or naturally discarded stuff, such as umbilical cord blood.