Transplant of pig heart into US man sparks debate
THERE have been mixed views from religious stakeholders, on what is believed to be the first transplant in the world using the heart of a genetically modified pig.
According to BBC.com, a US handyman, David Bennett, 57, recently underwent the experimental 7-hour procedure in Baltimore, Maryland.
The transplant was considered the last hope of saving his life, though it is not clear what his long-term chances of survival are, reported the BBC.
Bennett had said: “I know it’s a shot in the dark, but it’s my last choice.”
Doctors at the University of Maryland Medical Center were granted a special dispensation by the US medical regulator to carry out the procedure on the basis that Bennett, who has terminal heart disease, would otherwise have died.
Bennett had been deemed ineligible for a human transplant, a decision that is often taken by doctors when the patient is in poor health.
For the medical team who carried out the transplant, it marked the culmination of years of research and it could change lives across the world, said the BBC.
Bartley Griffith, the surgeon, said the surgery would bring the world one step closer to solving the organ shortage crisis.
He said they were optimistic that the first-in-the-world surgery would provide an important new option for patients.
Dr Christine Lau, the chairperson of the Department of Surgery at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, was in the operating theatre during the surgery.
“He’s more of a risk because we require more immunosuppression, slightly different than we would normally do in a human-to-human transplant.
“People die all the time on the waiting list, waiting for organs. If we could use genetically engineered pig organs they’d never have to wait. They could basically get an organ as they needed it,” she had told the BBC.
“Plus, we wouldn’t have to fly all over the country at night to recover organs to put them into recipients.”
The possibility of using animal organs for so-called “xenotransplantation” to meet the demand had long been considered, and using pig heart valves was common, reported the BBC.
The pig used in the transplant had been genetically modified to knock out several genes that would have led to the organ being rejected by Bennett’s body, AFP news agency reported.
According to CNN.com, Bennett’s doctors reported last Monday, three days after the surgery, that he was doing well.
The doctors would need to monitor him to see whether the transplant worked to provide lifesaving benefits. He would be monitored for immune system problems or other complications, said CNN.
South African religious leaders shared their views on extending life artificially and the use of a genetically modified heart of a pig.
Ashwin Trikamjee, the president of the South African Hindu Maha Sabha (SAHMS), said in Hinduism life was sacred and that there was no evidence of any prohibition against organ transplantation.
“From an ethical perspective, xenotransplantation is a controversial issue. In the 21st century, there will also be concerns about the rights of animals as well. In Hinduism all forms of life are sacred. It can be argued that in Hinduism, Lord Ganesha is an example of xenotransplantation.”
Trikamjee said humans had, from the earliest times, used medical science and Ayurveda to alleviate human suffering from illnesses and diseases and extend life.
“However, we cannot determine when each life ought to end and we
cannot really say that we are extending life. Life may end with or without our intervention or humans may continue to live with or without the intervention of medical science.
“Medical science is based on the principle of reducing suffering. Reducing the suffering of others is considered a pious activity.”
Trikamjee said plant and animal tissues were used in medication.
“Even blood transfusion is transferring human tissue and/or cells from one human to another. From a Hindu perspective, the intervention needs to be dharmic. Hindus have a strong belief in life after death and reincarnation, with the soul being significant and the body being less significant.
“The body is important only as a vehicle for the individual to grow from various experiences. Organ transplant can be viewed as facilitating such experiences.”
He said, however, medical intervention should not be at the expense of other life forms.
“Hindus are meant to respect and protect all life and using animals to prolong human life – at the expense of the animal – will be adharmic.”
Philip Rosenthal, the director of the ChristianView Network, a public advocacy organisation, said: “We are not opposed to extraordinary medical actions to extend life in principle, but there may be particular situations which are debatable, such as pointless, wasteful use of scarce resources that could be better used by others and prolong needless suffering.”
He said a checklist applied in such cases.
“We are opposed to the killing of innocent people because they are made
in the image of God, and cruelty to animals, but not to the killing of animals if it is done without cruelty. Nevertheless, neither of these are alleged from this incident.”
Rosenthal said selective breeding of animals and plants had modified genes for thousands of years, but genetic technology allowed more targeted changes.
“The next issue raised is genetic modification of animals and plants. We do not have an objection to this in principle but particular situations may create ethical problems which must be thought through in advance. For example, our environmental regulations require that genetically modified organisms must be controlled and need a permit for release into the environment.”
Rosenthal said new actions that were undertaken needed to be carefully considered with regard to ethical harm that might arise.
“Hopefully, that was done by an ethics committee in this instance. Possibly, in the ensuing public discussion, some other ethical issue may be brought to light and we would have to listen to that and consider it in terms of the Scriptures. But, in terms of the checklist of ethical issues above, we do not yet see any contravention of Scripture.”
Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier, the Catholic Archbishop Emeritus of Durban, said: “What is the purpose of this?
“This type of transplant raises the question: Are we trying to play God and determining how long a person lives?
“A second question raised is: What would be the quality of life of a person with such a transplant? I know people who have had ordinary transplants go through quite difficult times, and I can only imagine that following such a transplant, with a heart of a genetically modified pig, would be more demanding or difficult. Was that taken into consideration?” he asked.
Moulana Abdullah Khan, the administrator of the Jamiatul Ulama KZN (Council of Muslim Theologians), said it was the belief of Islam and Muslims that life could not be extended beyond its fixed time.
“The Qur’an states that ‘no person shall die except with the permission of Allah at the appointed time’.
“It is our belief that medical treatment cannot extend or prolong life.”
Khan said according to Islamic beliefs it was not permissible to transplant a pig organ into a human being.
“Since we believe that life cannot be extended beyond its ordained moment of death, it will not be permissible to utilise any haraam (unlawful) method in the futile attempt to thwart death,” he said.