The Instigator
Ainura
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Nargiza
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

xenotransplantation is good or bad?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/8/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,662 times Debate No: 30041
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Ainura

Con

Xeno would be impossible without using animal materials, by definition. Do we have a right to use them?

Xeno research may be more problematic than any subsequent use of animals for organs. In current research, animals are both donors and recipients. Donor issues are similar to those that would arise once xeno is well established. But animal test recipients may be subjected to procedures that cause serious suffering. Some such suffering may be caused by the social context of the research: for example, profit-oriented research groups may perceive the demands of humane treatment of animals as obstacles to winning the race, not moral necessities. Even in the best circumstances, some suffering may be unavoidable: surgery causes pain, and drugs can cause a variety of seriously unpleasant symptoms. Donor animals may also suffer because of the conditions necessary for producing safe organs. To maintain a sterile environment, infant animals will be delivered by cesarean and kept isolated, causing much emotional suffering in social animals like pigs. However, the primary moral question that arises for donor animals is whether they (morally) may be killed for their donations.

Many people, including some scientists, regard these as trivial concerns. Although most believe that avoidable animal suffering and death should be prevented, their overriding concern is human welfare. Others believe that it could be morally acceptable to painlessly kill animals for human welfare, but that our aims do not justify animal suffering. Still others believe that it is wrong to do to animals what one wouldn"t do to humans.
Nargiza

Pro

First of all, transplantation of animal organs can decrease the level of human organs black market. Nowadays, there is huge black market in human organs, which creates big problems, because it is killing of people and making money for criminal world . Italy"s newspaper La Reppublica has recently carried an article about the growing sales of human organs. According to their information people from middle class who get mortgage loans in banks, sells their organs in order to pay for it, because they doesn"t have any other choice, or they are thinking that they doesn"t have. In the top of their list of risk there are Russia, Estonia and Moldavia, all the post-Soviet countries . As they states there is a big opportunity for black market appearance in other neighboring regions. There is also another example when one boy in China sold a kidney in order to buy iPAD . If such situation would be under control, such terrible event would never happen. Unfortunately because of high demand for this material it is impossible to control the situation. Using of cheap animal"s organs will create competition with the black market. Animal"s organs cheaper than humans, as a result because the price in "legal market" is less than in the black, moreover there are guarantees of safety which is giving by state hospital and state by itself, people will prefer to use legal ways of getting organs. As a result the black market will decrease, and human killing or desecration of dead people"s bodies will stopped. Legal transplantation is safety and have lower price than other sources, so it can create real competition and after all using of black market will decrease.
Debate Round No. 1
Ainura

Con

However, Xenotransplantation is very dangerous for human health because of the risk of getting disease. For example, Thomas Starzl, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, in 1992 and 1993 did two operations of transplanting baboon livers into two patients with hepatitis. Both of them died after operation. According to John Fung, a member of Starzl's team, the reason of death patients was from everyday bacteria and fungal infections. And it is not the only case when human dies after transplanting for him or her animal organs because human"s organism not always accept animal organs very well. As it is known, there is virus from pigs, named "swine flu". This is one more argument to not to use swine organs for human transplantation. There is possibility of creation of new viruses, because we will use animal"s organs and blood. It can create new illness, which still is not known. As a result, new pandemic disease can appear (UBM Medica Australia, 2003). Nowadays xenotransplantation is only in process of its formatting and till this process won"t be discussed clearly in the scientific way it shouldn"t be used. There are many questions which should be discussed and many problems to solve. The process of transplantation is not perfect, as it was shown on the examples.
Nargiza

Pro

many people need vitals to live, but there are not enough human organs to transplantation. Using animal organs is one of the best solutions to this problem, including the fact that it is much cheaper than human organs transplantation. Xenotransplantation is the best alternative to save lives of people who need new organs in their organisms in any case it can give the hope for men. According to Bruce Agnew (1999), there is an example of transplanting bone marrow from baboon to human . This experiment was done in 1995 by Suzanne Ildstad, director of the Institute for Cellular Therapeutics in Louisville, Kentucky studies bone-marrow transplantation. Jeff Getty, over who this operation was undergone, was living till 2006. Pig is the most likely source of transplantable organs because their organs have the right size and pigs grow to maturity faster than chimpanzees. Pigs can be raised in sterile environments an have less diseases. People can grow pigs for their organs and use them. So, it is easier to find a pig"s or another animal"s organ in the city than human"s, and moreover it can help to people, they will stop wait and get what they really need. In addition, chimpanzees have genome which is more than 98 percent identical with the human genome. According to investigation, there are nearly 550,000 Americans with heart disease every year and more than 50,000 of them die while waiting for heart transplants . It is pity because at the same time those people can use animal"s organs and get some hope for future, but at the moment they are just dying. In addition, according to non-official research, which is called "Should animal-to-human organ transplants be allowed?" majority (69%) of respondents of asked people (1185 people were interviewed) answered positively . These show us that democratically (by using sampling) people choose using of animal organs for saving human lives, so it is the first indicator of importance of this issue. Finally it shows that majority of people wants to use it in order to save lives of other people.
Debate Round No. 2
Ainura

Con

In Western societies, the first perspective predominates. Huge industries cater to our appetite for meat " several pounds a week per person in North America " and vegetarianism is the exception. Western societies also tolerate the widespread testing of drugs and cosmetics on animals, and leather and fur products are popular. But as we all know in our more introspective moments, accepted social practices don"t necessarily reflect considered moral judgments.

In the last few years, because of my concerns about animals, the environment and health, my introductory ethics classes have examined the case for vegetarianism, and it has been fascinating to watch the changes in students" attitudes. Once they understand the meat economy, most acknowledge that it rests on important moral choices, and some become vegetarians. This point is not intended to do an end run around the sophisticated philosophical debates on this topic, but rather to suggest that there is less moral authority than might seem in the apparently commonsense retort about animal welfare, "Well, we eat them, don"t we?"

A less emotionally gripping but still pressing question is the extent to which we morally may tinker with animals" genetic endowments. Discussion of this matter is much less well-developed than the ones about animal suffering and killing.

It is important to notice that no moral conclusions about animals are scientific. That is, they depend on judgments about values, not about which means are best for achieving a particular goal. Scientists may be in a position to help the public understand what is at issue, but have no special expertise in deciding how best to reason about competing values. Because these judgments implicate fundamental and deeply-held beliefs, there needs to be full, honest, public discussion about what is proposed. This has not yet occurred.
Nargiza

Pro

In conclusion it should be noticed that many scientist and people believe that transplants should be used to save people life. As it was shown before, there is a real fact that there is shortage of human organs and a lot of people do not get help in the time. Animal"s organs are more spread and it can help to those people, so, the most important thing is to save human"s lives, because it is very important just to give the hope for people who are in big trouble without any hope for tomorrow. Of course there a big problem, that these organs will not be adopted by human organism and it will lead to the death. Or another possible problem that some new illness will appear and it will create danger situation. But, nevertheless, with the time humanity will be able to prevent all possible threats and if this science can give a hope it have to be used.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.