breeding of anencephalic humans for organ transplants

Post Reply New Topic

(note to moderators: i believe i'm with in the rules. It is not unethical, no one suffers, a lot of people benefit.)

Anencephaly: is a congenital malformation, in witch the baby is born with no brain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anencephaly

So basically, they are brain dead. They are incapable of suffering, actually they are incapable of experiencing anything. They aren't human, they have no rights. They are just human biological material. They are property.

The anencephalic have many potential application.
Organ transplants
surrogate mothers
scientific experimentation
Doctor training
etc....

production:
We use the anencephalic humans them selves, to produce more of them.

Female anencephalics are artificially fertilized by male anencephalics, and the fetuses will be also anencephalic. We block the development of the brain at a genetic level, they never have a brain, we don't remove there brain.

Abortion is alredy legal in various jurisdictions. Historically, people even practiced infanticide. The jump from abortion to induce anencephaly is not that great.Of course, the field should be regulated by government to avoid abuse.

We apply selective breading to select for desirable traits or other genetic engineering. For example, we could remove all the genes that code the brain. We could select individuals that survive with less external artificial support. Select individuals that grow faster, etc......
I believe using the word eugenics in this contest is absurd. It's absolutely not what eugenics is suppose to do.

More details about my views on my blog

http://thechurchofthequantumimmortal.blogspot.be/2010/12/human-sea-squirt.html

I discussed it with doctor friends.
Some where shocked. Others said it was a good idea, but they didn't want to get involved with it.
My mother is pro-life(yes she is), .... and said that she wasn't opposed (yes she isn't!) O.o (What!? It doesn't compute), and that i shouldn't discuss the idea with any one(yea right).

This post, contrary to what is customary in this thread , has a serious purpose. It's not just an innocent discussion. I'll try to start an Internet movement to promote politically the idea.

Like the page.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Breeding-of-anencephalic-humans-for-organ-transplants/538324829533711

I'll cook more stuff up in the following months. PM me if you are interested, i'll need motivated people, and support.

P.S.
If you are outraged, i'll be respectful of you're views. I remind you, this is a moderated forum.

Last edited by Quantum_Immortal on 04 Feb 2013, 11:15 am, edited 3 times in total.

What an idea! It is so godamned Evil!

ruveyn

There's no victim!
Whose the victim?

That will be totally unnecessary by the time the technology exists. Huge strides are being made with adult stem cells to make a single organ out of your own DNA and won't require the use of immune suppressant drugs.

I have no objections to the topic being discussed. My only objection is that you would want to use these people for culinary purposes by making them into bread.

The principle of depriving a human being of its brain is rather ungood.

If particular organs can be grown in a vat, that is one thing. Then there is no person to be destroyed.

But growing a baby and scooping its brains out is rather nasty.

ruveyn

We'll be dead by old age before that happens. That includes you.
I have some doubts that the technology will be able to produce a functioning organs with in our life times.
I believe steam cells are a fad, they are over hyped, and the difficulties understated.
It's like fusion. We are still waiting for fusion power to come.
It will not help people for the next..... 30 years at least.
The anencephalic can give results immediately, with certainty.

You need a Ph.d or two for stem cells. Even illiterate peasants succeeded in selective breading animals.
Most probably the cost will be very high. Not for every one.

A straight line, is not always the shorted root to a destination.

You can manufacture immune systems that are tolerant of the receiver antigens. The immature immune system of a fetus considers as self anything that it detects, before some age.
At the worse, you can just replace vital organs as they brake down from.
You'll only need to research this issue, and things about nerves.
With steam cells, you have to do everything from scratch.

And other arguments....

I have long dreamt of making several clones of myself. Then keeping the clones jacked up on cinderblocks in my backyard so i can mine them for spare parts for myself -to keep myself healthiy in my old age.You know-be the redneck Dr. Frankenstien.

There would be problems. You would have to care, feed, and even entertain your clones. Then there is the possibility that they might get uppity and take over, and even start to mine ME for spare parts.

But wow- your scheme circumvents a lot of these problems!

Its diabolical!

Read what i'm saying. We prevent the brain from developing. We remove nothing. You understand the difference? There's nothing to remove. They even lack a major part of the skull and scalp.

The neural tube normally closes at the top during neurulation, 23-27 day. Then the tip gets morphed in the brain. It is literally blown like a balloon, fluid is pushed inside. Then it starts folding and other cell migration.

In anencephaly, the top fails to close. The tip isn't blown, because there's a gaping whole in it. All other stages for the formation of the brain never happen.

The cells aren't yet very differentiated. They aren't any neurons yet.

The idea of breeding such people isn't new in itself. There was a recent sci fi movie (forgotten the name now) where rich people could have themselves cloned as part of a medical insurance policy but their clone would be grown (supposedly) without a brain. However, the reality was that the clones had fully functional brains and lived in a small underground city until the patron required their organs. The city had a fake lottery and those who won supposedly left the city to go to a desert island paradise but in reality it was to their death. Good film.

The basis of that old movie "Coma" too. Where coma patients were kept hidden away and used for organ transplants.

In one way you could argue that humans bred without brains could humanely be used for organ transplants, but it would be a big ethical bridge to cross and could be the slippery slope into much worse practices. There is already a thriving trade in the black market of organs stolen from victims murdered to order and the practice of poor people selling a kidney for financial gain. Is it in China that prisoners on death row have their organs harvested anyway? Very dodgy territory.

Why diabolical?
They are no victims, they can't experience anything. They never had a brain.
We didn't remove there brain, we prevented it from developing. You understand the distinction?

Would you refuse a transplant from them?

I don't see who gets hurt!

The Island.

I think i see what film you are talking about. I don't remember the title, i never saw it. I didn't know about these plot details.
EDIT: Just read the plot, now i know why i didn't bother to watch it. Any way, i think there's quite a distance from my idea.

In practice it's always a mess to have slaves.

My idea goes a step further however.

The problems you are describing, are happening right now. My idea is innocent in this. I believe, the problems you are describing will be reduced.

We could argue, that the availability of good quality, cheap, commercially and ethically grown human organs, ready for transplantation, will render the current mafia irrelevant. The governments should regulate the market and avoid abuse. Why would anyone shell out 100.000€ for a stolen heart, go and buy it from a mafia, with uncertain quality, with huge penalties if caught etc...?

These are not fake rolexes. You can die.

It's like when abortion is legalized. Why would you go to a back alley abortionist if its legal?
Similarly, with decriminalized drugs. Why by Dodgy illegal stuff when you have a legit market?

You also need to balance, the lives saved with the potential lives lost from illegal practices. I believe the end result is overwhelmingly positive.
What the ratio will be? Probably well bellow 1% .

The "slippery slope" argument is abusive in my opinion. It can be spinned to say no to anything. It's up to future generations to watch out. We can't anticipate everything that will happen in the future.

I am completely against it. To create any kind of human being for the sole purpose of harvesting organs goes against God and nature, in my opinion. Just because science can do something doesn't always mean it should, and this is one of those cases.

define human?

In a species of sea slugs, when they meat, they try to rape each other (hermaphrodites). At the same time they try to cut each other's penises.
So yea, i have no ethical problem what so ever in being unnatural.

I'm an atheist. So i'm not sure how to respond to the God part.
I could simply say, that am an atheist, i believe there's no God, no soul. We are just a chemical machine. I don't believe, or see that it harms any one, and that's good enough for me. Its a matter of using technology responsibly.