Better Science NEAVS' Position on Xenotransplants Xenotransplantation—transplanting cells, tissues or organs from one species into another species—began in earnest in the early 1900s. There have been many different attempts at xenotransplantation. In 1905, a French surgeon put pieces of rabbit kidneys into a child who died two weeks later. 1 In 1923, an American surgeon transplanted a lamb kidney into a human who died nine days later. 2 In 1964, another American surgeon transplanted a chimpanzee heart into a man who died two hours later. 3 In 1984 Leonard Bailey transplanted a baboon heart into newborn "Baby-Fae" in California — she died 20 days later. 4 In the entire history of xenotransplantation, there has never been a successful whole-organ animal to human transplant. 5 Most human xenograft recipients die anywhere from hours to weeks after receiving the animal organ. In this fact sheet, NEAVS will focus on cross-species organ transplantation. Why are scientists doing cross-species organ transplants? The majority of xenotransplant scientists claim they are doing it because of the shortage of human organs available for transplants. A group of scientists, physicians and surgeons brought together by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation states, "…researchers are constantly looking for ways to expand the number of donor organs that become available. While there is no question that human organs are best suited for humans, xenotransplantation research should be pursued…because animals, such as the pig, could [emphasis added] offer an unlimited supply of organs and allow the transplant procedures to be scheduled on an elective basis." 6 back to top >> How serious is the human organ shortage? And what can be done to address this shortage that is safer and better for humans than xenotransplantation? Although there is a severe organ donation shortage — the reason may not be due to a lack of organs. More public awareness of the organ donation crisis would help increase the number of organs available for transplant. At present, only about 20% of people who die healthy (e.g. in accidents, from violence, etc.) have arranged to donate their organs. 7 Additionally, many of the people receiving transplants have diseases that are preventable. For instance, it is estimated that 100,000 first-time heart attacks could be averted and $13 billion in medical costs could be saved by the year 2005 if Americans simply reduced their average saturated fat intake by as little as one to three percentage points. 8 The number of persons actually requiring transplants could be reduced by funding preventative healthcare programs advocating positive lifestyle measures such as not smoking, exercising regularly, and eating a healthful diet. Further, if the United States adopted laws similar to those of Austria, Spain, Belgium, and Singapore there would be a potential increase in the availability of human organs. In these nations, organ donation rates soared after "presumed consent" laws passed. Such laws assume that citizens will donate their organs after death unless they specifically "opt out." 9 In Sweden and Denmark similar "mandated choice" laws require citizens to indicate whether or not they want to donate their organs. These measures have increased donations by hundreds of thousands. 10 back to top >> What are the dangers of xenotransplantation? Putting animal parts into humans can expose the recipient to potentially deadly animal viruses. Such cross-species viruses could hurt not only the original recipient but could spread to humans worldwide. Dr. David Cooper, former transplant surgeon and president of the International Xenotransplantation Association, says, "The…concern is, are we going to do any harm by transferring infectious agents to the patient…[and] Then infect the community." 11 Even if scientists can screen for some viruses in animals there is always the potential for unknown viruses to exist and, therefore, to be missed by the screening. Also, through mutations, viruses can change from benign to harmful or even deadly. Finally, it is impossible to have completely pathogen-free animals. 12 Many viruses can cross-over from animals to humans, such as the hepadnavirus, papillomavirus, retrovirus, aterivirus, togavirus, adenovirus, hantavirus, and papovavirus. Viruses that have crossed-over from animals to humans have killed scores of people. For instance, in the 1950s the Asian flu killed a million people and in the late 1960s the Hong Kong flu killed 700,000. And it is thought that the 1918 Spanish flu that killed 20 million people was caused by a virus that was transmitted from animals to humans. 13 Nearly all transplanted organs, except those of identical twins, spur rejection by the recipient, even in allotransplants — organs transplanted between the same species. In xenotransplantation, the transplanted organ may cause hyperacute rejection — a severe, life-threatening rejection of the transplanted part and acute vascular rejection, an inflammation of blood vessels. Researchers have spent millions of dollars in developing transgenic pigs that have human "flags" on their cells in hopes that their organs will not be rejected, but these efforts so far have been completely unsuccessful. 14 back to top >> What are the financial costs of developing xenotransplantation? Xenotransplantation research is an expensive attempt to examine a risky and unethical enterprise. A noted scientist, Mae-Wan Ho says, "…it is bad science working together with big business for quick profit aided and abetted by our government…" 15 Some researchers, however, hope for a lucrative market and apparently ignore the risks and harm that xenotransplantation actually poses. Millions of taxpayer dollars are allocated for this research. The following are just a few of the federally-funded xenotransplant projects recently undertaken: $1,974,144 of federal funds in 2000 went to A.B. Cosimi at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) for research on swine and nonhuman primates. And in 2001 he received $2,028,495 for xenotransplantation research. 16 And David Sachs, also of MGH, received $1,481,206 federal dollars for xenotransplantation research. 17 $99,900 went to John Gibbons of ProLinia, Inc., in Athens, Georgia for "Novel Pig Cloning Procedures for Xenotransplantation." Gibbons writes, "The use of pigs as organ donors for humans is potentially a $6 billion market. ProLinia will play a niche role in developing xenotransplantation."18 The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute gave $113,853 to Moses Njenga of the University of Minnesota Twin Cities to examine the risk of a porcine (pig) virus in xenotransplantation. The research involves putting infected pig tissues into immunodeficient mice and in studying monkey-to-monkey and pig-to-monkey transplantations. 19 According to a May 2001 Boston Globe article, Massachusetts’ Immerge BioTherapeutics and Wisconsin’s Infigen will receive $1.7 million from the Commerce Department’s National Institute for Science and Technology in a joint venture to produce pigs for xenotransplantation. 20 back to top >>  What are some companies that are researching xenotransplantation? A partial list includes: Alexion Pharmaceuticals of Connecticut Biotransplant of Massachusetts (Imutran, a British company was bought out by Novartis and merged with Biotransplant) Genzyme Transgenics Corporation of Massachusetts Geron of California Infigen of Wisconsin Nextran Inc., a division of Baxter Healthcare Corporation of New Jersey back to top >> What is NEAVS’ position on xenotransplantation? NEAVS believes all xenotransplantation research should be permanently banned for the following reasons: Thousands of animals suffer and die for xenotransplant experimenters’ curiosity and greed. Over the years, baboons, chickens, chimpanzees, dogs, goats, monkeys, pigs, rabbits, rats, and other species have died in xenotransplant research. There is no guaranteed way to eliminate the possibility of a transmissible deadly cross-species virus that may cause a global human health catastrophe. Individual recipients die and their families suffer as a result of these medical failures. The United States is spending millions of dollars into developing risky and unsuccessful xenotransplant procedures. Meanwhile, certain health problems that are prevalent and can successfully be corrected go unaddressed. Approximately 43 million Americans are without health insurance coverage; 21 millions of Americans are turned away from under-funded, under-available smoking, alcohol, and drug treatment programs and facilities; industrial polluters of our environment, a major cause of illness and death to Americans each year, are allowed to operate with minimal if any adequate controls; and preventative health measures are under-utilized and under-encouraged. Major accomplishments in fighting human disease would be made if the government prioritized funding access to healthcare coverage and treatment facilities for all Americans, and promised all Americans freedom from industrially produced environmental toxins. Spending taxpayers' money to help develop the unpromising and even dangerous option of xenotransplantation when there are better and safer options already available is poor government spending and bad medicine. The push for cross-species organ transplants profits only those research and breeding facilities that will reap tremendous financial gain whether the project ultimately succeeds or fails. Meanwhile xenotransplantation promises to be a failure. Xenotransplantation offers nothing to the millions of Americans who have health concerns that could and should be addressed by non-animal based research and could and should be treated with better health care priorities. Xenotransplantation is neither good science nor good ethics and should be banned. back to top >> How can I help stop xenotransplant research and increase the human organ donor pool? Politely tell Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, that you want a ban on xenotransplant research and development for the reasons stated above. Secretary Tommy Thompson U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 200 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20201 Fax: 202-619-0257 Toll Free Tel: 1-877-696-6775 hhsmail@os.dhhs.gov Ask your congressional representative to introduce "presumed consent" legislation. For your senator: www.senate.gov/ contacting/index.cfm For your representative(s): www.house.gov/writerep Call 800-688-9889 to find the names of your legislators. The Honorable Representative __________ U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Become an organ donor. Contact the United Network for Organ Sharing/Coalition on Donation 1100 Boulders Parkway, Suite 700 Richmond, VA 23225-8770 Fax: 804-323-7343 Phone: 804-330-8620 coalition@unos.org www.shareyourlife.org Find out if your Motor Vehicle Registry allows you to register on your driver’s license to be an organ donor. In the U.S., you can find your state’s Registry contact information by going to: http://www.state.oh.us/odps/division/bmv/mv50.html Sign the Campaign for Responsible Transplantation’s online petition: www.crt-online.org/petition.html Minimize your chances of needing an organ transplant by adopting a healthy lifestyle. Don’t smoke; drink alcoholic beverages in moderation; exercise regularly; and, eat a low-fat vegetarian diet. —May 2001 back to top >> C. Ray Greek and Jean Swingle Greek, Sacred Cows and Golden Geese (New York: Continuum, 2000), 206.  back to article >> Tony Stark, Knife to the Heart: The Story of Transplant Surgery (UK: Macmillan, 1996) 233.  back to article >> Ibid., 158-162.  back to article >> Anon, "Grandstand Medicine", Nature Nov. 8, 1984.  back to article >> Medical Research Modernization Committee’s publication, Of Pigs, Primates, and Plagues.  back to article >> International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation press release December 15, 2000.  back to article >> Richard L. Worsnop, "Organ Transplants: Can the Number of Donors Be Increased?," CQ Researcher 5, August 11, 1995. back to article >> Gerry Oster, David Thompson, "Estimated Effects of Reducing Dietary Saturated Fat Intake on the Incident and Cost of Coronary Heart Disease in the US," Journal of the American Dietetic Association 96 (1996): 127-31.  back to article >> Ian Kennedy, et al., "The case for Presumed Consent in Organ Donation," The Lancet, May 30, 1996: 351.  back to article >> Moussa Awounda, "Swedish Organ-Donation Drive Set for Success," The Lancet, May 18, 1996: 347.  back to article >> Maggie Fox, "Too soon for animal-human heart transplants" The Hindustan Times, December 18 2000.  back to article >> Institute of Medicine’s 1996 Report  back to article >> Greek and Greek, 216.  back to article >> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/ shows/organfarm/etc/faqs.html  back to article >> The Unholy Alliance. The Ecologist Vol. 27, no.4, pp. 152-158.  back to article >> NIH’s Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects (CRISP)  back to article >> Ibid.  back to article >> Ibid.  back to article >> Ibid.  back to article >> Naomi Aoki, "Charlestown biotech in pig-clone venture" Boston Globe May 9, 2001.  back to article >> U.S. Census Bureau statistic for 1999.  back to article >>

Other NEAVS Fact Sheets: Benefits of Non-Animal Tests | Xenotransplants | Animal Welfare Act | Limitations of Animal Tests | Non-Animal Product Safety Test Alternatives << Back to Better Science  | Home

• Why are scientists doing cross-species organ transplants?
  
  
• How can I help stop xenotransplant research and increase the human organ donor pool?
  
  
• How serious is the human organ shortage? And what can be done to address this shortage that is safer and better for humans than xenotransplantation?
  
  
• What are the dangers of xenotransplantation?
  
  
• What are the financial costs of developing xenotransplantation?
  
  
• What are some companies that are
  researching xenotransplantation?
  
  
• What is NEAVS’ position on xenotransplantation?