On Jan. 26, the scientific journal “Cell” published a paper describing human stem cells that were injected into a pig embryo. An international team of researchers led by the Salk institute successfully developed the embryo for four weeks before terminating the experiment — making it the longest living of its kind. While this advent is is a breakthrough for scientists addressing a worldwide organ shortage, some critics have expressed concerns regarding the possibility of animals developing human organs. What do you think of this recent development, and do you believe the possible benefits of this technology outweigh the moral concerns one may have?

Abraham Cheloff ’18

The ability to not only inject but also develop human stem cells in another model organism is a giant step forward in the race to create organs, as opposed to waiting for a match. If scientists are able to expand this research to the extent that adult stem cells could be used, we would have a negligible rejection rate and easier access to organs at the time of need. However, growing animals for organ harvest provides the same ethical dilemmas as growing them for slaughter. It is hard to see where the line will be drawn. For instance, if a neurodegenerative patient has human neurons grown in a pig, but by the time the neurons are ready for harvest the pig has developed human-like capabilities such as thinking and feeling, would we still be willing to harvest those neurons? This shouldn’t end scientific advancement, but we must be cautious.

Abraham Cheloff ’18 is a Biology Undergraduate Departmental Representative. He is also a teacher’s assistant for General Biology Lab and does undergraduate research in the Miller Lab.

Ricky Brathwaite ’17

I do agree that there are some ethical dilemmas; however, the ends justify the means in this case. The implications this novel research can have are unfathomable. The benefits for sure outweigh any ethical dilemmas that I have seen presented. Like the article said, “Every 10 minutes a person is added to the national waiting list for organ transplants. And every day, 22 people on that list die without the organ they need.” Currently, there are more than 122,000 people on the waitlist for any particular organ in the United States alone. I don’t see how people can stand by and think this is alright. If you aren’t going to do something about saving these people’s lives, then why halt, criticize and denounce those who are willing to?

Ricky Brathwaite ’17 is a teacher’s assistant for General Biology Lab and the vice president of the Society for the Advancement of Chicanos/Hispanics and Native Americans in Science.

Prof. Paul Miller (BIO)

If someone has a heart transplant, do they end up loving the donor’s spouse? No, because our ability to love depends on our brains, not our hearts. It is coordinated neural activity across our brains that gives rise to consciousness, which is the most important aspect of being human. Unfortunately, my own church has mistakenly made the attribution of full human rights depend upon the relative location of specific molecules of DNA rather than on the capacity for consciousness, which makes us full humans with spiritual potential. So the important question becomes: “Is a conscious being harmed?” A group of cells is not conscious, nor can any organ other than the brain give rise to consciousness. If the chimeras develop more fully, then the answerable question will be “Do they have porcine or human brains?” If porcine, then harvesting them for human organs to save lives is more ethical than the current practice of harvesting pigs for non-essential meat.

Prof. Paul Miller (BIO) is an Associate Professor of Biology.

Prof. Benjamin Sherman (PHIL)

A common objection to such experiments runs something like this: Growing human organ inside a pig is wrong because it is unnatural to combine species in this way. It is true that, in the wild, human organs do not grow inside pigs. But that is not much of an objection. Every new technology is something that did not previously appear in nature. There may well be ethical problems, but they are mostly familiar ones. We should consider how much suffering the experiments cause their subjects and whether the benefits are worth it. We should consider the risk of the new biotech altering the ecosystem. And we should carefully monitor how the human cells develop in pigs —if a pig fetus developed a human brain, for instance, that would raise some new ethical issues. I see nothing inherently wrong with the experiments, as long as they are conducted with sufficient care.

Prof. Benjamin Sherman (PHIL) is a Lecturer in Philosophy.

Prof. Alice Noble (HELLER)

My mother (and her family!) was a grateful recipient of a pig heart valve on three occasions, extending her life for over 30 years. Belmonte’s chimeras bring us one small step closer to a new source of transplantable human organs. But, does this new technology cross ethical lines that this tried and true technology does not? An ethical research agenda and goals are necessary for the appropriate application of this potentially transformative technology. These include: oversight of the integrity of the scientific process; transparency of scientific developments, such as that surrounding the human-pig chimera; respect for human and animal research subjects; a worthy research goal, such as overcoming disease; and promotion of social justice. Whether this research is ethical depends primarily on where it leads. Some foreseeable areas of concern include chimeric research that alters the central nervous system, potential transmission of zoonotic diseases or manipulations that influence offspring. Transparent weighing of these concerns and related risks should guide research.
The NIH should fund this developing research and an ongoing exploration of ethical issues, positioning the U.S. to set a global example.

Prof. Alice Noble (HELLER) is a Senior Lecturer in Legal Studies.