Recently the first transplant of a human face was completed.
I happened to find it rather interesting for a number of reasons.
Recently when my son was in the Cleveland Clinic, I read an article displayed in a glass case along one of the miles of corridors within the world-famous facility. The article was written by a doctor. She wrote of how it was possible but almost forbidden in medical communities because of the ethical questions swirling around the procedure.
She was a proponent of face transplants. She felt that if a disfigured person wanted it, they should be granted the opportunity for a somewhat normal life.
The controversy does not, as I understood it, have much of anything to do with the riskiness of the procedure beyond the risks associated with any transplant including tissue rejection, but rather the potential after-affects on the patient, the patient's family and friends.
It seems that we humans can't get past the idea that there is a person beneath the face, that the face is not the person but the facade of the person. There is basically widespread fear within the medical community they "we/they" are going to0 far, creating a possible rejection of the patient by the family and friends, or perhaps even by the patient himself or herself.
Kinda hard to get your head around...
Its now been done in France to a woman who had tried to commit suicide and while unconcious was viciously malled by her dog as I recall the story...which is a story unto itself, I guess.
At any rate, I throw this down...
Is there a line beyond which no one should go with medicine?
If it is between a willing donor and a willing recipeint, I don't guess I have a problem with it. The donor will likely be dead, so they won't be using the face anymore.
__________________
You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride!
It is interesting to know that she attempted suicide and then a dog ate her face...Listening to the media, that little snippet of information has been convieniently left out...All I've heard before now is; A dog ate her face and she has had a new one installed and she has taken up smoking.
The answer to your base question is: I don't think that there are limits as to the things that are possable in medicine. Technology and morality are the two inhibitors to the things that may one day be possable.
Technology is the one factor that is-what-it-is, and will develop over time becausethat is simply the nature of technology...It will improve.
Morality, on the other hand, is the item to be debated. The whole topic of morality boils down to one issue. That is, What would God want us to do.
Some people have a very limited view of that answer, while others have a very broad view of that answer.
I personally feel that God gave us a brain and opposing thumbs for a reason...And that is to use them. I have no qualms with medical science progressing and exploring new and wonderfull paths.
I don't see anything morally wrong with the procedure whatsoever. You can strip a face off one person and put it on another, but the face will not look the same as it did on the donor because of a different bone structure. The whole idea that its going to effect a person, their family, and friends is a moot point when you consider what a person looks like after their entire face has been inflicted with 3rd degree burns. Quality of life trumps any socialogical concerns, especially when noone was harmed as a result of the transplant. I have coworkers who have had cadaver ligaments installed in their knees giving them an opportunity to live a normal life, I don't see any difference between this and having a fubar face replaced.
I kind of inferred that the woman had committed suicide. The news people had said that she took sleeping pills to 'forget all of her troubles' which sounded like a euphamism for suicide to me. I'm betting that she had one of those foofoo dogs, I'm one who believes that the nature of dogs is far better than the nature of most of humankind and that they won't eat your face when you are unconscious- with the exception of the devil spawned miniature dogs.
There is a cosmetic sugeon in Wisconsin that is watching this one very carefully. He's very experienced and says that he would have no problem with doing the procedure himself, but current laws forbid him from doing so.
__________________
Obamanfreude - 1. taking pleasure from the misfortunes of an Obama supporter as he or she is adversely affected by the policies of their Dear Leader.
Well I'm not going to argue the ethical issues of a facial transplant because unless you've walked in the shoes of someone severley disfigured I imagine its hard to understand. However, this woman was drugged out of her mind when she was attacked by her dog, and now she's back to chain smoking as a big Thank You to the doctors who've tried to help her. Smoking, which is one of the worst things for tissue transplant people.
Okay, I will get a little into the ethical side of this. Its not simply a transplant, the person must continue to take drugs all their lives to keep their bodies from rejecting the transplant. Doesn't that sound strange ? Having to trick and fool your own body to accept something it doesn't want so you can live ?
Where to draw the line? Well in the cases where both parties are willing in the case of a face transplant, I have no problem as long as it is to deal with a severe injury or defect.
Drawing the line... to me if and when cosmetic surgery reaches the point (and it will) where it can take someone who is 90 and cosmetically they can be made to look 30 that is going to far. This is just my opinion, cosmetic surgery for a more youthful look or larger breast is BS. Cosmetic surgery should be limited to correcting/concealing scars and birth defects.
Growing someone a new liver from their own cells or the like I have no problem with, selling organs is BS, donating them is fine.
__________________
The Tazman aka Martin Price
Proud father of a Devil Dog
Quality of life trumps any socialogical concerns, especially when noone was harmed as a result of the transplant.
Dave590
Quote:
I personally feel that God gave us a brain and opposing thumbs for a reason...And that is to use them. I have no qualms with medical science progressing and exploring new and wonderfull paths.
North Texan
Quote:
If it is between a willing donor and a willing recipeint, I don't guess I have a problem with it. The donor will likely be dead, so they won't be using the face anymore.
The Mind
Quote:
Having to trick and fool your own body to accept something it doesn't want so you can live ?
Tazmeister
Quote:
...to me if and when cosmetic surgery reaches the point (and it will) where it can take someone who is 90 and cosmetically they can be made to look 30 that is going to far.
Briman's benchmark is the quality of life. I can agree with that.
Dave590 essentially says let it go where it will go because it should and it will eventually anyway. I can agree with that.
The Mind raises valid questions about the nature of nature itself and says in a way, that its not nice to fool mother nature. I can agree with that.
Tazman draws the line at using medicine for vanity. I can agree with that.
But...
"The quality of life" means different things to different people.
What would God want us to do" is subject to an entire spectrum of interpretations as seen in the fierce debates and widely varying interpretations of what should or should not be done with cloning.
Aspirin "tricks and fools" the body as do a variety of pain killers, etc. Or is pain a different type of agony when compared to disfigurement?
If "growing someone a new liver from their own cells" is OK, but using someone else's cells is not, is there not a conflict with accepting the cells of others by way of the transplanting of entire organs? Further, what is a "birth defect?" Is it a child with a nose or mouth that is otherwise perfectly functional but so crooked that the child is abused and mocked to the point of dysfunctional distraction? What then is "normal?"
Aspirin "tricks and fools" the body as do a variety of pain killers, etc. Or is pain a different type of agony when compared to disfigurement?
What is pain VC ? Nothing more than nerve ending sending electrical impulses to the brain warning that something isn't right.
That is totally different than the body's entire immune system attacking a foreign object and trying to repel it from the body. Its rejection, its the body knowing its not suppose to be there, and drugs being administered to make it be there anyway.
Briman's benchmark is the quality of life. I can agree with that.
I agree with that also, but to me there is a distinct difference between quality of life due to being dissappointed in how one has aged or the nose God gave them in thier personal view of thier quality of life and the improvement in the quality of ones life due to disease, injury, or defect.
Quote:
Dave590 essentially says let it go where it will go because it should and it will eventually anyway. I can agree with that.
What about cloning, not of organs, but entire individuals?
Quote:
The Mind raises valid questions about the nature of nature itself and says in a way, that its not nice to fool mother nature. I can agree with that.
Are we not already fooling mother nature on a regular basis with modern medicine?
Quote:
Or is pain a different type of agony when compared to disfigurement?
Of course it is different, it is physically felt, disfigurement can cause physical pain, but when involving how one appears to the world the mental anguish when one is viewed as a freak or with pity due to ones appearance can be just as devestating to ones quality of life that has nothing to do with vanity.
Quote:
If "growing someone a new liver from their own cells" is OK, but using someone else's cells is not, is there not a conflict with accepting the cells of others by way of the transplanting of entire organs?
To clarify what I originaly said, I personaly do not have a problem with either.
Quote:
What then is "normal?"
The million dollar question!!
In my opinion visually normal is when one is capable of walking down the street without people staring at them due to some sort of deformity, scar or feeling pity for them due to an obvious disfigurement.
Physical normalcy is a horse of a different color, it can be totally invisible to the eye yet be totally debilitating, someone with a severe heart defect may be incapable of walking up a flight of steps without having to stop and rest, then of course there is diabetes and numerous other problems that the majority of people do not suffer from.
What is normal for me may not be what someone else views as normal.
I have always felt that some folks have 2 different views of what is normal... one for them selves and one for others! Vanity is what drives their self normalcy standards, I am 52 and have turned almost entirely grey, I have been that way since I was in my late 30's, it has always amzed me the number of guys I know who ask me why I don't dye it? The main reason is I am perfectly happy with it, I am not 20 years old any more and have no need to fool myself or any one else about that, if one does not like the way I look the can kiss my posterior!
__________________
The Tazman aka Martin Price
Proud father of a Devil Dog
Face me
