SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Here, you guys can debate over this: Is transplantion(of organs) really ethical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Yes, yes it is. (you wanna give us more to go on?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 Fine, do you believe that the transplantation method is unethical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob000555 Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Is there any reson taking from the dead ,with their permission, to save the living would be unethical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 Yeah, considering that half the population is living with an organ that their bodies could reject at any point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 nope, i signed up as an organ donor. after i'm dead they can do whatever the hell they like with the bits leftover. i won't need them any more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 What if doctors can't use the organs because they can't find a recipient with your blood type? Do the doctors just let the organs rot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Fine, do you believe that the transplantation method is unethical?That's a bit vauge, there are different methods for transplanting different organs.And to be honest, I don't see how any method could be more or less ethical than other, choosing a method is generally just selecting the most efficient/convenient means to the same end. Yeah, considering that half the population is living with an organ that their bodies could reject at any point.You got a source for that?What if doctors can't use the organs because they can't find a recipient with your blood type? Do the doctors just let the organs rot?Well, yes, pretty much, sometimes it'll get used for research. Transplants aren't always possible but that doesn't affect the ethical implications of when they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 My friend Elizabeth, has a transplanted kidney. Her body almost rejected it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 well if they are left to rot in the body they don't stand a chance of helping anyone. if they are transplanted then the could extend someones life by a couple years possibly decades with new anti rejection drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 Yes, I do have a source for that information, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. The Post Gazette actually took the information from some national organ transplantion foundation. Yeah, what if the organ they were given was transplanted previously into someone else, but that person's body rejected it, would the organ be able to be retransplanted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob000555 Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 What if doctors can't use the organs because they can't find a recipient with your blood type? Do the doctors just let the organs rot? Is that why the list of people needing an organ is so long? most people stay on the list for years before the get to the top. edit: dont doble post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 I guess, I don't know Another debatable question: Is cloning ethically right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Yes, I do have a source for that information, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette. The Post Gazette actually took the information from some national organ transplantion foundation.Some foundation? Have you been in a debate before?Another debatable question: Is cloning ethically right?Pretty much not a debatable question because the word "cloning" covers so many things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Another debatable question: Is cloning ethically right? don't shift gears so quickly. At SFN, we like to try and keep 1 topic per thread as a guideline. As for organ rejection: isn't it better to have a chance an organ will be rejected rather than no organ at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob000555 Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 What if doctors can't use the organs because they can't find a recipient with your blood type? Do the doctors just let the organs rot? 88,000 people are wating for organs none will go to waste http://www.organtransplants.org/understanding/unos/ SCIGENIUS: thats 2 doble posts i one topic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 sorry guys, double posting, my fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carol Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 I can't think of a single reason why transplantation of organs should be considered unethical. When a person dies, his body will just return to dust. So, instead of letting it go to waste, why not let somebody make use of its parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 This is silly. Scigenius, please elaborate on your replies, and stick to one topic per thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glider Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 The possibility of rejection is not an ethical question, it's a medical problem. It would be an ethical question of the possibility of rejection was not revealed to the patient prior to transplant, or if there were a better alternative that was being withheld. A real ethical issue surrounding organ transplant is the idea of selling organs (i.e. placing monetary value on them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequence Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Nothing wrong with it, I'm sixteen and I'm a donor. I don't need the heart for anything if I'm dead. and if someone else can live, thats great. If they can't use it for a transplant, use it in research to teach the next generation of surgeons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Well this isn't much fun, so let me throw a wrench in the gears... I can see an ethical issue because those parts make me. If I'm dead, I still want my parts, because no one knows what happens when we die. What if we need them for the next level of existence? You could be killing people in their next life cycle before they even get started because you're robbing parts they need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCIGENIUS Posted November 15, 2006 Author Share Posted November 15, 2006 Finally! ParanoiA, why do you agree with me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the tree Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 If I'm dead, I still want my parts,That's where the "donor" bit comes in. Currently organs are not taken with the prior consent of their previous owner (or parental consent).What if we need them for the next level of existence?That is a pretty big "what if", on the same level why don't we bury people with all their possessions?Finally! ParanoiA, why do you agree with me?He is a agreeing with you? In what sense? You haven't yet presented an argument, an opinion, a hypothesis, a relevant statement... what is there to agree with? As for why, as best I can tell, he is playing Devil's Advocate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Finally! ParanoiA, why do you agree with me? I don't. Just trying to apply some critical thinking to the thread since everyone seems to be agreeing with each other. I don't know really how thought out it is, but I like to challenge things at their core. If what you believe is really true, then it should prevail. If you haven't questioned everything you believe every few years, then you're long overdue. To me, it starts with absurdity like this... That's where the "donor" bit comes in. Currently organs are not taken with the prior consent of their previous owner (or parental consent). But isn't there a moral distinction between giving consent when all of the consequences are known or not known? If I don't know about the spaghetti monster being the supreme god over all gods and that he requires everyone in the next level of existence to have both kidneys or else I burn for eternity in molten hot spaghetti sauce, then I'm not making an educated decision. That is a pretty big "what if", on the same level why don't we bury people with all their possessions? Finally! the tree, why do you agree with me? Just kidding. I'm not even sure I can really play devil's advocate on this one. My heart just isn't in it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now