h.ross.perot writes "Like a page from Larry Niven's Known Space series, here is a real report of criminals' organs being harvested for 'profit.' From the article: 'China is trying to move away from the use of executed prisoners as the major source of organs for transplants. According to the China Daily newspaper, executed prisoners currently provide two-thirds of all transplant organs. The government is now launching a voluntary donation scheme, which it hopes will also curb the illegal trafficking in organs.
But analysts say cultural bias against removing organs after death will make a voluntary scheme hard to implement.'"
I think that it would be a waste NOT to use these organs. The prisoners will be executed either way, might as well make them contribute some good to society to offset whatever they were sentenced to death for. There is a possible conflict of interest, though, if the judges start getting paid off to sentence people to death...
Yes, I've read that in China corporations can set up factories in prison camps and the prisoners will be forced to work for free. Apparently, the prison guards of some of these camps actually go and arrest people specifically when a larger workforce is needed. If there's profit in people being arrested and imprisoned, then more people will be arrested and imprisoned.
The 13th Amendment of the American Constitution seemingly allows penal labour as it states that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime." Douglas A. Blackmon of the Wall Street Journal has argued that in the United States in the 19th century, after the abolition of slavery, government officials on behalf of business interests "enacted [laws] specifically to intimidate blacks, [and] tens of thousands of African Americans were arbitrarily arrested". This resulted in "neoslavery...[at] coal mines, lumber camps, brickyards, railroads, quarries and farm plantations" and "beatings and physical torture", as blacks were "hit with outrageous fines, and charged for the costs of their own arrests."[2]
Though the use of non-punitive prison labour is not generally controversial if the labour in question serves the public good, is done for sound penological reasons, and is not excessive, cruel, unusual, inhumane, degrading, or humiliating, a significant amount of controversy has arisen with regards to the use of prison labour if the prison in question is privatized, a phenomenon present in a few areas of the United States.[6] As of 2000, privatized prisons incarcerate approximately 3.1% of the prison population within the US, or 62,000 inmates, out of a total incarcerated population of 2 million,[6] and of these privatized prisons, the vast majority use prisoners as a labour force for purposes of avoiding costs, or producing salable goods and services, and thus enhancing the profit of the corporation running them.
I guess China gets all the flak because they must be doing it in an cruel, inhumane, and exploitative manner, since everyone knows they're all dirty subhuman Reds.
China is actually a lot more restrained than Iran.
So what? That's not even like hailing a turd for being the least smelly in the park. It's like hailing it for being only the second most smelly as opposed to the worst.
Why do you think those "reality shows" and afternoon "talk shows" are so popular? Because they show real life and because they give you a real impression of other people's lives, because people are actually genuinely interested how others are doing? Bullcrap. They're popular because they give people someone to point at and say "Gee, I'm not that good... but I'm still way better than them!". It makes people feel good because they can look down at someone and feel good about themselves because they're not as bad off as someone else. I have no job but at least I have fewer bottles lying around in my living room than that bum there. My son smokes and drinks, but at least he's not a deadbeat like that boy at Super Nanny.
Aspiring to something bigger would require work. Looking down at someone else is much easier.
The whole WMD deal struck me as kinda odd. I mean, it was like the school bully having the new kid at his collar and threatening him to punch the living crap out of him if he didn't hand over his lunch money while the poor kid was yelling and begging because he doesn't have any, while some obnoxious 5th grader (i.e. Li'l Kim) was jumping around them yelling "Look at me, look at me, I have some, I have some!"
Makes me guess it wasn't about the lunch money but because the new kid had braces or something.
China is actually a lot more restrained than Iran.
Not in terms of executions.
In 2008, China is purported to have performed 1,718 out of the 2,390 reported executions in the entire world. 72% is a pretty significant chunk. Iran's #2 with 346 (14%). Then again, China has not been reported to still be executing minors; Iran still does. (Source: Amnesty International [amnestyusa.org])
In 2008, China is purported to have performed 1,718 out of the 2,390 reported executions in the entire world. 72% is a pretty significant chunk. Iran's #2 with 346 (14%).
I would not want to condone state-sanctioned murder in China, Iran or anywhere else. However, in a discussion about the relative "restraint"... cough... if China vs Iran, of what possible relevance can the figure of percentage of world-wide executions be?
A more meaningful metric would be something like number of executions per 100,000
Fair enough. As of 2008's CIA estimate, China has 1,330,044,544 people and Iran has 65,875,224, making the execution rates 1.29 per million in China and 5.25 per million in Iran.
For fun, I ran the numbers on the next three highest (and consistantly highest) capital states. Saudi Arabia, with 27,601,038 people and 102 executions, has 3.70 per million. The USA, with 304,059,724 people and 37 executions, has 0.12. Pakistan, with 172,800,048 people and 36 executions, has 0.21.
Minors have been executed in Texas within the last decade. Even GITMO had minors in there. We can't really play the comparison game here especially since we could always call up Myanmar or North Korea where we can only speculate. We also can not argue from a position of moral superiority without looking stupid. We can only really argue whether execution is right, wrong, or the usual justification of execution (or borrowing North Korean torture methods designed to prepare people for show trials) - sometimes. Now the organ issue I'm not so worried about since I've registered as an organ donor. The real worry would be if it becomes a new vector for corruption and people are getting killed to get their organs.
Iran is -barely- the size of a single state in terms of people.
Huh? The poster above used CIA figures to show Iran has over 65 million people. What state do you live in that has more than 65 million people? California has just over 35 million and it's the largest.
For reference [wikipedia.org]. Using that chart, Iran has a population larger than the last 21 states combined.
Not a single woman was executed,
Again, huh? Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, 11 women have been executed in this country. In fact, the last woman to be executed was in 2005 in Texas. If you're counting only federal executions, two women have been executed: Ethel Rosenberg and Bonnie Brown Heady.
If there are judges sentencing innocent kids to jail time for kickbacks, then I don't think it's a stretch to assume it would happen with death row inmates and organs. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html?_r=2&hp [nytimes.com]
I think that it would be a waste NOT to use these organs. The prisoners will be executed either way, might as well make them contribute some good to society to offset whatever they were sentenced to death for.
Assuming that the execution method does not damage the organs in question.
Except that a lot of executed people are innocent, like the members of Falun Gong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falungong [wikipedia.org] Basically, it's a large sect, which teaches QiGong.
Repression is very hard, and Falun Gong members are sent to prison, and a lot of them have been executed to grab their body parts. I guess that because they practice qigong, they are healthy and provide nice body parts.
Funnily, China government said that Falun Gong was a dangerous sect, probably because you risk your life by following this
I mean, "ghoul" comes to mind, but it's the only one that comes close.
They are parting people out for profit. Literal chop-shops for human bodies. It's a proposition only the most extreme horror movies have touched. It's the walking definition of Capital-E Evil.
You have to remember there have been three parts to the accusations. They just ADMITTED to the first one.
1. That the Chinese were selling organs of condemned prisoners, which they've always denied until now, and 2. That many of these people were conde
I dunno why everbody is suddenly surprised, it has been known for quite a long time that China harvest organs from death row prisoner (end of 90 local china group were claimoring it, 2000 some major paper reported it, and I assume by then many state department knew it), what is NEW is that they admitted it *NOW* and want to introduce ethical organ harvesting practice. So whereas everybody get their panty in a knot and cheap shot China, one should note (as the WHO did) that this is a bettering of the situati
Well, to avoid the problems that go along with illegal organ trade (e.g. abduction of grown-ups and especially children), some countries have a reverse approach: In Luxembourg, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Czech republic and Hungary, you have to register if you do not want your organs to be donated after you passed away.
Your argue on ethical grounds here, something that I can't really follow. My body is a living shell for my mind. If my mind is gone, dump the carcass if you want, I obviously don't need it anymore. If you find someone who does, more power to you, as long as I don't have to pay to get the waste out of the way, help yourself.
The problem is more that someone might be interested in my body while I still need it, because he needs it to, and he has the power to evict me. And that's something I would indeed mind. I don't have a spare body lying around.
Corpses do nothing but decay. They ARE bio-waste, and in nature are recycled by other organisms. Decay is life recycling the dead. There is no reason to respect a corpse except primitive custom and death denial.
I can understand your position from a technical perspective. However, in my opinion, taking organs from people without consent is wicked.
The British Government are considering 'implied consent' with regard to organ donorship - if you die, and you haven't withdrawn consent by some act, they consider you fair game.
What people, as a group, have no interest in a supply of organs? You, me, anyone could at any time run into a disease that could make it highly desirable to have a matching spare organ.
I remember a religion there considers the opening of the body a mortal sin, thus devout members of that faith might be immune to the temptation. Though considering China's (official) stance on religion I guess that option is none.
You're working under the assumption that the verdict comes out of a "fair" trial, i.e. where the crime is the base for the verdict. You might notice the circular problem you're heading into: When he is outside the social taboo and norm for being sentenced to death, the reverse is true as well, sentencing him to death puts him outside of the social norms and thus everything's fair. So if we had some sort of "commission" that tells whether someone can be harvested or not, the result would always be positive b
The tell-tale sign is how young most of the bodies are with absolutely no trauma or anatomic evidence of disease or decay. Most of the bodies appear to be in their early to late twenties. The likelihood that all of these people died in hospital (if not laboratory) conditions of natural causes like cardiac arrhythmias is ridiculously unlikely to say the least.
But, the real evidence comes from direct investigations [wikipedia.org] into the company itself. 20/20 did an investigation [youtube.com] into the company, Premier Exhibitions, Inc. and found the actual warehouse where the bodies are preserved. Needless to say, it is NOT where the company claimed it to be, and the interview with the company's founder at the end is priceless. Further investigations by the government pretty much confirmed everyone's suspicions.
I'm surprised that all of this is news to many people. In 2006, Chinese authorities were bragging to the international media [timesonline.co.uk] about how successful their "death vans" have been. These death vans are ambulances turned mobile execution chambers expressly designed for the preservation of organs. So proud was the company's spokesman in one of the subsequent articles that he insisted any interested overseas buyers reading the article should contact him directly for sales.
The Indiana University Center for Bioethics has an interesting bibliography about inmates and organ donation in the United States (not harvesting) http://www.bioethics.iu.edu/body.cfm?id=79 [iu.edu]. Obviously inmates are - in some states at least - not even allowed to donate their organs and in some cases not even to close family. The ethical questions concering the death penalty aside: Harvesting without consent is IMHO not an ethical thing to do under any circumstances. Whatever guilt there was has been paid with the death penalty, after that, the will of the deceased should be respected. In doubt, consider silence as a "no". That inmates are prohibited to donate organs (donate as in: Not for profit and of their own free will) is equally nonsensical.
I suspect most of us agree that after death we won't be needing those organs... So give society a favor and fill out that organ donor card. It's just one more card in your wallet after all. Saving someone's life post-mortem is not a bad last accomplishment.:)
Granted, your liver might end up in a person worthy of a Darwin award, but it's a risk I'm willing to take myself.;)
Some of us find that keeping people who are genetically weak alive fundamentally wrong.
And the rest of the people in your head disagree? Or abstain from the vote?
Smartaleckism aside (sorry, but people using the pluralis majestatis when talking just for themselves really tempt me to reply with something fitting), why? You are aware that by your theory Stephen Hawking should have been dead for a few decades by now, yes? Think the world would be a richer place without him?
There has long been speculation that killed inmates were used for organ donations - not in the least because often the family can not see the body, and execution dates are set usually less than a day or sometimes only hours before the execution. So many families can not say farewell to the prisoner. And organs for donation are of course best used fresh.
What is new of course, and what surprises me, is that the China government admits they are doing it. They are usually so secretive about anything that may be controversial, this admission comes really as a surprise to me.
Organ donation in China is far far lower than in the West. This is largely cultural (same as in Hong Kong, my place of residence), as people believe the body is best kept intact for burial/cremation. While in Western cultures that is not so much an issue. As a result there are very few people allowing organs to be donated.
But this article is also a bit sensationalist: they claim China puts more people to death than any other country. I am not surprised. China is the most populous nation in the world. Nr 2, India, also has the death penalty but is barely using this form of punishment. What would be more interesting would be the number of people put to death per million population or so. The USA is known for putting many people to death also, but China simply has more than four times the population.
I read a report by a Chinese doctor who fled the country and said some donors were still alive when they started removing the organs. The donors were killed by a shooting squad and some weren't hit properly. The doctors were ordered to remove the organs anyways ASAP.
by Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 27, @01:31AM (#29212881)
I have not heard any outcries about "Zionist barbarians". I believe you are misrepresenting the views of the people you are opposing. It is a cheap trick that does not add anything constructive to the discussion. Please stop doing that.
It is a fact that there is organized, illegal organ trade in Israel. See for example an article in Jerusalem Post, Jul 23, 2007 (available on the web). I do not believe that this a "total fabrication", as the Jerusalem Post would presumably have little interest in fabricated smearing in this case. Or do you mean that the accusations against the _state_ of Israel are untrue, as opposed to the accusations against _citizens_ of Israel?
In the case of China, I believe it has been proved that the state is involved. On the other hand, Chinese organ trade uses bodies of its own citizens, whereas in the Israeli case, bodies of citizens from other countries are used. I think it is completely fair to demand investigations in both cases.
See for example an article in Jerusalem Post, Jul 23, 2007 (available on the web).
That has to be one of the dumbest things I've seen online for quite a while.
Why the hell didn't you LINK to that article? Are we just supposed to browse through every single article in that newspaper from that day in order to find that article? Take your word for it? This isn't a book where you can't include the article - link to the bloody thing!
China publicly harvests organs and people hardly notice. Israel is accused of harvesting organs, a total fabrication, and there's an outcry, demanding an investigation into these Zionist barbarians. What the hell?
When were these allegations against Israel? I've been paying pretty close attention to media driven hysteria for a couple years now, and I think I've completely missed this one. Where is the proof of the hysteria (from an American-centric POV), and where is the disproof that it actually happened?
There have been allegations of an Israeli human body part smuggling ring for years (2003 BBC report [bbc.co.uk]).
The new allegations centre around a scandal in New Jersey in which two state legislators and several Rabbis have been arrested for trafficking in human body parts [slate.com]. The Slate article claims that Jewish religious law allow most other laws can be broken to save the life of a Jew ("for the sake of saving a life, a Jew is allowed to break just about any commandment." [slate.com]) and that the Rabbis would see human body part trafficking as a good thing ("They sincerely felt they were not hurting anyone; indeed, by giving life to another, they probably felt they were mimicking the divine. They were in the business of saving lives.") The additional allegation made by the Swedish newspaper is that the IDF were removing organs from Palestinian prisoners who die in custody, and from other sources of dead Palestinian bodies, in order to supply the smuggling groups.
The only outcry I heard was Israel screaming "ANTI-SEMITISM!!" when the reports surfaced.
Which, to be fair, it almost certainly was. There is no sign of any real evidence that support the reports.
What is, to my mind, totally unreasonable was the Isreali government's stance of blaming the entire country for the behaviour of a single independent newspaper.
by Anonymous Coward
on Thursday August 27, @03:12AM (#29213413)
I can't believe that got an "Informative" tag when it's based on one old phone interview and wild speculation by a tabloid reporter. There is zero evidence that the IDF kills people in order to harvest their organs. This is blood libel, plain and simple.
Israel has an extreme shortage of organs, and every time there is a successful transplant it's all over the news sites, with the identity of the donor (usually a motor accident victim). Now you'll tell me that's all a fabricated conspiracy? Give me a break.
Some people feel that they will not get the full medical care that they would have gotten otherwise. For instance when you do not opt-in, Doctors would hopefully fight until the very end to save you. Should you opt-in, when does the Doctor draw the line to save you versus save the organs for transplant.
Doctors cannot save you AND the organs, so when people feel troubled that this creates a conflict of interest with their mortality at stake, they vote against it. This may be based on incorrect data, but it
You are correct about organs. But, as many have pointed out, the problem is that harvesting organs from people you kill creates a profit motive for killing people and thus creates pressure for more people to be killed. *That* is the problem.
A Waste? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, if it is profitable to incarcerate, more people will be incarcerated too, right?... welcome to america!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I've read that in China corporations can set up factories in prison camps and the prisoners will be forced to work for free. Apparently, the prison guards of some of these camps actually go and arrest people specifically when a larger workforce is needed. If there's profit in people being arrested and imprisoned, then more people will be arrested and imprisoned.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You've read about it? And it happens in China? And nowhere else?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labour [wikipedia.org]
The 13th Amendment of the American Constitution seemingly allows penal labour as it states that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime." Douglas A. Blackmon of the Wall Street Journal has argued that in the United States in the 19th century, after the abolition of slavery, government officials on behalf of business interests "enacted [laws] specifically to intimidate blacks, [and] tens of thousands of African Americans were arbitrarily arrested". This resulted in "neoslavery...[at] coal mines, lumber camps, brickyards, railroads, quarries and farm plantations" and "beatings and physical torture", as blacks were "hit with outrageous fines, and charged for the costs of their own arrests."[2]
Though the use of non-punitive prison labour is not generally controversial if the labour in question serves the public good, is done for sound penological reasons, and is not excessive, cruel, unusual, inhumane, degrading, or humiliating, a significant amount of controversy has arisen with regards to the use of prison labour if the prison in question is privatized, a phenomenon present in a few areas of the United States.[6] As of 2000, privatized prisons incarcerate approximately 3.1% of the prison population within the US, or 62,000 inmates, out of a total incarcerated population of 2 million,[6] and of these privatized prisons, the vast majority use prisoners as a labour force for purposes of avoiding costs, or producing salable goods and services, and thus enhancing the profit of the corporation running them.
I guess China gets all the flak because they must be doing it in an cruel, inhumane, and exploitative manner, since everyone knows they're all dirty subhuman Reds.
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Interesting)
China is actually a lot more restrained than Iran.
So what? That's not even like hailing a turd for being the least smelly in the park. It's like hailing it for being only the second most smelly as opposed to the worst.
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to human nature.
Why do you think those "reality shows" and afternoon "talk shows" are so popular? Because they show real life and because they give you a real impression of other people's lives, because people are actually genuinely interested how others are doing? Bullcrap. They're popular because they give people someone to point at and say "Gee, I'm not that good... but I'm still way better than them!". It makes people feel good because they can look down at someone and feel good about themselves because they're not as bad off as someone else. I have no job but at least I have fewer bottles lying around in my living room than that bum there. My son smokes and drinks, but at least he's not a deadbeat like that boy at Super Nanny.
Aspiring to something bigger would require work. Looking down at someone else is much easier.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The whole WMD deal struck me as kinda odd. I mean, it was like the school bully having the new kid at his collar and threatening him to punch the living crap out of him if he didn't hand over his lunch money while the poor kid was yelling and begging because he doesn't have any, while some obnoxious 5th grader (i.e. Li'l Kim) was jumping around them yelling "Look at me, look at me, I have some, I have some!"
Makes me guess it wasn't about the lunch money but because the new kid had braces or something.
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Funny)
You lost me there. Perhaps start by explaining what type of car the smelliest turd represents.
A taxi. Why else would you hail it?
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Informative)
Not in terms of executions.
In 2008, China is purported to have performed 1,718 out of the 2,390 reported executions in the entire world. 72% is a pretty significant chunk. Iran's #2 with 346 (14%). Then again, China has not been reported to still be executing minors; Iran still does. (Source: Amnesty International [amnestyusa.org])
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In 2008, China is purported to have performed 1,718 out of the 2,390 reported executions in the entire world. 72% is a pretty significant chunk. Iran's #2 with 346 (14%).
I would not want to condone state-sanctioned murder in China, Iran or anywhere else. However, in a discussion about the relative "restraint" ... cough ... if China vs Iran, of what possible relevance can the figure of percentage of world-wide executions be?
A more meaningful metric would be something like number of executions per 100,000
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Interesting)
For fun, I ran the numbers on the next three highest (and consistantly highest) capital states. Saudi Arabia, with 27,601,038 people and 102 executions, has 3.70 per million. The USA, with 304,059,724 people and 37 executions, has 0.12. Pakistan, with 172,800,048 people and 36 executions, has 0.21.
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Funny)
And here I was, thinking that the USA was number one at everything ... disappointing.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The USA does better at homicide. In all categories.
Re:A Waste? (Score:4, Insightful)
We can only really argue whether execution is right, wrong, or the usual justification of execution (or borrowing North Korean torture methods designed to prepare people for show trials) - sometimes.
Now the organ issue I'm not so worried about since I've registered as an organ donor. The real worry would be if it becomes a new vector for corruption and people are getting killed to get their organs.
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Informative)
How were these minor girls executed ? By stoning, hanging and throwing them off buildings, exactly as islam dictates
Not to forget that they are raped first if they are still virgins, as the Islam does not allow the execution of such.
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:4, Insightful)
Huh? The poster above used CIA figures to show Iran has over 65 million people. What state do you live in that has more than 65 million people? California has just over 35 million and it's the largest.
For reference [wikipedia.org]. Using that chart, Iran has a population larger than the last 21 states combined.
Not a single woman was executed,
Again, huh? Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, 11 women have been executed in this country. In fact, the last woman to be executed was in 2005 in Texas. If you're counting only federal executions, two women have been executed: Ethel Rosenberg and Bonnie Brown Heady.
For reference [infoplease.com] (state data).
Other than your calculations for the percentage of executions, the rest of your comments are bupkis.
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Funny)
My Girlfriend gets a lot more restrained than North Korea. ...
Wait, what were we talking about again?
Parent
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming that the execution method does not damage the organs in question.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Except that a lot of executed people are innocent, like the members of Falun Gong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falungong [wikipedia.org]
Basically, it's a large sect, which teaches QiGong.
Repression is very hard, and Falun Gong members are sent to prison, and a lot of them have been executed to grab their body parts.
I guess that because they practice qigong, they are healthy and provide nice body parts.
Funnily, China government said that Falun Gong was a dangerous sect, probably because you risk your life by following this
Words Fail Me. (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, "ghoul" comes to mind, but it's the only one that comes close.
They are parting people out for profit. Literal chop-shops for human bodies. It's a proposition only the most extreme horror movies have touched. It's the walking definition of Capital-E Evil.
You have to remember there have been three parts to the accusations. They just ADMITTED to the first one.
1. That the Chinese were selling organs of condemned prisoners, which they've always denied until now, and
2. That many of these people were conde
that is actually old news (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, to avoid the problems that go along with illegal organ trade (e.g. abduction of grown-ups and especially children), some countries have a reverse approach:
In Luxembourg, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Czech republic and Hungary, you have to register if you do not want your organs to be donated after you passed away.
Re:A Waste? (Score:5, Interesting)
Your argue on ethical grounds here, something that I can't really follow. My body is a living shell for my mind. If my mind is gone, dump the carcass if you want, I obviously don't need it anymore. If you find someone who does, more power to you, as long as I don't have to pay to get the waste out of the way, help yourself.
The problem is more that someone might be interested in my body while I still need it, because he needs it to, and he has the power to evict me. And that's something I would indeed mind. I don't have a spare body lying around.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Corpses do nothing but decay. They ARE bio-waste, and in nature are recycled by other organisms. Decay is life recycling the dead. There is no reason to respect a corpse except primitive custom and death denial.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I can understand your position from a technical perspective. However, in my opinion, taking organs from people without consent is wicked.
The British Government are considering 'implied consent' with regard to organ donorship - if you die, and you haven't withdrawn consent by some act, they consider you fair game.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What people, as a group, have no interest in a supply of organs? You, me, anyone could at any time run into a disease that could make it highly desirable to have a matching spare organ.
I remember a religion there considers the opening of the body a mortal sin, thus devout members of that faith might be immune to the temptation. Though considering China's (official) stance on religion I guess that option is none.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're working under the assumption that the verdict comes out of a "fair" trial, i.e. where the crime is the base for the verdict. You might notice the circular problem you're heading into: When he is outside the social taboo and norm for being sentenced to death, the reverse is true as well, sentencing him to death puts him outside of the social norms and thus everything's fair. So if we had some sort of "commission" that tells whether someone can be harvested or not, the result would always be positive b
Don't worry (Score:5, Funny)
I'll get this all sorted out in a few hundred years.
Love,
The Brennan-monster
Bodies Exhibit, anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ive been to the exhibition and the flatly deny the bodies are from prisoners
if anything the person who taught up of the exhibit donated his own body for the cause and it is there for all too see
theres a smear campaign by the usual religious nut cases opposed to science and medicine
Re:Bodies Exhibit, anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
The tell-tale sign is how young most of the bodies are with absolutely no trauma or anatomic evidence of disease or decay. Most of the bodies appear to be in their early to late twenties. The likelihood that all of these people died in hospital (if not laboratory) conditions of natural causes like cardiac arrhythmias is ridiculously unlikely to say the least.
But, the real evidence comes from direct investigations [wikipedia.org] into the company itself. 20/20 did an investigation [youtube.com] into the company, Premier Exhibitions, Inc. and found the actual warehouse where the bodies are preserved. Needless to say, it is NOT where the company claimed it to be, and the interview with the company's founder at the end is priceless. Further investigations by the government pretty much confirmed everyone's suspicions.
I'm surprised that all of this is news to many people. In 2006, Chinese authorities were bragging to the international media [timesonline.co.uk] about how successful their "death vans" have been. These death vans are ambulances turned mobile execution chambers expressly designed for the preservation of organs. So proud was the company's spokesman in one of the subsequent articles that he insisted any interested overseas buyers reading the article should contact him directly for sales.
-Grym
Parent
Inmates and Organ Donation in the United States (Score:3, Interesting)
Be a sensible geek (Score:3, Interesting)
I suspect most of us agree that after death we won't be needing those organs... So give society a favor and fill out that organ donor card. It's just one more card in your wallet after all. Saving someone's life post-mortem is not a bad last accomplishment. :)
Granted, your liver might end up in a person worthy of a Darwin award, but it's a risk I'm willing to take myself. ;)
Re:Be a sensible geek (Score:4, Insightful)
Some of us find that keeping people who are genetically weak alive fundamentally wrong.
And the rest of the people in your head disagree? Or abstain from the vote?
Smartaleckism aside (sorry, but people using the pluralis majestatis when talking just for themselves really tempt me to reply with something fitting), why? You are aware that by your theory Stephen Hawking should have been dead for a few decades by now, yes? Think the world would be a richer place without him?
Parent
Re:And if you are a Christian? (Score:4, Insightful)
I would say that's a very minority Christian view. I'm a Christian AND a registered organ donor. In fact, here's a listing of various denominations of Christianity (and other religions) and their view of organ donation [organtransplants.org]. Granted I only skimmed the list, but I did not see one that opposed organ donation, and a number that highly recommend it as an act of Christian love.
Parent
Truth and sensationalism in one... (Score:3, Interesting)
That is what I thought when I read TFA.
There has long been speculation that killed inmates were used for organ donations - not in the least because often the family can not see the body, and execution dates are set usually less than a day or sometimes only hours before the execution. So many families can not say farewell to the prisoner. And organs for donation are of course best used fresh.
What is new of course, and what surprises me, is that the China government admits they are doing it. They are usually so secretive about anything that may be controversial, this admission comes really as a surprise to me.
Organ donation in China is far far lower than in the West. This is largely cultural (same as in Hong Kong, my place of residence), as people believe the body is best kept intact for burial/cremation. While in Western cultures that is not so much an issue. As a result there are very few people allowing organs to be donated.
But this article is also a bit sensationalist: they claim China puts more people to death than any other country. I am not surprised. China is the most populous nation in the world. Nr 2, India, also has the death penalty but is barely using this form of punishment. What would be more interesting would be the number of people put to death per million population or so. The USA is known for putting many people to death also, but China simply has more than four times the population.
there is a simple solution to lack of organs (Score:4, Interesting)
Create a central registry of organ donors.
Once you have been on the registry for (say) two years, you get preference over someone else if you need an organ.
Reports about donors still being alive (Score:3, Insightful)
I read a report by a Chinese doctor who fled the country and said some donors were still alive when they started removing the organs. The donors were killed by a shooting squad and some weren't hit properly. The doctors were ordered to remove the organs anyways ASAP.
Re:Why so little outcry vs Israel? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have not heard any outcries about "Zionist barbarians". I believe you are misrepresenting the views of the people you are opposing. It is a cheap trick that does not add anything constructive to the discussion. Please stop doing that.
It is a fact that there is organized, illegal organ trade in Israel. See for example an article in Jerusalem Post, Jul 23, 2007 (available on the web). I do not believe that this a "total fabrication", as the Jerusalem Post would presumably have little interest in fabricated smearing in this case. Or do you mean that the accusations against the _state_ of Israel are untrue, as opposed to the accusations against _citizens_ of Israel?
In the case of China, I believe it has been proved that the state is involved. On the other hand, Chinese organ trade uses bodies of its own citizens, whereas in the Israeli case, bodies of citizens from other countries are used. I think it is completely fair to demand investigations in both cases.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That has to be one of the dumbest things I've seen online for quite a while.
Why the hell didn't you LINK to that article? Are we just supposed to browse through every single article in that newspaper from that day in order to find that article? Take your word for it? This isn't a book where you can't include the article - link to the bloody thing!
Re: (Score:3)
China publicly harvests organs and people hardly notice. Israel is accused of harvesting organs, a total fabrication, and there's an outcry, demanding an investigation into these Zionist barbarians. What the hell?
When were these allegations against Israel? I've been paying pretty close attention to media driven hysteria for a couple years now, and I think I've completely missed this one. Where is the proof of the hysteria (from an American-centric POV), and where is the disproof that it actually happened?
Re:Why so little outcry vs Israel? (Score:4, Interesting)
The allegations are recent and were made by a Swedish tabloid newspaper, see Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
BBC News article [bbc.co.uk]
CNN article [cnn.com]
There have been allegations of an Israeli human body part smuggling ring for years (2003 BBC report [bbc.co.uk]).
The new allegations centre around a scandal in New Jersey in which two state legislators and several Rabbis have been arrested for trafficking in human body parts [slate.com]. The Slate article claims that Jewish religious law allow most other laws can be broken to save the life of a Jew ("for the sake of saving a life, a Jew is allowed to break just about any commandment." [slate.com]) and that the Rabbis would see human body part trafficking as a good thing ("They sincerely felt they were not hurting anyone; indeed, by giving life to another, they probably felt they were mimicking the divine. They were in the business of saving lives.") The additional allegation made by the Swedish newspaper is that the IDF were removing organs from Palestinian prisoners who die in custody, and from other sources of dead Palestinian bodies, in order to supply the smuggling groups.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The only outcry I heard was Israel screaming "ANTI-SEMITISM!!" when the reports surfaced.
Which, to be fair, it almost certainly was. There is no sign of any real evidence that support the reports.
What is, to my mind, totally unreasonable was the Isreali government's stance of blaming the entire country for the behaviour of a single independent newspaper.
Re:Israel does this too (Score:5, Insightful)
[Reliable citation needed]
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
mod parent jew
Re:Israel does this too (Score:5, Informative)
I can't believe that got an "Informative" tag when it's based on one old phone interview and wild speculation by a tabloid reporter. There is zero evidence that the IDF kills people in order to harvest their organs. This is blood libel, plain and simple.
Israel has an extreme shortage of organs, and every time there is a successful transplant it's all over the news sites, with the identity of the donor (usually a motor accident victim). Now you'll tell me that's all a fabricated conspiracy? Give me a break.
- Anonymous Coward, aka Eitheladar
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You are correct about organs. But, as many have pointed out, the problem is that harvesting organs from people you kill creates a profit motive for killing people and thus creates pressure for more people to be killed.
*That* is the problem.