Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science

Cat Organ Transplants 44

sophie baines writes "Vets have given their approval for cats to have kidney transplants in the UK-despite ethical concerns about the procedure. Liverpool University is believed to be one of the few veterinary teaching centres around the country to have the advanced specialist equipment needed to carry out the operation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cat Organ Transplants

Comments Filter:
  • by CTD ( 615278 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @08:24AM (#5405120) Homepage
    I don't get it...

    "Britain's main animal charities, including the RSPCA, had expressed ethical concerns about the procedure, particularly over the issue of choice and consent."

    It's a cat! I've got two cats. While I will certainly agree that they have a mind of their own (and for some reason think that the best place to be is underfoot while I'm walking in the morning), but consent??? It's a cat...


    "Mr. Whiskers, this is a risky operation with potential complications. It is entirely possible that you could die due to this surgery. I still advise you to have it done, as your organs are failing and you won't live much longer without a transplant. We have a ready donor, do you give your consent for this transplant to be done?"

    "Meow."

    Boggling what people will do to have a cause.
    • First, you have no idea how UK people love pets. They have the largest community of pet lovers you'll ever see.

      Second, it's not right to put humans _always_ above animals and plants. We have to realize once in our lifetime that human life is not the most important thing in this world but life itself. And life itself cannon exist without animal and plants.
      • I dunno my friend. I've seen a good share of Americans treat pets like humans. We might give the UK a run for it, plus we have better teeth, unless you head into the Ozarks ;)

        On a less humorous note, it is right to put humans_always_above animas and plants. Given the choice between killing a person, an animal, or an acre of trees, I'll take my meat fried and when can you print some news on that bark?

        Philosophical difference between us there will probably never be resolved. ;) BTW, when did /. do a story transplant with the pet store? :)
      • First, you have no idea how UK people love pets.

        So? Parents make identical decisions for their children - there's no consent from the child in those cases either. And as a cat-owner, I consider my cat to be my baby... if she needed a transplant, you're damn right I'll make the decision for her. This [the "ethical concern"] is an absolutely ridiculous argument that has no bearing on how people feel about their pets.

    • Choice and consent (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ptaff ( 165113 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @08:40AM (#5405175) Homepage
      >>particularly over the issue of choice and consent

      We decide for them where they go, what they eat, when to bath, push them away when we want.

      We let them locked inside when there's nobody home, we decide when and why they lose their reproductive abilities. If they need medication, we push it inside their throats.

      Yeah, like people care for choice and consent from cats.

      What kind of freedom is that?!
    • by unapersson ( 38207 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @09:01AM (#5405320) Homepage
      "It's a cat! I've got two cats. While I will certainly agree that they have a mind of their own (and for some reason think that the best place to be is underfoot while I'm walking in the morning), but consent??? It's a cat..."

      So do I. But I think it's more of an issue for the donor animal. It may be OK for us to decide that kitty1 should recieve a donor kidney otherwise it won't survive, but is it OK to force a healthy kitty2 to donate said kidney? Then it's more of an ethical dilema, i.e. people getting animals from rescue shelters for donor body parts.

    • Or do you want me to harvest the kidneys of your precious kittens without your permission?

      What some people will say to complain about people with a cause...
    • I love cats too, but whenever I hear about some crazy procedure being done to extend the life of the cat, it worries me on the issue of consent. Well, sorta.

      Consent isn't exactly the right word, really, but it describes a similar situation. You can't explain to a cat (or dog, or rat, or snake, or whatever) why it is going through all this pain. You can't say "just deal with the pain for a while, and in the long run it'll be for the best." From their point of view, it just looks like people are hurting them. Think about it: you don't mind the doctor giving you a pill to take, but you would be really disturbed and unhappy if the doctor tried to choke you. To a cat, there is no difference, because they don't know that the pill is for their own good.

      So, when I see something like kidney transplants, where a cat who is usually old and has lived a good life goes through a bunch of nasty surgury and is forced to go on anti-rejection drugs (which are notorious for their nasty side effects), I think it's time to deal with it and put the poor animal down. Do you really want your loved pet's last years to be lived in confused misery? Do you want then to be convinced that whole time that it is you who is hurting them, and for no reason?
    • As another comment said, you could just butcher the first one that matches. Who decides that one cat is more valueable than the other ?
      If you "repair" your cat at the cost of another cat, I feel that it isn't seen as a living beeing, but as a thing.
      And in the end, a cat isn't afraid of death. It is your egoism to keep something that you own.
      • I agree. I've had cats, dogs, fish, and while I've taken the best measures I can to keep them well and treat them if they are sick, I also know when is time to let go, and allow my friend to pass on in what I hope is the most human way I can.

        An organ dontated from a cat that has already died, OK, but never should any healthy animal lose its life just because another could benefit from its organs.

        If the donor is still alive, how could you even humanely put it down, because such measures, AFAIK, would render that animals organs unhealthy. So the poor unwilling "donor" animal doesn't even get put down humanely, that if you ask me is cruelty, and criminal.

        It's never a question of consent, even if he could speak a language, an animal will never consent to its own organs being taken. I'll give blood and criticism, but until I die, nothing else.

  • by zudo ( 307075 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @08:25AM (#5405126)
    That's discrimination that is
  • by Kent_Franken ( 92437 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @09:12AM (#5405385) Homepage Journal
    So, how do you get replacement cat kidneys? Do you wait until a suitable donor dies of natural causes, or do you just butcher the first one that will work?
    • BYO replacement cat?

      You could keep replacing bits... end up with this uber-cat made up of parts from lesser cats!

      Hell forget genetic engineering... make your dream cat frankenstein style :D

      I can see the man walking into the pet store:
      "I'll take the cute ginger one in the corner... the one with the green eyes... and that playful one..... errr... and a scalpel"
    • So, how do you get replacement cat kidneys? Do you wait until a suitable donor dies of natural causes, or do you just butcher the first one that will work?

      I don't know how it is currently done, but I believe that a typical animal shelter (not a "no kill" shelter) kills many cats a day. If a shelter were going to kill a donor cat at a given time regardless of whether that cat was going to be an organ donor, then I don't think it would be crueler for them to instead do the donor surgery that the cat does not wake up from.

      Both of my cats have ID chips, so I don't think an animal shelter would kill them as long as my phone still works, but, I think that if I found out that some pet of mine had been killed in a shelter due to a faulty ID chip or whatever, it would, if anything, console me a bit know that a kidney had been used to save another pet, provided that I was convinced that the demand for the kidney had not accelerated the time to kill my pet.

  • by Mark (ph'x) ( 619499 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @09:27AM (#5405492)
    Its interesting that people would see fit to spend generous wads of cash on extending the life of a cat by a couple of years. I wouldve thought that the cost of this would be prohibitively expensive... for the average owner as well as the average cat :)

    I also wonder how someone can justify paying this sort of money... thinking of the starving children, etc, etc. Maybe a compulsory tour of a human hospital to look at lack of funding might be in order for people that would pay for this...
    • by samael ( 12612 ) <Andrew@Ducker.org.uk> on Friday February 28, 2003 @10:01AM (#5405844) Homepage
      And the same could be said of every frippery, from computer games to fast cars (to slow cars) to expensive dinners.

      If you ate rice and fish every day and sent the savings you made to the starving children of Africa, you'd save dozens of lives. I don't see people doing it though.
    • ..to keep a cat alive, who had been born with congenital malformations, and then abused by- you guessed it- a person! - I actually can understand this. I can't argue its necessity above the need to save children, trees, cows, or any other cause you could name. But I can say this: when I was faced with the option of putting myself into debt to save the life of a charming, good-natured, sweet little creature who was relatively innocent, barely a year old, and might not even live to see me paying off the bill I chose to spend the money and get it done, and I've never regretted it.

      She's still with me. I made a choice based on my earnest belief that I had a chance to help a creature who was in need. I probably wouldn't have made this choice for a stray, choosing first to support the 'higher issues' that people are referring to here- other people, for example. And if she hadn't lived, I still believe that it would have been worth it. Why? Because I couldn't live with the thought that I had let her die without trying. That's why these people will pay for these transplants.

      Part guilt, part love. I know my time with her is limited. Eventually, her hips will give out due the calcification there, and her fused-from-the-middle-down spine won't give her the flexibility to work around it. and the hours of physical therapy i've done with her- yeah, I know, physical therapy for a cat- won't be able to make up for it, and to ease her discomfort she'll be put to sleep. But in the meantime, she fell asleep with her head on my arm last night. She won't last till they have replacement parts. Too many things wrong. But how do you look at an animal that you've accepted into your family- and that's the key moral issue for most people- and deny them treatment that might let them live?

      it isn't necessarily right, but we make our choices based on what affects us closest to home first. It takes a lot of guts and perspective to accept those other issues out there- poverty, hunger, disease, the ecological state of our planet- as part of our own household.

      Just some thoughts; feel free to pick apart and disagree.

      • Cats aren't able to tell others that "Hey I'm in constant excruciating pain here, let me die" so how do you know that keeping it alive is the best thing for it? What if you are just enabling it to live an extra day filled with nothing but pain?
        • Because her whole attitude changes when she's suffering. She DID have serious pain. She stopped playing, stopped purring, and stopped being interested in her food. Now she purrs, plays, and expresses preferences betwen types of foods quite cheerfully.
          I think people underestimate exactly how much one learns when living in close concert with other creatures. So long as she's interested in life- interested in interacting with the world around her, and i don't mean whether she's bored... if her eyes get that glassy listless look, her coat gets dull, and she mewls in pain when she moves, that's when i'll know she's hurting most. Until then, we deal with day-to-day pains as they come up, and she seems really interested in life and living and the world around her.
        • Huh? It's pretty obvious when creatures that similar to us are in excruciating pain (dogs, cats, etc).

          I don't have cats around but I bet with cats even if you're totally stupid they'll let you know in very obvious ways. You'd be sharing their pain if you're not careful.

          If the cat is comatose or unresponsive then the operation sure didn't work.

          I'm sure if you are good friends with another animal you'd know even if it's in a bit of pain, not even excruciating.

          But women? They're probably from some other planet. Just kidding :).
    • Money spent on doesn't disappear.. it circulates through the economy.

      I pay my vet a lot of money to take care of sick animals. My vet employees several employees and some interns.

      Those interns have school bills to pay. The vet school funds research activity that may lead to a better quality of life for humans and animals alike.

      My vet and her employees buy groceries, which keeps the local grocer in business, which allows him to pay his employees, etc, etc..

      Money is never wasted unless it goes unspent.
    • Yes, but the people willing to spend the money on a cat kidney transplant can clearly not be trusted with it. Better to give the money to a responsible vet, who is likely to use it for slightly more intelligent purposes. I mean, it's not like your cat gets a kidney and ten grand disappear from circulation or anything.
    • Why not?

      Just because they care for the cat doesn't necessarily mean they don't care for the starving children around the world. The two are not tightly linked issues. It seems almost a fallacy to link these to with an "either or" sort of thing.

      Most times there's very little you can do directly about the children starving (look at Africa - practically all the starving is due to politics), but if you can do something for the sick cat why not?

      Whether I buy lunch for a street dog/cat has practically zero effect on starving kids or some underfunded hospital. But I can be sure it has effect on the dog/cat.

      Most people likely to spend such money on their cats are rich enough that whether they spend money on their cat or not has very little impact on whether they donate to a charity _you_ approve of.

      Why shouldn't they spend money on a cat they love?

      Could do far worse with your money than to spend it on a living creature you love. You might as well start with those you love, and then work on extending the reach of your love. More likely to do the right thing this way, than to do it because of guilt or obligation or some other reason.
  • Actually... (Score:5, Informative)

    by breon.halling ( 235909 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @10:17AM (#5405990)

    ... my sister is a vet who was working at the University of Florida, Gainseville teaching centre. She's performed the procedure several times. Successfully, too!

    • by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @11:33AM (#5406690) Homepage
      She's performed the procedure several times.

      Oh my god! What's wrong with your cat?
      Nothing, my cat is fine.
      What are those lumps all over it?!?!
      Oh, those are kidneys. I've transplanted several kidneys into it, and I ran out of room in the usual places.


      -
      • ...I've transplanted several kidneys into it, and I ran out of room in the usual place.

        She's performed the procedure several times on different cats, weisenheimer! =)

  • by C21 ( 643569 )
    at first I thought this was an article about can organs being donated to humans.
  • by Hubert_Shrump ( 256081 ) <cobranet@nOSpAM.gmail.com> on Friday February 28, 2003 @11:51AM (#5406843) Journal
    Steve Austin. Astronaut. A cat barely alive.

    Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability to make the world's first bionic cat. Steve Austin will be that cat. Better than he was before. Better ... stronger ... faster.

    • Gentlemen, we can rebuild him. We have the technology. We have the capability to make the world's first bionic cat. Steve Austin will be that cat. Better than he was before. Better ... stronger ... faster.

      Yeah, but will he still shed cat fur all over the house? And will he continue to insist on dropping his little "cat nuggets" ONCE FRIGGIN' INCH OUTSIDE OF THE DAMN LITTER BOX!?!

      GMD

  • by Dr. Awktagon ( 233360 ) on Friday February 28, 2003 @12:53PM (#5407392) Homepage
    Feline kidney transplants have been performed in the USA for a while now, in a number of locations. I read about a hospital in Florida, perhaps the same one referenced by the poster above.

    I recently had one of my cats euthanized for chronic renal failure (he had a blood clot in his legs and tail and couldn't walk, among other things) and I learned how some people spent thousands of dollars to transplant kidneys or perform regular dialysis.

    I didn't read about any particular ethical concerns, just the vets shrugging and saying "if you really want to do it, and you have the money, it's possible".

    But my belief is that 1) it's just a cat, you'll get over any grief; and 2) there comes a point when treating your pet that you are no longer doing it *for* the animal, you're doing it *to* the animal for your own selfish wishes. At that point it's better to euthanize.

    A cat with transplanted kidneys will never be the same anyway, he will have to take constant
    immunosuppressants and other drugs just to stay alive, and will have constant complications and will not be a very happy cat.

    My $0.02 as a cat lover.
    • Apparently cats don't have the genetic diversity of humans and only require minimal immuno-suppression. AFAIK (and believe me, I've checked), cats don't get dialysis. You can provide fluid therapy--i.e. 100-300ml of lactated Ringer's injected under the skin, and that does help quite a bit.

      My furball [ste-marie.org] has been getting that daily for the last seven years, and he's quite happy. Even purrs while he's getting the fluids. Only side effects is that he sloshes [ste-marie.org] for a while after the injection.

  • yea I didnt really understand the whole "ethical issue" at first til I read more.. I thought they meant that it was a very dangerous procedure!

    ethical issues about consent for a cat are ridiculous. You're effectively a parent to a creature which cant make sophisticated choices like this. People get surgery on their kids every day. A good example is surgery to detach conjoined twins from each other. Sometimes its medically unnecessary, and nobody asks the kids (when theyre young that is).

    So whats better: "Mr Johnson, we can give your cat a kidney transplant, but we wont be liable if he sues!" or "Mr Johnson, Im sorry.. we have to kill your cat."
  • Human cloning has been outright abolished, so until the people that consider it a "moral dilema" I won't be getting a new pair of lungs from my spare parts body anytime soon.

    But this has the potential of generating a lot of money for cloning and stem cell research. Already there is a lot of pet cloning going on (although at the 6 figure price tag I won't be cloning my kitty anytime soon) Hopefully this will create a demand for cloned pet parts which will have the direct effect of funding research in these areas.

    Hmm, Chia Kidney, just add water and watch it grow.

Only great masters of style can succeed in being obtuse. -- Oscar Wilde Most UNIX programmers are great masters of style. -- The Unnamed Usenetter

Working...