Religion, Rights, and Science in Kidney Transplants

These intrepid patients and their doctors are pushing the forefront of scientific discovery. But it is not just medical breakthroughs that have been needed. Religion and rights have posed sky-high barriers to overcome.

There are about 95,000 North Americans awaiting a kidney transplant. What will happen to these people? Less than half will receive the organ they require. For the lucky ones, whether the wait is a short few months or a long several years depends on various factors.

Winston Churchill wrote, “Truth is inconvertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is.” Kidney transplant is often the only hope for these people to lead productive lives. Hope though, however small, is a fortune when just a few years ago, prior to that first successful transplant, renal failure was a death sentence.

Even as the transplant of donor organs became possible, the challenges were huge. Medically, within hours of surgery, the donor kidney would be rejected and destroyed by the patient's own immune system. This started to change in the early 1970s when researchers discovered ways to fight the rejection reaction.

Then came the religious objections by those who believe the body must remain intact for the afterlife. Catholic charity shone through when Pope John Paul II said, “With the advent of organ donation, man has found a way to give of himself and his body so others may continue to live.”

Now it’s another problem. Humans have two kidneys and can live with just one. But there’s no queue of people waiting to donate their spare. 

Scientists have been working hard to solve that problem by turning to pigs, an animal well suited to the task of providing the organ, but at the cost of their lives. This has had the animal rights community up in arms.

One might understand a societal reaction against the use of primate’s kidneys: too close to us, too rare of species, too expensive, and not suitable in any case due to the susceptibility to similar viruses as humans. But pigs? They can be reproduced in large numbers, cheaply, and are readily available. Would not even animal rights activists be placated knowing that humans have been slaughtering pigs to eat for all time? There are delicate arguments in the debate, and scientists are treading carefully, but not always with accuracy in foresight.

In 1996, one of the world’s top experts on kidney transplants predicted the first pig kidney would be transplanted into a human within seven years. It has been a lot longer than that, and we still have only a handful of attempts.

The problem remains that transplanted kidneys from humans or animals are too readily rejected by the patient’s immune system. The drugs used to suppress the immune response cause plentiful other concerns. Now, however, the breakthrough enabling the desired, long-term acceptance of a pig kidney transplant is a genetic modification to the pig’s DNA.

Humans are remarkable problem solvers. We may not always arrive at the best answers immediately. But the challenge for those who disagree should be to come up with better solutions, not to undertake despicable acts, as emptyheaded miscreants have done before.

In 1996, two Gifford-Jones columns told the tragic story of a transplant researcher trying to save human lives who was victimized by animal rights protestors. Visit www.docgiff.com and follow the links.