Lawrence Faucette, the second living person to receive a genetically modified pig heart in a transplant, has died six weeks after the experimental procedure. The University of Maryland Medical Center, where the experimental procedure had been performed, said the heart began to show signs of rejection in recent days.

“Mr. Faucette’s last wish was for us to make the most of what we have learned from our experience, so others may be guaranteed a chance for a new heart when a human organ is unavailable. He then told the team of doctors and nurses who gathered around him that he loved us. We will miss him tremendously,” Dr. Bartley Griffith, clinical director of the Cardiac Xenotransplantation Program at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, said in a statement. Griffith had performed the experimental surgery.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
96 points

A lot of people think that regular human transplants are problem free but the vast majority of them are rejected by the receiver. If it’s for a life saving procedure it can only extend the life span by so much…

permalink
report
reply
56 points

My dad had a double lung transplant several months ago…we were told by his transplant team that, with transplants, rejection is a “when”, not an “if”. However, if caught early enough, the docs can do an incredible amount to combat rejection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Complete layperson here but it kind of astounds me that we haven’t cracked the code for this friend-or-foe identification. One would think there is some identifier or expression that is evaluated by the immune system and if we could match that we’d be golden but clearly not that simple.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

We can’t even cure autoimmune diseases yet. Why the fuck has my immune system decided my own tissues are the enemy?! Such a dick move.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

I started reading the book Immune by the team that runs the Kurzgesagt (In a Nutshell) YouTube channel. The book is written for laypeople like us to understand, but I didn’t get very far before going “holy shit this is ridiculously complicated”. Honestly, just the fact that scientists understand any of this astounds me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Taking immunology right now, it’s incredibly complicated. Immune cells aren’t like any other cells in our bodies, they’re absolutely bonkers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Our bodies are just winging it. It’s both beautiful and goodness and all kinds of other things but it’s a bit philosophical at times.

I had ITP. Autoimmune something which means they don’t know what caused it but my body stopped acknowledging that parts of my blood cell, not the entire one just a piece of it, we’re not me. Of course not me gets flushed out.

But the fancy words for part of a blood cell is called a platelet if you don’t have any platelets you don’t clot. As you can probably pick up not being able to clot is a big problem. I was in danger of bleeding out because my body decided to take out all my platelets.

Seems like an easy problem. If a whole blood cell is me because the DNA matches and all kinds of other things, obviously one cell of me is one cell of me. But if you take one cell of me and you break it up into pieces is it still one cell of me? By definition is not it is 50% of me…

So one cell of me is obviously me and one cell of you is obviously you but what happens when we get into percents at what percent does my cell stop becoming me?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Biology is not as simple as 1s and 0s. We want it too be. But it’s just more complex.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Your body has the miraculous ability to identify ANYTHING that isn’t itself: viruses, fungi, bacteria, even lots of nearly-self things like cancer.

It’s likely not a solvable problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Fair enough.

These are very complicated processes that are difficult to interpret with such a (relatively) small number of people looking at it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Honestly, this might sound weird, but if my body ever got to that point, I’d rather just go die in a war.

Better to go out with a bang than a wimper, imo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Lmao yeah you say that now

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I’m just curious if you have data behind this?

My understanding is that rejection related deaths in solid organ transplant recipients is only ~18% and that it is actually trending downward.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s not actually how it works. Rejection of a transplanted organ means the body is developing antibodies against the organ.

Successful dosing and continued use of immunosuppressants inhibit the body from “rejecting” the transplanted organ(s).

I suspect you’re operating off a commonly held idea that transplanted organs have a “shelf life” but that’s not really true.

It’s important to keep in mind that transplanting organs is still comparatively new medical science (only about 70 years old) and that transplants are often for older patients or patients with other underlying conditions that caused the original organ failure to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 511K

    Comments