Not logged inChampdogs Information Exchange
By Quinn
Date 13.02.02 09:15 UTC
Have any of you read the article on canine organ transplants in the new Dogs Today? I'd be interested in hearing your opinions on the subject. Hope it's not too controversial!
By heelerkay
Date 13.02.02 10:57 UTC
Not got it yet. Any chance of a brief outline.
By Quinn
Date 13.02.02 12:06 UTC
I will try, but I can promise you I will leave many important details out and probably get some facts wrong!
In the U.S. in 1999 they started to transplant kidneys in dogs with renal failure. This has been done 4 times so far with only half of those surviving after surgery. The donor dogs seem to recover fine. Outcome for kidney transplant surgery in cats is much more successful at 70 - 80%. Cats don't reject organs to the same degree as dogs.
Cats who would probably be pts can be adopted from shelters and turned into donors as long as they are rehomed after surgery. The family in the Dogs today article were turned down by all the shelters they approached due to policys put in place to prevent dogs being used for medical procedures or research. They would have used one of their own 5 dogs, but they were too old and none were a match. They ended up acquiring a dog from a breeder after doing all the prerequisite bloodwork with the breeders dog. The surgery didn't work and they acquired another dog for a second transplant. That surgery was also unsuccessful. The families beloved dog died.
The article basically goes on to discuss the ethics of such a surgery from the perspective of both the donor dog and the sick dog.
I am not brilliant at long posts, so I won't go on and on. That's the gist of it without going into all the arguments against. So, what do you think?
By heelerkay
Date 13.02.02 12:25 UTC
Interesting. Still digesting it. Is there anything else on the net about this topic? I am going to have a look. What do i think? without knowing anymore my gut feeling is its wrong to go down this road. Alowing people to aquire dogs for the sole purpose of transplantation. If it was one of the pups i had breed that someone was trying to buy for this i would go mad. Just because the ability is there to do such operations
dosnt make them ethical. What would be next heart transplant etc.
It the donor dog that worries me.
By Leigh
Date 13.02.02 12:56 UTC
By heelerkay
Date 13.02.02 13:00 UTC
Thanks leigh
By heelerkay
Date 13.02.02 14:01 UTC
I will throw another spanner in the works.
Bitchs unlike woman produce 3-12 pups depending on breed.
Surely natural selection has already been tampered with for the good in some cases to let a higher % of these pups live hopefully good lives.
but if more intervention is put in place is society not going to be over run with dogs haveing no homes as new owners would be keeping there dogs a lot longer. I think the balance has already tipped you only had to look at matties figures on rescue.
I am not very good at getting my point across but hope you get the thread of what im trying to say.
By Quinn
Date 13.02.02 14:23 UTC
Thanks Leigh! The Cohen family were indeed the family cited in the DT article. I am personally of two minds. (Yes, some would say I have a split personality!) I think that in order for veterinarian medicine to continue to progress, these sorts of experimental surgeries will need to continue. If the homeless dogs or cats get a new family out of the deal, well that can't be all bad. Also, if an animals organs can be used to save anothers life after it has died, why not? But then there is another side of me that is uncomfortable with the ethical side of things. Should organs be "harvested" from an animal that is disadvantaged in one way or another? What about the money side of things? What do you think?
Oh, and great links! :)
By issysmum
Date 13.02.02 14:39 UTC
When I first read the original post I thought WOW, what great news - isn't it amazing what they can do these days. Then I started wondering where the organs come from.
I'm not sure I agree with it, but on a technical side it's amazing what can be done now.
Fiona
By Isabel
Date 13.02.02 23:32 UTC

I don't think its just worrying about the donor I would also question the ethics of putting the receipient dog through such major surgery. I think we are moving dangerously into the area of 'all things must be tried' when it is often kinder not to, sometimes we are seeking to spare ourselves from the pain of loss and being squeamish about euthanasia and that is no favour to our animals.
By westie lover
Date 14.02.02 07:20 UTC
Cant wait to buy Dogs Today now! However, hypothetically, I think if one of my dogs needed a kidney transplant / risked death or serious illness from kidney failure, I would seriously consider it having the op, taking a kidney from another of my own dogs - as the article seems to state that the donor recovers well. I think if the donors did not recover well, then ethically it WOULD be wrong - ie to use a rescue/unwanted dogs' kidney and then put it to sleep, to save another. If the donor were to recover well and the terminally ill dog had a chance of being saved I think it would be acceptable to me. Anyway I'll have to read the article.
By mari
Date 14.02.02 10:56 UTC
Idont know if I would be interested in transplants at all .Im wondering if it isent hidden experiment under the guise of extending the life of a beloved pet , Im suspicious. but kidney decease is hereditery and if dogs with a transplanted kidney are used to breed from again then im sure the problem will just go on and on, and the vets will be lining their pockets yet once again.I know mostpeople would not consider breeding from a dog that had a transplant, but there will be plenty that would. W.L, I cant get dogs today here , so maybe when you get a chance you might put a bit on for me to read. best wishes marie mari
By digger
Date 14.02.02 11:26 UTC
I agree with Isabel - my partner and I have a saying 'just because we can doesn't mean we should' - and we apply it to all sorts of things from speeding in the car (which is capapble of 130 mph +) to surgery/treatment on our animals.........
By heelerkay
Date 14.02.02 11:29 UTC
100% with your saying digger.
By Ingrid
Date 14.02.02 11:54 UTC
I can't say I agree with it, the final bit of the article does state that at least with human transplant the donor can give permission, these dogs can't. I know they say that the donor dog makes a good recovery, but as with humans this isn't always the case, the recipient will be on expensive drugs for the rest of it's life to stop rejection, so what if the donor dog does not recover well and also requires life time treatment, and I very much doubt you'd get insurance to cover it, so how would the new owner feel then.
Mari if you want the magazine, I have read my copy and will willingly send it to you if you want to e-mail me your address - crazyhounds@btinternet.com
By heelerkay
Date 14.02.02 12:48 UTC
Also what about the selfish people who will buy a dog as a Donor.
Then not want it when there pooch is well.
By mari
Date 14.02.02 15:24 UTC
Why thank you very much ingrid that is very nice of you , all I can offer you back is waterford today :d
Powered by mwForum 2.29.6 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill