The body parts and organs that were named have been successful in treating the patient’s condition. Discuss whether or not these artificial organs can permanently replace the original human organ. I believe in this day and time, that completely ruling out regular transplant would not be fair because there are so many people waiting for a transplant. I feel as though artificial organs cannot permanently take the place of original human organs because a patient might not react as well to an original human organ rather than an artificial one. My theory also is that eventually people will start bidding on artificial organs and the richer people will have say over a family that doesn't have a lot of money.
To increase the supply of deceased donors is quite difficult; donors have to die under the right circumstances. Still if we harvested all of the eligible cadavers, the gap would still not get filled. However things like laws and cultural beliefs discourage healthy people from donating their organs. Paying more for any scarce commodity is one way to increase the surplus.
People are becoming more aware of such a risky decision. Moreover, the author of “Straight Talk about Cosmetic Surgery” Arthur W. Perry had stated that “the death rate was three times lower in patients operated on by board certified plastic surgeons than non-board certified plastic surgeon.” Also, as seen in the news, other countries such as Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic are giving the famous “cosmetic vacation” for lower cost to take advantage of people who don’t know the risks. However, there aren’t records in numbers found for either victims or good results of “cosmetic vacation”. Most of the time, these people have to undergo a second surgery or extra care in their country of residency. For this reason, cosmetic surgery is not worth the risks because of the consequences such as possible infections, complications or even death can come easily after a cosmetic surgery.
The cost of health care that he receives for the heart transplant after leaving a hospital is about $1 million. As the guy recovered, he still had to serve 25 years to life in prison. There is a debate about whether the felons deserve organ transplantation. Most people would find it troubling that a criminal would get a major organ transplant while hundreds of law-abiding citizens who desperately need the organ, such as heart, kidney, liver, lung, and etc., are made to wait. National Kidney Foundation stated, “Over 95,000 U.S. patients are currently waiting for an organ transplant; nearly 4,000 new patients are added to the waiting list each month.” On the other hand, there is valid argument regarding convicted felons should receive organ transplants .
The receiving person would get a new lease on life, getting to live longer thanks to the original owner of the organ. There would also, most likely, not be a shortage of organs for people who desperately needed them. Second, the bad part of paying for organs is that you are selling parts of the human body. This violates a 1984 federal law that declares organs a national resource and not subjected to compensation. Pennsylvania only plans to donate $300 to the funeral home to help pay for the costs of funerals.
The number of people behind bars has grown substantially in many countries over the past 20 years.” (para. 9). Better policing can also be attributed to the decline in crime rates as evidence of the growing prison population. According to Mitchell (2010), "In Denver, 30 of the 2009 murders — almost 80 percent — have been solved, according to Mary Dulacki, records coordinator for Denver police.” Per a Denver Police spokesperson, another factor in the reduction of murders is the improvements with emergency medical treatment and services. First responders are able to save more lives than in the past (Mitchell, 2010).
Gaylin then argues that the more controversial uses, banking and harvesting, will fix current problems of organ donation. There is a short period of time in which an organ is available for harvesting and transplant after the donor is dead. Having a stock of vital organ donors would erase the time restrictions. There is also such a supply shortage, especially of vital organs, that banking would be hard to turn down with 10,000 people dying per year while waiting for organs (Munson,2008,463). Gaylin is justified in predicting that the wholesale salvage of useful body parts is not without
Each year, more and more people are lining up to have gastric bypass surgery, despite the medical risks and very high cost. Is it the answer to our nation's battle with weight? Is it right for you? Obesity is the United States is very common, and many people look for an easy way out. Gastric bypass surgery may not only help with obesity but it is believed that gastric bypass can help in treatment with diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and sleep apnea.
Challenges of Organ Donation Organ donation refers to the act in donating human body organs or tissues to save lives of recipients in need of transplant. Organs or tissues can be donated by either a living or a dead person and one has to give his or her consent before the process is done. There are a lot of people worldwide waiting for an organ transplant and I do agree with the statement of the CORE members that there are about 110,000 people waiting for an organ donation, but only about 25,000 transplants each year”. According to UNOS, by March 2014, around 121,600 people in the United States were on the organ waiting list. Each day quit a number of people waiting for organ transplant die because the demand for organs has largely exceeds the number of donors all over the world.
While the arguments against animal testing are numerous, it still has a tremendous amount of benefit towards humans as a species. One cannot just look at the life expectancy as a measure of how well people live, but instead, we must also look at the quality of life. Should animal testing be eliminated, or, as the article suggests, put under the same ethical code towards the treatment of humans, we will experience a sharp decline in lifespan, and a decrease in the quality of life. The loss of animal testing would result in a sharp decline of lifespan in humans. The one thing most people understand about viruses and bacteria is that they evolve at an extremely rapid pace, leading to what can be called an evolutionary “arms race” between humanity and the diseases we contract.