Posted by Sandy Donchess on February 21, 1999 at 22:29:27:
In Reply to: Genetic Engineering vs Xenotransplantation posted by KenC on February 21, 1999 at 21:24:22:
There are a number of avenues being researched for a cure for diabetes; we all know that. However, due to funding problems, there are fewer private companies still working (or still working full-speed ahead) on xeno islet transplants. We know that Dr. Eastman of the NIDDK more or less pooh-poohs the idea. Some researchers question the "purity" of pig islets. Many others, particularly those who actually work with them, do not.
What I don't understand is, given that much good has and is coming of xeno technology, why aren't more people embracing it as something that should be fully explored and funded? Even the CDC studies found no evidence of a super pig virus. In fact, no one really has found any evidence at all that pig islets and other tissues would present a problem to humans.
Is it just the IDEA of having non-human tissue in a human body that causes some to totally dismiss xeno as a possible avenue of cure or, at least, substantive therapy for diseases? Is it really an animal-rights group issue? Does the NIH support/fund this in any way at all? (Sorry, I'm not experienced enough in searching the NIH databases to know.)
As I've said many times, I fear immunosuppressants very much. I still have niggling fears about the NIH/DRI work on anti-CD40 ligand. None of us will know if it's "safe" until clinical trials in humans are done, and the trial participants are tracked for years. I hope it is safe.
Certainly, much of our anguish is due to the fact that companies and research facilities are not free or do not wish to openly say what they are doing. I don't see this changing. But I would like the NIH to explain and justify, if they can, why they do not pay attention to xeno.