And now for something completely different: A face-transplant…

isabelledinoire_468x315

Isabelle Dinoire before she was mauled by her dog.

9355336

The ” Before” picture of the recipient of France’s first transplant. She was the victim of a dog mauling. (not to be confused with the recent Face-transplant done in the US, last month)

face_transplant_dinoir_sfw2

Months after the operation, and a year later.

610x

Side view “After”.

gesichtpa_dw_wissen_263937g

A close-up of the “year later” pic. (Theres’ something very spooky about it, as though the eyes don’t match the face – reminiscent of an James Bond villain who’s wearing a mask.)

First Ever Face Transplant – Face Came from Live Donor

1999 parliamentary committee told that body parts donors “are sick, they are dying. They are living and not dead.”

By John-Henry Westen

Face Transplant featured on cover of Paris MatchAMIENS, France, December 9, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Much controversy has been made over the first-ever face transplant surgery conducted in France on a 38-year-old woman Isabelle Dinoire who was attacked by a dog. Covered by the media in recent days, the surgery was performed November 26-27 in a hospital in Amiens. The controversy has revolved around two aspects of the operation and totally ignored a third – and the most disturbing of the controversies surrounding the operation.

Ethicists and experts the world over have been discussing the need of the transplant recipient to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of her life and of the psychological consequences of having a different face. Ignored however has been the fact that the face, in order to be transplanted had to come from a live donor – heart beating and still breathing.

Dr. Iain Hutchison, an oral-facial surgeon at Barts and the London Hospital, told the BBC: “The transplant would have to come from a beating heart donor.” Hutchison, who is chief executive of Saving Faces – the Facial Surgery Research Foundation, explained, “So, say your sister was in intensive care, you would have to agree to allow their face to be removed before the ventilator was switched off.” (See the BBC coverage: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4484728.stm )

Doctors in the UK are arguing that since the first two objections are easily answerable in the case of face transplants since having a horrifically disfigured face would eclipse the risks of the anti-rejection drugs and the psychological trauma of having a different face. Writing an editorial in the British Medical Journal, Dr. Peter E M Butler, a UK consultant plastic surgeon and colleagues conclude, “Now that research has made the concept of facial transplant a reality, concerns about long term immunosuppression do remain. But, instead of considering why facial transplantation cannot be justified, we may find it hard to justify why it should not be done.” (see the BMJ editorial http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7529/1349?eh… )

The reason why the issue of the need for live donors is being ignored is “brain death”, a concept first invented in the late 60’s in order to allow for transplantation of vital organs. While vital organ transplants have become more readily available they are by no means universally approved of by medical professionals and ethicists.

Dr. John Shea, M.D. a medical consultant for Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSiteNews.com that “there is no general agreement that brain death is death.” He said moreover that “criteria for establishing ‘brain death’ vary from England to the US and through the other countries of Europe.”

The Sunday Times revealed that the donor of the face was also a 38-year-old woman who had attempted suicide and was declared ‘brain dead’ on arrival at hospital. Face Transplant patient

In 1999, when the Canadian Parliament was examining the issue of vital organ donation a Parliamentary committee heard disturbing testimony about organ harvesting and criteria for declarations of ‘death’.

Ruth Oliver, a Vancouver psychiatrist who was declared clinically dead in 1977 at the Kingston General Hospital after suffering internal bleeding of the brain, was there in 1999 to tell the committee she is “living testimony that people survive” hospital declarations of death not based on solid criteria.

Dr. John Yun, a Richmond, B.C. oncologist, testified to the committee that organ harvesting was the impetus behind the brain death theory that has been accepted by the medical profession since 1968. In the 1980’s Yun worked in an ICU unit keeping brain dead patients on life support for organ transplants. Yun who had revised his position on the matter and believed such actions were wrong, told the committee, “We must not jump to the conclusion that a dubious definition of death — the medical hypothesis of brain death — is in fact death.”

Dr. Michael Brear, a Vancouver general practitioner, who has for 40 years been raising questions about the ethics of brain death, told the committee that “The so-called ‘beating-heart cadavers’ who are used as donors are in fact living patients. They are sick, they are dying. They are living and not dead.”

Dr. Brear notes that the first successful heart transplant harvesting took place in South Africa. He suggested that racism was behind the decision to approve the procedure since the operation took place under the old apartheid system and the donor was a black woman.

Dr Oliver noted, “unconscious or dying people are not people of lesser value. More and more ethicists, philosophers, and churches are rejecting brain death specifically for that reason.”

Indeed a ‘Statement Opposing Brain Death Criteria’ was published in 2000, signed by over 120 people from 19 nations, including physicans, philosophers, and theologians. Included in the list of signers were Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of the Diocese of Lincoln in Nebraska and Bishop Robert Vasa of the Diocese of Baker in Oregon. (see the statement online http://www.lifestudies.org/jp/noshihantai.htm )

Advertisements

8 Responses to “And now for something completely different: A face-transplant…”

  1. just like to have more info. on this an cast of it

  2. Ivan leroux Says:

    una amiga querida recibio descarga eléctrica en cara, necesita esté tipo de ayuda hel

  3. All this article is doing is spreading misinformation to people. To make the argument that brain death is merely a hypothesis is just unintelligent or uninformed at best. There are people everywhere walking around us because of the courage of families to donate loved one’s organs even in a time of great sorrow and suffering (from the death of a family member). Why make such a point about the donors from live bodies? If your brain is non functional, which can be tested, you are DEAD, brain dead. Also, who cares if they have to remove the donor face while the machines are still on. What logical difference does it make? Would you rather they wait until the machines are off, so that there is a lower chance of success? It is fucking idiotic thinking like this that causes families to not donate organs, which just results in more deaths.
    You are so focused on the donor and all these externalities that dont really matter, when you should be focused on the lives being saved. Misinformation like this is in effect killing people, just like Jenny McCarthy trying to get kids to not get vaccines. You guys have no science backgrounds and are fucking idiots.

  4. To the previous commenter: Thank you for putting in words most of my thoughts. It’s hard to believe this wasn’t the work of a troll.

    I would just like to add that the woman said to have “””survived brain death””” was declared brain dead in 1977. How can anyone make a case against brain death diagnosis TODAY through a case that happened thrity four years ago with a straight face?

    This article is proof that you can get supposed experts to defend any case, no matter how wacky.

  5. liana seneor Says:

    i think you look beter naw so its a good think u got bit

  6. chloe bradly Says:

    hahah u ied

  7. morphine side effects…

    […]And now for something completely different: A face-transplant… « So Totally and Completely Politically Incorrect[…]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: