ArticleJournal of medical ethics2019
Moral uncertainty and the farming of human-pig chimeras.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ethical arguments concerning human-animal chimera research: a systematic review.BMC medical ethics · 2020Pooled it
- Will Human-Animal Chimeras Cause Moral Confusion? Exploring Public Attitudes.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- Conscientious objection: a global health perspective.BMJ global health · 2024Article
- Chimeric Livers: Interspecies Blastocyst Complementation and Xenotransplantation for End-Stage Liver Disease.Hepatic medicine : evidence and research · 2024Review
- From genome editing to blastocyst complementation: A new horizon in heart transplantation?JTCVS techniques · 2022Article
- Xenogeneic and Stem Cell-Based Therapy for Cardiovascular Diseases: Genetic Engineering of Porcine Cells and Their Applications in Heart Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Emerging moral status issues.Monash bioethics review · 2020Review
- 'It's not worse than eating them': the limits of analogy in bioethics.Monash bioethics review · 2020Article
- Animals in Moral Limbo: How Literary Pigs May Help Lab-Generated Ones.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Review
- Moral Limits of Brain Organoid Research.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It may soon be possible to generate human organs inside of human-pig chimeras via a process called interspecies blastocyst complementation. This paper discusses what arguably the central ethical concern is raised by this potential source of transplantable organs: that farming human-pig chimeras for their organs risks perpetrating a serious moral wrong because the moral status of human-pig chimeras is uncertain, and potentially significant. Those who raise this concern usually take it to be unique to the creation of chimeric animals with 'humanised' brains. In this paper, we show how that the same style of argument can be used to critique current uses of non-chimeric pigs in agriculture. This reveals an important tension between two common moral views: that farming human-pig chimeras for their organs is ethically concerning, and that farming non-chimeric pigs for food or research is ethically benign. At least one of these views stands in need of revision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.