Plundered body parts implanted in thousands
March 19, 2006 4:49 AM   Subscribe

Plundered body parts implanted in thousands A macabre scandal in which corpses were plundered for body parts could be even bigger than previously disclosed, with one company alone saying it has distributed thousands of pieces of human tissue that authorities fear could be tainted with disease....But the company noted here is not alone. The People’s Republic Has Long Been Suspected of Selling Organs From Prisoners. Now One New York Doctor Knows the Rumors Are True. But since there is a great need for parts, and money to be made, others also are getting into this flourishing business too. And parts can serve other purpose . But for quick insights, go to EBay
posted by Postroad (30 comments total)
 
Anybody remember Larry Niven's short story "The Jigsaw Man"? It introduced the concept of organlegging.
posted by pax digita at 5:03 AM on March 19, 2006


Oops...tried using the linky thingy...let's try again: organlegging.
posted by pax digita at 5:03 AM on March 19, 2006


I'm not going to lose my head over it, but this is starting to get on somebody's nerves.
posted by mischief at 5:26 AM on March 19, 2006


*steals mischief's face, sells it on eBay*
posted by loquacious at 5:57 AM on March 19, 2006


What in the hell do you mean my reserve wasn't met!? He's not that ugly!
posted by loquacious at 5:58 AM on March 19, 2006


Other recent stuff
posted by jeffburdges at 6:37 AM on March 19, 2006


i never realized dead people gave a shit about living people using their organs
posted by yonation at 7:40 AM on March 19, 2006


As people live longer and the dichotomy between the haves and the have-nots grows, this is bound to be a booming industry. Forget stem cell research and biotech -- where can I invest in some good ol' tissue?

Sure -- voluntary would be better and that whole disease thing is unfortunate -- but... you can't make an omelette and all. With some minor tweaks to the tax code and improvements to the law this could prove quite lucrative. Soldiers are government property, right? Why should their service end with death when they could help anyone with the cold hard cash to pony up lead a longer life?

Those cells are worth their weight in platinum and it's just plain wasteful to throw them in the ground. I say, let the market speak. It's simple supply and demand. There is most definately a surplus of people and human beings are definately a renewable resource. As the timber industry has proven time and time again, there can't be any harm in a bit of proactive harvesting and conservation minded management.
posted by cedar at 8:07 AM on March 19, 2006


It can be a very big deal if the host/deceased has a prior medical history, and/or the parts have been improperly stored before transplant. If downer cows can often slip past FDA inspections, think of the shady venues in medicine that would allow quick profits to take precedent over the risk of hepatitis in a patient. Or the prospect of medical waste being sold under the table to big pharma as so-called "healthy" material for new vaccines.
posted by Smart Dalek at 8:13 AM on March 19, 2006


what yonation said. I can't find it, but wasn't there some thing in Britain where you were going to have to actively opt out of the organ donor program rather than opt in? seemed like a good idea to me. We'd need to create sometype of agency to keep sick limbs from being transplanted, but that seems a small price to pay for all those delicious useful organs.
posted by es_de_bah at 8:39 AM on March 19, 2006


...and then there's China opening itself up to capitalism
posted by sswiller at 9:18 AM on March 19, 2006


Young, nonsmoking prisoners are given blood tests and medical exams to assess compatibility with arriving patients, the investigator explains, and courts set execution dates accordingly.

That would explain why seemingly everybody in China smokes.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:31 AM on March 19, 2006


Ebay dosn't allow the sale of human tissue or 'body fluids'.

Honestly, I just don't have a problem with this. My 'revulsion reflex' must be broken, or something. As long as it doesn't lead to people murdering each other for parts, I don't care what happens to corpses of otherwise dead.
posted by delmoi at 10:09 AM on March 19, 2006


i never realized dead people gave a shit about living people using their organs

Point taken, but I think the issue here revolves around whether the living are being assured their safety from receiving diseased organs or tissues. Also, a mentioned above the PRC seems to facilitate some living becoming dead in order to benefit other living.

It amazed me when doing medical work, particularly in burn care, how much cadaver tissue is used. I had always been curious as to its origins.
posted by rollbiz at 10:14 AM on March 19, 2006


What if organ donation was opt-out instead of opt-in.

That addresses out of country tissue, from the dead who didn't wish to "donate", or the profit of all the people who are involved with the tissue from the dead exactly HOW?

Why should *I* offer up any of the tissue from my estate for free, when the people who "obtain the GIFT of life" are charged $1,400 for some of my skin? I paid to grow that skin, money that could have instead of food have gone to the estate.

When my 'gift of life' is REALLY A GIFT, then I'll give a gift. Otherwise, pay my estate.
posted by rough ashlar at 10:23 AM on March 19, 2006


Sooo rough ashlar...You'd honestly prefer that no one could receive tissue benefits if you died based on the premise that there are costs involved? What about the cost of the preservation, testing, etc.?

I mean, get on with your bad self...I just hope you don't wind up in a burn ward with no cadaver skin because someone felt the same way.
posted by rollbiz at 10:34 AM on March 19, 2006


You'd honestly prefer that no one could receive tissue benefits

You are re-packaging it. I used the term used by the organ 'donation' people - give the 'gift' of life.

When it is a GIFT, then I'll give a GIFT. Otherwise it is just a profit making venture, and as such my estate should get a hunk of the profit.

Why do you hate the captiolist system?

I just hope you don't wind up in a burn ward

As if I can afford such. Better off dead and passing it on to the estate, so the others in my life can continue.
posted by rough ashlar at 10:50 AM on March 19, 2006


As if I can afford such. Better off dead and passing it on to the estate, so the others in my life can continue.

You do realize defeatist whining aside, if you were to be badly burned you would be treat as anyone else would be...? You would get the specialty care, the meds, the cadaver tissue...? This is in contrast to lets say, China....where as noted above, those who can no longer pay are just turned off. Say what you want about the for profit HMO and insurance issues, but the fact remains that our ability to treat patients in this country is stellar. What is bankrupting the system are companies looking to make a buck off of your illnesses (insurance) in that they will fight not to pay out what they've taken from you over the period you've been insured, not the public hospitals and doctors who are often nearly going bankrupt themselves because they will treat anyone, anytime, for anything despite your ability to pay.
posted by rollbiz at 11:05 AM on March 19, 2006


I can't believe there are people here who have no problem with China culling its population of "undesirables" and harvesting their organs for sale. Are you familiar with the system of laws and lawmaking in China? Are you confident that all those taken and executed under their system are guilty of anything we would consider a crime? Does the fact that even on the face of it, the intent to harvest organs influences the timing and process of execution not cause you to wonder what else it may influence?
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:13 AM on March 19, 2006


What is bankrupting the system are companies looking to make a buck off of your illnesses (insurance)

Then why line the pockets with your tissue?

For the issue to be 'the insurance companies' why is it a visit to the local chiropractor was $75 if you were covered with insurance or $30 if I paid cash?

if you were to be badly burned you would be treat as anyone else would be...

Nope. If you identified as having insurance you will get different treatment than the poor street bum.

The Cheney-shotgun incident mentioned the ambulance that was kept nearby. Rather sure I don't have that feature in my life either.

So....'anyone else' isn't right.


I can't believe there are people here who have no problem with China culling its population of "undesirables" and harvesting their organs for sale.


And oppose the idea of the estate getting some coin from the tissue.
posted by rough ashlar at 11:43 AM on March 19, 2006


Alistair Cooke, who died of cancer and was way over the age limit for having his organs donated was one of the cadavers involved.
posted by mortisimo at 12:01 PM on March 19, 2006


This story broke a couple weeks after someone (a doctor) stuck (surgically impanted) someone (unknown) else's body part (an achilles tendon) into me. I found this story of grave concern -- where (who) did this tendon come from? Someone young (ish) and free of disease? Or just some random corpse from a Brooklyn funeral home.
Yes people should be organ donors, but no, companies should not be harvesting whatever they can get outside of the strictures that guarantee the quality of the tissue donated.
posted by kingfisher, his musclebound cat at 12:36 PM on March 19, 2006


Parts is parts
posted by Smedleyman at 1:42 PM on March 19, 2006


For the issue to be 'the insurance companies' why is it a visit to the local chiropractor was $75 if you were covered with insurance or $30 if I paid cash?

Oddly enough the majority of medical care costs more to the cash paying customer than an insurance company. There are negotiated contractual prices that the insurance company pays physicians which are far lower than the 'cash' price the patient sees.
posted by IronLizard at 3:46 PM on March 19, 2006


I agree that it is absurd that I'm asked to GIVE my body parts to FOR PROFIT companies... I have in the back of my mind that if my family has the "opportunity" for organ donation I'll sign for major organs which go straight hospital-to-hospital, but it is a "no" for body tissues that I have no control over whether they will be gifts or whether they will be free resources for for profit companies.
posted by loafingcactus at 3:55 PM on March 19, 2006


From the first link:
“At this time the agency is not releasing any specifics of that investigation in order to preserve the integrity of that investigation,” FDA spokesman Stephen King wrote in an e-mail.

Stephen King?
*does double take*
posted by archae at 4:47 PM on March 19, 2006



Why is all this "traditional medicine" always from some endangered animal?


Are they "traditional medicine" because they are endangered, or vice versa?
posted by spazzm at 8:13 AM on March 20, 2006


I spent 5 extra minutes doing what was needed to get the orange Organ Donor sticker affixed on my Drivers License. I've just given y'all at least three reasons to be very afraid.

Seriously, I wish I had a way to make them pay my family for any organs they make a profit on; I'd assumed that "donor" meant that people get my organs for FREE (though of course there'd be charges to do the work). I'd gladly give my corpse to the poor, but I don't like the idea of rich bastards exploiting my dead carcass either. Maybe before my license expires I'll remember to consult a lawyer about it.
posted by davy at 6:58 AM on March 21, 2006


Where are the multiculturalist Mefites now? I'd've thought somebody'd be defending the Chinese against Western-standards imperialism.
posted by davy at 7:20 AM on March 21, 2006




« Older ARPAnet   |   The Real Thing, hecho in Mexico Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments