The Washington Post ran a piece yesterday, First U.S. Uterine Transplant Planned. The article examines questions such as whether enough research and animal experimentation has been done to justify attempting the procedure in humans, and whether this is an option that should be available because the uterus is not necessary for life, unlike other commonly transplanted organs such as hearts and kidneys. The transplant would be considered temporary, allowing a woman to bear a child but is not intended as a lifetime replacement uterus, as the baby would be delivered via c-section and the uterus removed at that time. A November 2006 article from New Scientist reported that a physician at New York Downtown Hospital had been approved by its hospital review board for such a transplant, following "the first successful uterus transplant in a non-human primate" (a rhesus monkey) performed at the University of Pittsburgh. Scientists interviewed for that article were also skeptical that the procedure had been properly vetted through research.
Personally, I can't imagine wanting to carry a baby so badly that I would undergo a transplant procedure. Pregnancy has its own set of risks; adding transplantation risks to the mix seems like a dangerous and unnecessary option.
Click on the MeSH tag below to run a search for medical articles on uterine transplantation. Our Bodies, Our Blog also has coverage of the story.
Technorati Tags: transplant; uterus
MeSH Tags: Uterus/transplantation
No comments:
Post a Comment