DiversityNursing Blog

By Felicity Dryer

We live in a high-stress world. Between having to attend to work, kids, homes and run back and forth between meetings and all of the other demands of everyday life, to say that things can get stressful is an understatement. 

If your constant on-the-go lifestyle has left you feeling run down, beat down and just plain old exhausted, then you need to stop and smell the proverbial roses for a little bit.

Taking time to enjoy something that is peaceful and that is just for you can do wonders for your health, your mental clarity and for your happiness. You don’t have to invest much time in such activities, either; reserving just 30 minutes a day to something that you enjoy and that promotes a bit of peacefulness and tranquility can do wonders.

Here’s a look at some activities that you can do for just 30 minutes a day and that will provide you with some simply amazing benefits.

Yoga: It seems like yoga is all the rage in the fitness world as of late (well, not really as of late; it’s been a trend for quite a while) – and there’s a reason why; yoga provides some pretty amazing benefits.

Just 30 minutes of yoga a day will help to increase your strength and flexibility, as well as tone your body. In addition to physical benefits, yoga can also increase your brain function. A recent study conducted by the University of Illinois found that people who participated in just 20 minutes of yoga a day experienced an increase in the speed and accuracy of their brain functions. Yoga also helps to reduce stress levels and boosts mental clarity; talk about some pretty amazing benefits for just 30 minutes of your time each day.

Meditation: Another activity that can provide fantastic benefits in just 30 minutes a day is meditation. When you think of people meditating, what comes to mind? People who are more peaceful, more astute and have more clarity? If so, there’s a good reason why – Because meditation helps to promote all of these things.

In fact, just 30 minutes of meditating a day can boost your creative thinking abilities, heighten your energy levels, decrease your stress levels and even ease the feelings of depression.

A Long Walk: If someone tells you to ‘go take a walk’, take them up on it! There are so many wonderful benefits associated with walking, and the best part is, it is so easy to do. Walking for just 30 minutes a day improves your cardiovascular health, decreases stress and anxiety, helps to keep off excess weight, tones muscles, boosts energy levels and it can even help to decrease your risk of dementia. Walking also just makes you happy. So kick off those painfulwork shoes and dust off your sneakers, and get moving. There is nothing more therapeutic than soaking up the warm sunshine and observing the beauty of nature while walking on a nice day.

Reading: Everyone knows that reading is important, but do you know why? Reading for just 30 minutes each day can increase your vocabulary, boost your creative thinking and critical thinking skills, stimulate your mind, improve your memory and focus and decrease stress levels. So, when you’re feeling like you just need to escape for a little while, curl up with a book or a magazine and submerse yourself in reading.

No matter how crazy your lifestyle is, you can spare just 30 minutes a day to enjoy the benefits that one of these activities can provide. You’ll be amazed by how much happier you will feel – you owe it to yourself!

Source: http://www.interplayhealth.com

By Caleb Hellerman

Earlier this week, Brian Shepherd sat down in a small doctor's office in Bethesda, Maryland. A technician swabbed his arm and gave him a quick jab with a needle.

With that, Shepherd became subject No. 13 in the experiment testing a potential Ebola vaccine.

The trial was launched on an emergency basis earlier this month by the National Institute on Allergy and Infectious Disease. It's the first to test this kind of Ebola vaccine in humans.

"It's not just for the money," Shepherd wrote in a Reddit AMA. "I'm very interested in translational research and experiencing it from the guinea pig side is very rewarding. But yeah, the money helps. This one study will fund most of my grad school application costs, though not in time for application season."

The vaccine doesn't use live virus and can't infect volunteers with Ebola. Instead it uses specific Ebola proteins to trigger an immune response. They're delivered through the body on a modified version of an adenovirus, a type of cold virus.

In the initial phase, 10 healthy volunteers were given a low dose of vaccine. They were monitored for side effects and tested to see if their bodies are producing antibodies. In the second phase, of which Brian is a part, an additional 10 volunteers are being given a higher dose.

All participants will be followed for nearly a year and tested at regular intervals.

Shepherd, who has volunteered for several prior research studies at NIH, spoke with CNN about his experience.

The following is a condensed version of that conversation:

CNN: How did you come to join the study?

Brian Shepherd: I actually work at NIH; I'm a post-doc researcher in a developmental biology lab. Most trials I learn about from reading a ListServ (email list).

I heard about the vaccine study from going to preliminary meetings for a different study.

CNN: When was this?

Shepherd: Less than a month ago. I had my first appointment on August 26. It was just a sit-down, to talk about the trial, go through paperwork and consent forms, explaining what the trial was for. Then they did an initial run-through of my health history.

CNN: What was next?

Shepherd: The next week I had my second appointment. They did a full physical, blood work, health history, breathing checks. A lot of poking and prodding. My third visit was Wednesday. They drew blood, then gave me a shot. Now, my next appointment is Sunday.

CNN: What was it like? You wrote that pulling off the Band-aid was the worst of the pain.

Shepherd: I'm supposed to keep a daily diary for the first seven days, logging my temperature and any symptoms. The next morning, I woke up with a slight fever, 100.5. I took some Tylenol and it went away.

Other than that I feel fine. In fact, I ran a half-mile in a relay race at lunchtime with some people from work.

CNN: You wrote that for each of these regular visits, you're paid $175. How many times have you been a human guinea pig?

Shepherd: This is my second drug trial. Before that, I did mostly MRI studies.

The first one I did, I was in the MRI machine and had three tasks. They gave me two buttons and showed pictures. If it was Spiderman, I'd hit one button; if it was the Green Goblin, I'd hit the other. So I spent 15 minutes playing Spiderman vs. Green Goblin.

CNN: Did you have any reservation at all, taking part in this Ebola vaccine trial?

Shepherd: None at all.

Source: http://www.cnn.com

By David McNamee

Wearable tech is all the rage right now, with Google Glass and now the Apple Watch being gadget fiends' latest must-have items. Electronic activity monitors may be the most popular example of health-monitoring wearable technology. A new analysis from researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston - published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research - compared 13 of these devices.

"Despite their rising popularity, little is known about how these monitors differ from one another, what options they provide in their applications and how these options may impact their effectiveness," says Elizabeth Lyons, senior author of the new study and assistant professor at the Institute for Translational Sciences at the university.

"The feedback provided by these devices can be as, if not more, comprehensive than that provided by health care professionals," she adds.

Lyons and her colleagues assessed 13 wearable activity monitors available on the consumer market. The team wanted to see how the devices may promote healthy and fit behaviors and determine how closely they match successful interventions.

The researchers also compared the functionality of the devices and their apps with clinical recommendations from health care professionals.

In their analysis, the researchers write that most of the goal-setting, self-monitoring and feedback tools in the apps bundled with the devices were consistent with the recommendations health care professionals make for their patients when promoting increase in physical activity.

Despite this, the analysis also finds that some proven successful strategies for increasing physical activity were absent from the monitors. These included:

• Action planning
• Instruction on how to do the behavior
• Commitment and problem solving.

Interestingly, though, the authors suggest that the apps with the most features may not be as useful as apps with fewer - but more effective - tools.

The researchers also consider that how successful any monitor is largely depends on matching individual preferences and needs to the functionality of the device. For instance, someone who gets most of their exercise from swimming will benefit the most from having a waterproof monitor.

Applications for activity monitors beyond aiding weight loss?

The report also contains suggestions on applications for these monitors outside of their typical role as weight loss aids.

For instance, the researchers suggest the wearable activity monitors could be useful for patients who have been released from the hospital. These patients could use the monitors to measure their recovery and quality of life.

Also, health care professionals could use data from the monitors to identify at-risk patients for secondary prevention and rehabilitation purposes.

Lyons says:

"This content analysis provides preliminary information as to what these devices are capable of, laying a foundation for clinical, public health and rehabilitation applications. Future studies are needed to further investigate new types of electronic activity monitors and to test their feasibility, acceptability and ultimately their public health impact."

The study only looked at devices compatible with personal computers and iOS mobile devices, and the researchers admit it is possible "the experiences of Android users may differ from our experiences."

Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com

Growing up, Adriana Perez experienced the kinds of challenges that are at the core of the immigrant experience in America. She learned English as a second language, attended underperforming public schools in a small town, and struggled to pay for college because her parents—who were farmworkers—couldn’t afford to send her.

Through it all, Perez focused on the gifts she received during her upbringing: love and support from her family, guidance from her teachers and mentors, a strong work ethic derived from a culture that values hard work, and a personal drive to make a difference in her community.

When she reached adulthood, she made an unusual choice—at least for her demographic group: She became a nurse. Now an assistant professor of nursing at Arizona State University, Perez, PhD, ANP, is a member of the most underrepresented racial or ethnic group in nursing.

In 2013, Latinos comprised 3 percent of the nation’s nursing workforce, according to a survey by the National Council of State Boards of Nursing and the National Forum of State Workforce Centers, and 17 percent of the nation’s population, according to a U.S. Census Bureau fact sheet. And their numbers are growing: By 2060, Latinos are projected to comprise nearly one-third of the U.S. population. But their growth in nursing has been slow, Perez said.

Recruiting more Latino nurses is about more than parity in the nursing workforce; it’s about improving health and health care for Latinos, who have disproportionately high rates of HIV transmission, teen pregnancy, and chronic conditions like obesity and diabetes, according to data compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Latinos also are less likely to have health care coverage than other racial or ethnic groups.

More Latino nurses can help narrow disparities, experts say, because they are more likely to be able to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate care to Latino patients. “Having a culturally competent nurse really makes a difference in terms of compliance and patient outcomes,” said Elias Provencio-Vasquez, PhD, RN, FAAN, FAANP, dean of the nursing school at the University of Texas at El Paso and an alumnus of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) Executive Nurse Fellows program (2009-2012). “Patients really respond when they have a provider who understands their culture.”

The Institute of Medicine (IOM)—the esteemed arm of the National Academy of Sciences that advises the nation’s leading decision-makers on matters relating to health and medicine—agrees. In 2004, it published a report calling for a more diverse health care workforce to improve quality and access to care and to narrow racial and ethnic health disparities. And in 2010, the IOM released a report that included calls for greater diversity within the nursing profession in particular.

Latinos Aren’t Flocking to Nursing

Yet despite their growing numbers, Latinos are not flocking en masse to the nursing profession.

That’s in large part because of inequity in education, said Dan Suarez, BSN, MA, president of the National Association of Hispanic Nurses. “Many Latinos come from poor educational systems, and few concentrate on the kinds of science and math courses that are needed to enter nursing school. Latinos have the highest high school drop-out rate in the nation, and many students are just focused on staying in school and making it to graduation.”

Meanwhile, there are relatively few Latino nurse leaders and educators who can serve as role models, coaches and mentors to the next generation of nurses, Perez said. “When young people aren’t able to see themselves in those roles, it’s hard to imagine that they could be in that role.”

Language and culture also play a role. Latino parents often discourage Latino youth—and especially boys—from pursuing nursing because it is regarded as a low-status, low-pay service job in Mexico and parts of Latino America, Suarez said. “Parents tell their children they can do better than nursing ... Nursing has an image problem, and we’re trying to change that.”

The culture’s emphasis on traditional gender roles also discourages Latina wives and mothers from working outside the home and, if they do, from pursuing leadership positions, said Mary Lou de Leon Siantz, PhD, RN, FAAN, a professor at the Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing at UC Davis and an RWJF Executive Nurse Fellows program alumna (2004-2007). “The majority of Latina nurses go into associate degree programs and don’t see the need to go back for more education.”

Racism against Latinos, she added, is “full-blown,” especially amid the national debate over immigration. Academics and others retain unconscious biases against Latinos and members of other groups that are underrepresented in nursing.

RWJF is committed to increasing diversity in nursing through programs such as New Careers in Nursing, which works to increase the diversity of nursing professionals to help alleviate the nursing shortage, and the RWJF Nursing and Health Policy Collaborative at the University of New Mexico, which prepares nurses, especially those from underserved populations in the Southwest, to become distinguished leaders in health policy. The Future of Nursing: Campaign for Action, a joint initiative of RWJF and AARP, is working to diversify the nursing workforce, with help from Perez and others. The National Association of Hispanic Nurses, meanwhile, offers scholarships to Latino nursing students.

But more needs to be done, Siantz and others said. Educational bridge programs to help students transition into nursing school are needed, as are interventions to dispel negative stereotypes about nursing among Latinos and increased mentorship for aspiring nurses and nursing students.  “Latino nurses often talk about the influence of a family member, or a role model, or a mentor who told them to be a nurse,” said Perez, whose grandmother, a nurse in Mexico, encouraged her to pursue nursing in the United States. “We need to do more of that kind of outreach.”

Source: http://www.rwjf.org

By Nicole Scobie

Here's a light-hearted look at cancer treatment from the point of view of my son Elliot, who was only 4 1/2 when he was diagnosed. I know many of the adults I am in touch with who have cancer or who are helping a person with cancer through this journey, will relate!

Advice to adults with cancer from a 5-year-old:

1. It is perfectly acceptable to have a complete tantrum and throw your shoes around just before leaving for the hospital.

2. You always deserve a present after chemo.

3. If you feel like showing more respect and politeness to the hospital clown than your oncologist, that's OK.

4. If you manage to grab the syringe of medicine from the nurse, it's their loss and you are then allowed to squirt its entire content around the room.

5. You are allowed to complain loudly about any smells like perfume, but you are also allowed to fart freely whenever and wherever you want.

6. Anyone who says "this one tastes like syrup" better be not be lying or they can expect to catch some spit.

7. You are allowed to worry about life and death, but only to the same extent that you worry about whether Santa Claus will be able enter your home if you don't have a chimney.

8. Speaking of worry, you are not allowed to worry about anything that is not going to happen today or tomorrow.

9. Any bad thing that happened in the past should be quickly erased from your mind using ice cream.

10. It's OK to throw up directly on your caregiver instead of into the bucket they are holding. It will create warm and funny memories for them once this is all over.

11. Good friends may stare when they first see you without any hair, but they are quickly more interested in all your new toys. So make sure you have lots of new toys around all the time.

12. It is the right thing to do to jump off the examining table if the doctor's hands are too cold.

13. A popsicle for breakfast is a good idea and goes well with bacon.

14. If someone rubs your bald head and says you're cute, you should stare at them in complete boredom until they stop.

15. Always believe that scars are badges of courage and make you look like a pirate or a superhero.

16. Jumping on the bed is a perfectly acceptable form of exercise.

17. Someone should always be available to carry you if you don't feel like walking anymore and they will be grateful if you look at them lovingly and say, "You're walking too slowly."

18. It's a good idea to frequently press the little button next to the bed that makes the nurse come running, because she might be lonely and bored and enjoys picking your crayon up from the floor.

19. The only part of hospital food you should eat is the dessert. The rest is not really food, anyway.

20. Make having fun your priority all the time, no matter where you are or what's going to happen next.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com

Youtube

By Alice Gomstyn

How do you pass the time when cancer treatment means you're largely confined to your hospital room for weeks on end?

Tom Gillin, a 19-year-old college student, chose a less-than-obvious choice: He filmed a funny rap video channeling Jay-Z via the cancer ward.

"Some of the other videos I've seen about cancer patients are somewhat depressing," said Gillin, who was diagnosed with the pediatric cancer acute myeloid leukemia in April. "We wanted to flip the switch and do something that was the opposite of that."

Gillin teamed with several staffers at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia to create "Bald So Hard." The video's title refers to Gillin's chemotherapy-related hair loss but is also a play on the phrase "ball so hard" featured prominently in a hit song by Jay-Z and Kanye West. The song is parodied in Gillin's video, as is Jay-Z's "Empire State of Mind."

The rollicking video — promoted on Twitter with the hashtag #BaldSoHard — is full of swagger. Gillin is seen mouthing lyrics such as "bald so hard my head got shiny" while dancing with his oncologist, playing basketball and even steering a "boat," a cardboard cutout made by hospital art therapist Abbien Crowley. (The actual rap was performed, mostly off camera, by University of Pennsylvania medical student David Blitzer.)

But Gillin didn't shy away from the fatigue and boredom confronting hospital cancer patients. It took him and his hospital pals some two months to complete the three-minute video since chemotherapy treatments often left him too weak to shoot.

The song's lyrics, written by Gillin and CHOP music therapist Mike Mahoney, manage to make light of it: "They gave me sleeping meds all day and I was dozing/When I got up I was so bored that I watched 'Frozen.'"

Gillin said his main motivation for making the video was to raise awareness of pediatric cancer, though he'd also appreciate it if Jay-Z — one of the teen's favorite rappers — took note of the unusual homage and paid the hospital a visit.

But don't expect Gillin to use the video to launch his own hip hop career. "I'm not that musically inclined," he insists.

Instead, he's looking forward to completing his final round of chemotherapy in a couple of weeks and ultimately returning to student life at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he's studying civil engineering.

For now, he's enjoying the happy reactions to his video, which has generated more than 20,000 views on YouTube since it debuted late last month. The Jigga Man himself hasn't yet weighed in but plenty of others say they love Gillin's jam, with one YouTube user dubbing it "best medicine in the world."

Source: http://www.today.com

It's the mother of all hackathons — a group of MIT researchers are bringing together engineers, designers, health experts and parents with the goal of building a better breast pump. "We really want to bring the breast pump out of the lactation closet," said Alexis Hope, a research assistant at the MIT Media Lab. "If you talk to moms about something that makes the first part of having a baby miserable, they always say the breast pump. They're loud, they have a million parts, they're impossible to clean, heavy. They're completely impractical for the realities of your life."

In May, a small group from the lab came together to brainstorm, and a blog post about their efforts drew so much interest the organizers — who include four moms — decided to expand. They expect up to 80 people to join forces Sept. 20 and 21 and work all weekend "to make the breast pump not suck." Participants will split into five-person teams and then pitch their prototypes to the group at the end. Hope said it's "just a starting point," but ideally some of the innovations will catch the eye of pump manufacturers.

Half of all new moms in the United States now breastfeed for the six months recommended by pediatricians. Many of them use pumps to produce milk for when they return to work or are away from the baby. Studies have shown breast milk and nursing has health benefits for both the infant and the mother.

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com

For three young siblings, eating is a life or death proposition, thanks to a rare white blood cell disease, reported KSL.

The Frisk children— Jaxen, age 9; Tieler, age 7; Boston, age 4— have spent weeks in the hospital and are allergic to pets, pollens and multiple foods. The siblings all have eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorder (EGID), an abnormal build-up of eosinophil white blood cells in their GI tracts that can cause inflammation and tissue damage in response to foods and allergens. While the disease is relatively rare, it has increased in prevalence over the past decade affecting one in 2,000 people, according to the American Partnership for Eosinophilic Disorders.

"You need food to survive. But it is also what can kill you in our house," their mother, Jenny Frisk, told KSL.

When they’re exposed to their triggers, the children could have an anaphylactic reaction— potentially fatal allergic symptoms throughout the body.

"Tieler had one sip of milk when she was 1-year-old, and instantly started projectile vomiting and got hives all over her body," her father, Gary, told KSL. "It's a life and death situation at birthday parties, or religious events, or anywhere we go, because food is such a big part of our culture."

Between the three children, they’ve endured 11 surgeries and eight extended hospital stays, with more expected in the future.

On top of the children’s health issues, Gary battled cancer two years ago and Jenny had to have several surgeries due to serious adrenal insufficiencies that were unrelated to EGID.

The family has been bankrupted twice by medical bills. While they make too much income to qualify for help, they don’t make enough to pay for their children’s medical needs. Friends and family have started a GoFundMe account to raise money to pay for genetic testing and treatment.

"When we're looking at an illness that is not curable, and the treatment isn't covered (by insurance), the light at the end of the tunnel is really far away," Jenny said.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com

By David McNamee

Recently, Medical News Today reported on a breakthrough in xenotransplantation - the science of transplanting functional organs from one species to another. Scientists from the Cardiothoracic Surgery Research Program of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) demonstrated success in keeping genetically engineered piglet hearts alive in the abdomens of baboons for more than a year.

While that is a sentence that might sound absurd, or even nightmarish to some, xenotransplantation is a credible science involving the work of leading scientists and respected organizations like the NHLBI and the Mayo Clinic, as well as large private pharmaceutical firms such as United Therapeutics and Novartis.

What is more, xenotransplantation is not a new science, with experiments in cross-species blood transfusion dating as far back as the 17th century.

Why transplant the organs of animals into living humans?

The reason why xenotransplantation is a burning issue is very simple: because of a crippling shortage of available organs for patients who require transplants, many people are left to die.

US Government information on transplantation reports that an average of 79 people receive organ transplants every day, but that 18 people die each day because of a shortage of organs.

The number of people requiring an organ donation in the US has witnessed a more than five-fold increase in the past 2 decades - from 23,198 in 1991 to 121,272 in 2013. Over the same period, the number of people willing to donate has only doubled - 6,953 donors in 1991, compared with 14,257 donors in 2013.

Although some researchers are attempting to solve this shortage by developing mechanical components that could assist failing organs, these devices are considered to increase the risk of infection, blood clots and bleeding in the patient.

Stem cell research is also actively pursuing the goal of growing replacement organs, but despite regular news of breakthroughs, the reality of a functional lab-grown human organ fit for transplant is a long way off.

As the NHLBI's Dr. Muhammad M. Mohiuddin, who led the team responsible for the baboon trial, explained:

"Until we learn to grow organs via tissue engineering, which is unlikely in the near future, xenotransplantation seems to be a valid approach to supplement human organ availability. Despite many setbacks over the years, recent genetic and immunologic advancements have helped revitalized progress in the xenotransplantation field.

Xenotransplantation could help to compensate for the shortage of human organs available for transplant."

Xenotransplantation's eccentric history

The earliest known example of using animal body parts to replace diseased or faulty components of human bodies dates back to the 17th century, when Jean Baptiste Denis initiated the clinical practice of animal-to-human blood transfusion.

Perhaps predictably, the results were not successful and xenotransfusion was banned in Denis' native France.

Fast forward to the 19th century and a fairly unusual trend for skin xenotransplantation had emerged. Animals as varied as sheep, rabbits, dogs, cats, rats, chickens and pigeons were called upon to donate their skin, but the grafting process was not for the squeamish.

Medical records show that, in order for the xenosurgeons of the time to be satisfied that the donor skin had vascularized (developed capillaries), the living donor animal would usually have to be strapped to the patient for several days. However, the most popular skin donor - the frog - was typically skinned alive and then immediately grafted onto the patient.

Despite several reputed successes, modern physicians are skeptical that these skin grafts could have been in any way beneficial to the patient.

The first corneal xenotransplantation - where the cornea from a pig was implanted in a human patient - took place as early as 1838. However, scientists would not look seriously again at the potential for xenotransplantation until the 20th century and the first successes in human-to-human organ transplantation.

In 1907, the Nobel prize-winning surgeon Alexis Carrel - whose work on blood vessels made organ transplantation viable for the first time - wrote:

"The ideal method would be to transplant in man organs of animals easy to secure and operate on, such as hogs, for instance. But it would in all probability be necessary to immunize organs of the hog against the human serum. The future of transplantation of organs for therapeutic purposes depends on the feasibility of hetero [xeno] transplantation."

These words have been described as "prophetic" because Carrel is describing the exact line of research adopted by xenotransplantation scientists a century later.

A few years later, another leading scientist, Serge Voronoff, would also predict modern science's interest in using the pancreatic islets of pigs to treat severe type 1 diabetes in human patients. However, other xeno experiments by Voronoff have not endured critical reappraisal quite so well.

Voronoff's main scientific interest was in restoring the "zest for life" of elderly men. His attempt to reverse this element of the aging process was to transplant slices of chimpanzee or baboon testicle into the testicles of his elderly patients.

Incredibly, this surgery proved quite popular, with several hundred operations taking place during the 1920s in both the US and Europe.

By the 1960s, despite limited availability, the transplantation of kidneys from deceased to living humans had been established by French and American surgeons.

Dialysis was not yet in practice and given that, in the absence of an available donor kidney, his renal failure patients were facing certain death, the Louisiana surgeon Keith Reemtsma took the unprecedented step of transplanting animal kidneys. He chose chimpanzees as the donor animals, due to their close evolutionary relationship with humans.

Although 12 of his 13 chimpanzee-to-human transplants resulted in either organ rejection or infectious complications within 2 months, one patient of Reemtsma continued to live and work in good health for 9 months, before dying suddenly from acute electrolyte disturbance. Autopsy showed that the chimpanzee kidneys had not been rejected and were working normally.

Experiments in the xenotransplantation of essential organs continued in living patients until the 1980s - without lasting success. However, the procedures attracted widespread publicity, with some attributing a subsequent rise in organ donation to the failed attempt to transplant a baboon heart into a baby girl in 1983.

Where does research currently stand?

Despite the more obvious similarities between humans and other primates, pigs are now considered to be the most viable donor animal for xenotransplantation.

Despite diverging from humans on the evolutionary scale about 80 million years ago, whole genome sequencing of the pig has shown that humans and pigs share similar DNA, while the pig's organs - in size and function - are anatomically comparable to humans.

However, perhaps the main advantage of the pig as donor is in its availability - potentially providing an "unlimited supply" of donor organs. If transplantation is viable, pig donors would provide an immediate solution for the organ shortage problem.

Xenotransplantation optimists also believe that the process can improve on the existing success rate of transplantation of human organs. By keeping the pigs healthy, regularly monitored for infection, and alive right until the point when the required organs are excised under anesthesia, the adverse effects associated with transplantation from deceased donors - such as non-function of organs or transmission of pathogens - would be much less likely, this group argues.

However, there are still significant scientific barriers to the successful implementation of xenotransplantation.

The company United Therapeutics - who moved into xenotransplantation research after the daughter of CEO Martine Rothblatt was diagnosed with pulmonary hypertension, a condition with a 90% shortage rate of available lung donors - claim to be making progress with eliminating these barriers.

MedIcal News Today spoke to Rothblatt, who once claimed that the company will have successfully transplanted a pig lung into a human patient "before the end of the decade."

"For a first clinical trial, which was my goal, I think we are on track," she told us. "I said our goal by end of decade is to transplant a xeno lung into a patient with end-stage lung disease and bring them safely back to health."

As well as pioneering lung xenotransplants, the company has ambitions of making pig kidneys, livers, hearts and corneas available for human transplant.

"All are years away, but lung may well be most difficult," admits Rothblatt. "We call it the canary in the coal mine."

In order to make pig lungs compatible with humans, Rothblatt has estimated that 12 modifications need to be made to the pig genome that will prevent rejection. She claims United Therapeutics have now succeeded in making six of these genome modifications.

Also, it was United Therapeutics' genetically modified piglets that provided the world record-beating pig hearts for the NHLBI study in baboons.

Opposition to xenotransplantation

However, science is not the only obstacle to xenotransplantation. Despite clearing all steps of the research with ethics committees at every step, Rothblatt - who has a doctorate in medical ethics - admits there will be unforeseeable regulatory dilemmas and ethics conversations before xenotransplantation can be accepted into clinical practice.

In 2004, the UK's Policy Studies Institute conducted the first major survey of public attitudes towards potential solutions for the organ shortage crisis. The public perception of xenotransplantation was shown to be overwhelmingly negative.

Indeed, response to animal-to-human transplantation was so hostile that some respondents demanded that it be removed as an option on the survey. Although many respondents considered xenotransplantation unethical, the major concern was that animal viruses could infect humans and spread into the population.

Following the survey, an intriguing debate over the ethics of xenotransplantation took place in the pages of Philosophy Now. Making the case against xenotransplantation, Laura Purdy - professor emerita of philosophy at Wells College in Aurora, NY - commented that "the xeno debate proceeds as if saving lives is our top moral priority." She argues that, from this perspective, it suggests that the lives lost down the line as a result of perfecting xenotransplantation do not count.

"What about the 11 million babies and children who die every year from diarrhea, malaria, measles, pneumonia, AIDS and malnutrition?" she questioned. "What about the half-million women who die every year during pregnancy and childbirth when simple measures could save most of them?"

We asked Prof. Purdy why the fact that people die from matters unrelated to transplantation issues would morally preclude science from attempting to also solve the issue of organ donor shortages.

"I agree that, other things being equal, saying that people are dying from other causes doesn't show why we should not also tackle this cause," she replied.

"But once one has taken on board the larger risks to society, both from the research as well as the deployment of the technology, as well as the probability that this is merely a bridge technology that, hopefully will be made obsolete by future developments (such as partial or whole artificial hearts) or advances in public health (making headway against diabetes) and the probability that both research and implementation will be very expensive, that seriously erodes the case for proceeding.

Resources for health are far from infinite. There is a great deal that we could be doing now to advance human health that does not have these downsides - why not focus more there?"

Whether public attitudes toward xenotransplantation have mellowed in the decade since the Policy Studies Institute's survey is not currently known.

However, as the technology advances and the likelihood of implementation draws closer, so too must the public conversation over the perceived rights and wrongs of animal organ transplantation advance in order to hold the science accountable.

Do you have a view on this issue? If so, use our comments box to join the debate.

Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com