Registered User
another repulsive thing ive discovered in the history of vaccines..
Registered User
Just discovered? That's routinely taught in A-level biology now.
If the cells of the late Henriette Lacks can give us a cure for cancer, the only thing I will say against it is that her children and grandchildren should have been treated better than they have been. Which is what I already say, cure or not.
Registered User
Taught in biology since when? When I went through uni and did units in human biol, there was never any teaching on this.. so you mean to tell me they are now brainwashing children at school to think this sort of thing is ok?? each to their own i guess.. but this sort of thing in science imo just goes against all common sense and good reason and is totally unethical.. the other thing to say against it - perhaps she should have been asked for her consent before her cells were taken and used in such a manner... there's no justification really.
Registered User
Well, we did it in my biology degree many, many years ago, I know it has been taught for a couple of years at least as an A-level biology ethics thing... it is unethical but then so is most of the world, at least this may have a positive outcome.
I should have been asked for consent before being carved up, yet no-one thought to do that. Consent and doctors just don't happen, IME. That's the medical world and it won't change very soon.
Moderator
Haven't actually read the links but if you're interested in the Henrietta Lacks' life and the HeLa line there is a wonderful book about it. It's called The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks.
Yes, it's a travesty that whilst many Doctors, scientists and pharmaceutical companies have profited from her cells her family can't afford medical insurance or basic health care. Interestingly enough the researcher who grew her cells (which was a massive, massive breakthrough in medical research) never profited from them - he gave them away for free (and the medium they grew in). He was given cells from many dead patients the HeLa cells were special because they grew and because of them we understand all sorts of things about cells we never would have known. FWIW there is still a question over the ownership of discarded body tissue.
IMO Tuskegee syphilis experiment was far more awful than removing cells from a dead woman without consent.
Registered User
Tinkerbelle, Lady Zaidie lives in the UK, so it would be a different course to what you would be familiar with
Moderator
Registered User
Onyx - thanks for the info..
Not sure I needed to read this.. but I guess better to be informed. Ive always wondered about this exact thing -what happens to my blood when Ive had a blood test after they've done the tests. Especially with the whole technology of cloning these days.. and who knows what other technology they invent in the future, I want my tissues to remain mine and mine only!! This is the exact reason I decided to take my placenta home from the hospital - just a sneaking suspicion it wouldnt be disposed of properly by the hospital..
If this is happening in Australia, I want to know, and I want my tissues back!!! If I was aware of my tissues sitting in a lab somewhere, I would be absolutely furious and walk straight into that lab and retrieve them myself, and slap the researchers in the face in the process!! Makes me want to go and do a bit of research...
I dont agree with this sort of thing AT ALL. What peeves me off the most is that the medical field is so quick to shoot any researcher down whose study does not meet ethics requirements (as in the case of Wakefield), but then they do these diabolical unethical ridiculous disgusting apalling things in ""medicine"" and think its justified!!! Yes can you tell how angry I am at the thought of this.. and how little trust I have left in the medical field (which is why I started studying naturopathy). Having suffered a similar (very rare) illness to Henrietta Lacks myself, I would be devastated, appalled and feel absolutely sick if my cells were being used in a vaccine being injected to billions of people around the world every day.
BellyBelly Life Subscriber
If that shocks you...you might also be interested in the fact those bits of cardboard they use when they take the heel ***** samples from your newborns aren't actually thrown out...they are archived and stored for twenty years for research purposes...they will only be destroyed if you specifically ask for it.....now I think THAT is a really scary prospect......
Senior Moderator
Although Mel, they can come in useful... Jaidyn Leskie's body was identified using DNA markers from his heel ***** card...
BellyBelly Life Subscriber
yeah true....but is all the potential for other less altruistic DNA stuff that bothers me somewhat......
Registered User
I hear you Melbel! Funnily enough I was just thinking of that before and wondering about that possibility.. I might just contact my hospital to enquire and ask for it to be destroyed.
BellyBelly Life Subscriber
Well, they can keep my pap smear test. That's one package I DO NOT want in the mail.
So I'm not sure why it would bother you that your used samples may (but probably not) help in the advancement of disease research. It certainly doesn't bother me - but I'm a blood, bone marrow & organ donor.
(And the HeLa samples were taken in the 1950's, when it was ethical, even if it's not now. Your outrage appears to be about 60years belated)
Moderator
Tinkabelle, if you don't want your tissue used you should write that on your consent forms because legally your discarded tissue probably doesn't belong to you. I don't know of an Australian trial about it but if you google John Moore you will see that he tried to claim profits on research using his tissue and he lost the case.
Can I ask... hypothetically, if one of your loved ones or you was dying of cancer and they offered you a new treatment that was still in the trial stage would you refuse because it would mean that your tissue became theirs.
I understand that on a very basic level the thought of someone else patenting your blood cells and profiting from it is kind of discomforting but TBH if my unwanted tissue saved lives I would be ok with it. Should an artist who used something from your bin to make a sculpture have to share the profits/intellectual rights with you? To me tissue use is a similar issue - to me it's useless abut after some work it might be something else.
BTW - as far as I know the more important cell line in vaccinations comes from a fetus that was aborted in the 60's. Feel free to correct me because I'm not 100% sure....
I am confused about why it would bother you if it's to help save a life
Registered User
Exactly!!!! I am quite happy to give up anything I don't need if it could save someone's life. That's why I am an organ donor. As soon as I have popped this baby out I am putting myself on the bone marrow registry. I think there are way more improtant things to worry about than what happens to a bit of our blood or tissue.
Moderator
It's not so simple as that. In the years after taking tissue form Henrietta Lacks they also took tissue from her family and conducted tests on them without informing them about why. Her family only found out the truth by accident.
The research that they did in the Nazi death camps is still used today. It has saved lives but you know what it still bothers me.
Informed consent is one of the cornerstones of modern medicine. IMO informed consent should also cover what will happen to any tissue that is collected/discarded.
Registered User
And THAT onyx, is the crux of it for me, I have no problem being an organ/tissue donor, bacause that is MY CHOICE. the problem here is an ethical one in that some/most are given no choice.
I certainly had no idea about any of this before reading this thread!
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks