challenge: head transplantation accepted medical procedure

Exactly what it says on the tin. Head transplantation can easily be seen as a miracle cure, with some flaws obviously. How could we get a more positive response after the first successful trials than Frankenstein comments? Many people might actually prefer being paralyzed to dying a slow horrible death caused by an deadly illness that can’t be treated yet. So how can the world be convinced that it is a good last resort surgery for suffering people? New improved wheelchairs and other assistance technology for quadriplegic, that was developed in the meantime, should make it even easier palatable.
Yes this question is meant seriously. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_J._White#Guide_to_performing_brain_transplants
 
Well, points for original thinking. Welcome to the board.

Other than that I've got nothing.;)

SOunds pretty horrible. I'll give it some thought.

Maybe for already paralyzed people with terminal illnesses?

Now if this was FH...
 
Regardless of ethical issues, problem is its impossible at this time. Having some animal experiments "survive" for couple of days is eons from something that could actually be considered success.

1. We have no means of successfully reconnection the spinal column.

2. Organ rejection? I don't even want to imagine it.

3. Medicine can keep some organs stored for hours and days for transplantation. Brain has 10 minutes without oxygen before real death. Body to which the transplantation is done would also cause a huge time pressure, it can't be stored in any way, you would have to find way to keep the body alive without the brain.

4. How would you possibly find a donor? Death by accident has the body and organs damage and failure, as well as death by natural causes.

Brain transplants are for the time being, and at least for next several decades only a thing of grisly fiction.
 
[FONT=&quot]Regardless of ethical issues, problem is its impossible at this time. Having some animal experiments "survive" for couple of days is eons from something that could actually be considered success. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The article says that they were indeed capable of letting the monkey live infinitely but considered that an “ethical problem” and killed it. Besides the first human heart transplantations weren’t very successful in this regards either.

1. We have no means of successfully reconnection the spinal column. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]No never claimed that, you will still be [/FONT]quadriplegic[FONT=&quot] but at least you have the choice between that and death/endless chronic pain.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Organ rejection? I don't even want to imagine it. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]2. Well keep in mind that you don’t have any spinal connection to your lower body half, so for better or worse it is kind of an organic lung/heart/dialysis machine combination.

3. Medicine can keep some organs stored for hours and days for transplantation. Brain has 10 minutes without oxygen before real death. Body to which the transplantation is done would also cause a huge time pressure, it can't be stored in any way, you would have to find way to keep the body alive without the brain.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Cooling it down should solve that problem, as mentioned in the article. The more experience they have the better things will become compare this to heart transplantation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]And they succeed with the monkeys.

4. How would you possibly find a donor? Death by accident has the body and organs damage and failure, as well as death by natural causes. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Indeed the worst problem. You have to find someone brain-dead, by head injury or brain tumor and so forth.[/FONT] Here POD leading to a broader donor basis would be useful (probably something like organ donor by default, non organ donor by choice). The positive side effect would be finding better matches for donors and receiving. Still I will probably remain a rather fringe method for a long time.[FONT=&quot]

Brain transplants are for the time being, and at least for next several decades only a thing of grisly fiction.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

Indeed that why i never referred to brain transplantation but to head transplantation which already happened quite some time ago (in the 1970s). The grisly part is your personal opinion I would like to have the choice at least, though I am not sure how I would decide (not that it is relevant to the chal[/FONT]lenge)
 
Wouldn't this be better referred to as "whole body transplants", since a person's identity is lodged in the head?

Regardless, even if the procedure is possible, extensive research on it would be a tremendous waste of money and effort, especially when more advanced artificial organs and prostheses to replicate necessary bodily functions to support a head/brain are probably easier to accomplish in the long term than grafting people's heads onto other people's bodies.
 
Top