5 ms·

If pigs (or any animal) broaden the compatibility to other organs, what are the ethical implications for raising them with the intention to harvest their organs

If pigs (or any animal) broaden the compatibility to other organs, what are the ethical implications for raising them with the intention to harvest their organs, if any? On one hand, we already raise pigs to kill and eat routinely, and (mostly) people don't care - is this any different than say, buying a pig heart at the market to eat? On the other hand, it does somehow feel different to me, perhaps because sharing organs somehow humanizes the pigs by emphasizing our similarity? I'm not entirely sure from where my hesitation stems. I'm curious if anyone else read this story with mixed reactions.

zanethomas 5y ago
Eat all the bacon you want, get heart disease, get new heart, eat more bacon.
- khazhoux 5y ago
  Classic platform lock-in strategy.
- znpy 5y ago
  It's pigs all the way down
- m3at 5y ago
  A documentary called South Park showed just that in this episode: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Bar_(South_Park) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Bar_(South_Park) /s
- doctor_eval 5y ago
  Same pig supplies the heart AND the bacon.
TulliusCicero 5y ago
> On one hand, we already raise pigs to kill and eat routinely, and (mostly) people don't care - is this any different than say, buying a pig heart at the market to eat? Yes, in that it's morally superior to eating meat. Eating meat is mostly a nutritional luxury, but needing functioning organs is not. I'm a meat eater, but I imagine there are a number of vegetarians who would be okay with this sort of organ harvesting process. Of course, if we end up able to grow organs in a lab environment instead of inside an animal, that's probably better for all involved.
- badRNG 5y ago
  A (somewhat?) vegan perspective. I've teetered on staying committed to veganism for ethical reasons, and have spent time on and off with vegan diets. I don't at all think (nor do I think most vegans think [see disclaimer]) that pigs are worthy of equal moral consideration as humans. I, along with most humans, think that pigs as well as other animals are worthy of some level of moral consideration. Most would be rightfully outraged at the torture of animals for fun, for instance. Vegans take it a small step further, the moral consideration of a pig outweighs the pleasure provided to our taste buds by consuming their flesh. The prior two examples of consumption and torture, while vastly different, are also on a whole different level than raising pigs to save human lives. If you agree that pigs and humans are NOT morally equivalent (which is most people, including most vegans [see disclaimer],) then I think you are committed to the idea that it is imperative to raise and kill pigs to save human lives. [Disclaimer: neither vegans or non-vegans are monoliths. There are countless ethical, religious, and practical frameworks one will employ to arrive at any particular ethical position.]
  - jakear 5y ago
    A bit off topic but you seem level-headed and I've been wondering about this for a while: what's your vegan "endgame"? The way I see it, the "vegan utopia" would get rid of all small family farms (even strictly milk/egg ones) -- where animals are given all the food they need, have access to good medical care, are sheltered from predators, and are able to reproduce and nurse offspring -- and replace all that with... a couple animals scrapping it out against the brutality of raw, unfiltered, natural selection? I wouldn't want that for myself, and I don't know of any vegans who have opted into that lifestyle either. So what gives? Why is the vegan "morally correct" thing to force onto animals the opposite of what we collectively opt into as humans? (Plenty of people say they want to "escape from it all" and go live in the woods, but to actually commit to that for any amount of time is... rare.)
    - TulliusCicero 5y ago
      > The way I see it, the "vegan utopia" would get rid of all small family farms (even strictly milk/egg ones) -- where animals are given all the food they need, have access to good medical care, are sheltered from predators, and are able to reproduce and nurse offspring This is, like, the most charitable interpretation possible of the current state of farming for meat.
GiorgioG 5y ago
> what are the ethical implications for raising them with the intention to harvest their organs, if any? We slaughter more than 100m pigs per year in the US for food. I don’t think a few more million are going to cause a moral dilemma.
- Sporktacular 5y ago
  It's vivisection, but hopefully less painfully/traumatically than some slaughterhouses.
  - kgin 5y ago
    There isn’t any propofol at slaughterhouses
    - Sporktacular 5y ago
      Yeah, those experiment animals are so lucky...
drooby 5y ago
Don’t you know? Humans are pigs. /s Interesting and wild hypothesis. http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html
monkeybutton 5y ago
What about growing human organs in pigs? Like the pigoons from Oryx and Crake. http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1177 http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1177
- TulliusCicero 5y ago
  Then you have the reverse problem of the pigs rejecting the human organs, I suppose.
  - grumple 5y ago
    I guess you could immunosuppress the pigs until maturity, then transplant the organ?
baconforce 5y ago
Killing a pig to save a life of someone dying is very different than killing a pig so someone can have pork chops for dinner.
lupire 5y ago
In the book Treason, people are bred for spare parts.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  A Planet Called Treason, right? Yow. Surprised to see it mentioned here, or, well, anywhere.
Sporktacular 5y ago
"I'm curious if anyone else read this story with mixed reactions." Definitely. There are the whole experimentation and vivisection angles that makes it potentially more abusive and agonising than slaughter, especially under the usual commercial incentives, weak jurisdictions etc. The headlines will inevitably come.
giarc 5y ago
If they were raised for organs rather than meat for consumption, we'd likely treat them better. Not only because of the emotional causes, but because they'd probably be worth a lot of money so the investment would be greater to keeping them alive.

zanethomas 5y ago

Eat all the bacon you want, get heart disease, get new heart, eat more bacon.

khazhoux 5y ago
Classic platform lock-in strategy.
znpy 5y ago
It's pigs all the way down
m3at 5y ago
A documentary called South Park showed just that in this episode: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Bar_(South_Park) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Bar_(South_Park) /s
doctor_eval 5y ago
Same pig supplies the heart AND the bacon.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

> On one hand, we already raise pigs to kill and eat routinely, and (mostly) people don't care - is this any different than say, buying a pig heart at the market to eat? Yes, in that it's morally superior to eating meat. Eating meat is mostly a nutritional luxury, but needing functioning organs is not. I'm a meat eater, but I imagine there are a number of vegetarians who would be okay with this sort of organ harvesting process. Of course, if we end up able to grow organs in a lab environment instead of inside an animal, that's probably better for all involved.

badRNG 5y ago
A (somewhat?) vegan perspective. I've teetered on staying committed to veganism for ethical reasons, and have spent time on and off with vegan diets. I don't at all think (nor do I think most vegans think [see disclaimer]) that pigs are worthy of equal moral consideration as humans. I, along with most humans, think that pigs as well as other animals are worthy of some level of moral consideration. Most would be rightfully outraged at the torture of animals for fun, for instance. Vegans take it a small step further, the moral consideration of a pig outweighs the pleasure provided to our taste buds by consuming their flesh. The prior two examples of consumption and torture, while vastly different, are also on a whole different level than raising pigs to save human lives. If you agree that pigs and humans are NOT morally equivalent (which is most people, including most vegans [see disclaimer],) then I think you are committed to the idea that it is imperative to raise and kill pigs to save human lives. [Disclaimer: neither vegans or non-vegans are monoliths. There are countless ethical, religious, and practical frameworks one will employ to arrive at any particular ethical position.]
- jakear 5y ago
  A bit off topic but you seem level-headed and I've been wondering about this for a while: what's your vegan "endgame"? The way I see it, the "vegan utopia" would get rid of all small family farms (even strictly milk/egg ones) -- where animals are given all the food they need, have access to good medical care, are sheltered from predators, and are able to reproduce and nurse offspring -- and replace all that with... a couple animals scrapping it out against the brutality of raw, unfiltered, natural selection? I wouldn't want that for myself, and I don't know of any vegans who have opted into that lifestyle either. So what gives? Why is the vegan "morally correct" thing to force onto animals the opposite of what we collectively opt into as humans? (Plenty of people say they want to "escape from it all" and go live in the woods, but to actually commit to that for any amount of time is... rare.)
  - TulliusCicero 5y ago
    > The way I see it, the "vegan utopia" would get rid of all small family farms (even strictly milk/egg ones) -- where animals are given all the food they need, have access to good medical care, are sheltered from predators, and are able to reproduce and nurse offspring This is, like, the most charitable interpretation possible of the current state of farming for meat.

GiorgioG 5y ago

> what are the ethical implications for raising them with the intention to harvest their organs, if any? We slaughter more than 100m pigs per year in the US for food. I don’t think a few more million are going to cause a moral dilemma.

Sporktacular 5y ago
It's vivisection, but hopefully less painfully/traumatically than some slaughterhouses.
- kgin 5y ago
  There isn’t any propofol at slaughterhouses
  - Sporktacular 5y ago
    Yeah, those experiment animals are so lucky...

drooby 5y ago

Don’t you know? Humans are pigs. /s Interesting and wild hypothesis. http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html http://www.macroevolution.net/human-origins.html

monkeybutton 5y ago

What about growing human organs in pigs? Like the pigoons from Oryx and Crake. http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1177 http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1177

TulliusCicero 5y ago
Then you have the reverse problem of the pigs rejecting the human organs, I suppose.
- grumple 5y ago
  I guess you could immunosuppress the pigs until maturity, then transplant the organ?

baconforce 5y ago

Killing a pig to save a life of someone dying is very different than killing a pig so someone can have pork chops for dinner.

lupire 5y ago

In the book Treason, people are bred for spare parts.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
A Planet Called Treason, right? Yow. Surprised to see it mentioned here, or, well, anywhere.

Sporktacular 5y ago

"I'm curious if anyone else read this story with mixed reactions." Definitely. There are the whole experimentation and vivisection angles that makes it potentially more abusive and agonising than slaughter, especially under the usual commercial incentives, weak jurisdictions etc. The headlines will inevitably come.

giarc 5y ago

If they were raised for organs rather than meat for consumption, we'd likely treat them better. Not only because of the emotional causes, but because they'd probably be worth a lot of money so the investment would be greater to keeping them alive.