12 ms·
First baby born in UK to woman with transplanted womb
- remarkEon 2y agoMRKH is inherited, which adds an additional ethnical layer to this.
- gadders 2y agoApparently so are most of the male conditions that require ICSI IVF.
- remarkEon 2y agoInteresting, I did not know that. Makes me wonder if we're compounding infertility issues into the future if this is done at scale. Not saying that's right or wrong, but it's worth thinking about.
- qingcharles 2y agoProbably we are, but we're also negating them with science at probably a higher rate.
- sneak 2y agoIf everything scientific inquiry accomplishes is a “miracle”, then nothing is. Is it a miracle I can go to JFK and fly through the air and be in Europe for dinner? It’s a surgical procedure. It’s cool that it worked. We don’t need to invoke the supernatural here, especially given the oodles of hard work that went into this by very real and natural human beings.
- derektank 2y agoFor my money I would say, yes, and I think Louis C.K. was right when he said, "Everybody on every plane should just constantly be going, 'Oh my God! Wow!' You're sitting in a chair in the sky!"
- sneak 2y agoYes, but by that logic we should be dumbfounded with awe every time we speak to turn on the lights, make a long distance call, eat a fresh fruit grown on another continent, or walk around after open heart surgery. At some point we should just assign credit where credit is due: thousands upon thousands of people working very hard for many decades to make the impossible possible. Our modern world is amazing, but it’s not miraculous. It’s achievement, not supernatural.
- nick238 2y agoJust for clarity, "in UK" is qualifying the whole thing, not that she just happened to be in the UK. A woman in Alabama had a child via a uterus transplant, among other places.
- jesprenj 2y ago> The first baby born as a result of a womb transplant was in Sweden in 2014. Since then around 135 such transplants have been carried out in more than a dozen countries, including the US, China, France, Germany, India and Turkey. Around 65 babies have been born. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29485996 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29485996
- throwawayk7h 2y agoLab-grown vaginas made from the patient's own stem-cells have also been transplanted into women [1]. Hopefully soon it will be possible to get the whole #!/usr/bash. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaginal_transplantation#Laboratory-grown_technique https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaginal_transplantation#Labora... (I don't know why this lab stopped performing this procedure though.)
- throwawayk7h 2y agoIt would be quite interesting to see how public discourse about gender is affected by this, and in particular if this procedure is done successfully on a transgender woman. Regardless of your political outlook, it will no longer be possible to say that the ability to give birth is a condition for being a woman. (And what will happen should chromosome replacement become possible? It seems unlikely that anyone would really invest in such a procedure, but is it medically feasible?)
- ericmcer 2y agoIf the procedures got so good that a trans woman/man was indistinguishable from one born that way who would still object to them claiming the gender they choose, most of the arguments fall apart at that point.
- aisenik 2y agoAlmost everyone who opposes trans people's existence today. Opposition to trans rights is rooted in patriarchal hegemony and the control of bodies. Our existence is a fundamental threat to the foundational perspective of the predominant power-structure in society. No one does a womb-check before granting women validity. It's always been a vibe thing and people who do not conform to the prescribed model of existence as a man or woman are constantly denied full privileges under the framework. It's not just trans women getting the short end of the stick here, it's everyone: men who do not embrace dominance culture or otherwise display "effeminacy" are denied true Man status, women who don't meet beauty standards or possess a submissive demeanor are slurred as bull-dykes or the dreaded transexual. This isn't an issue with any real reasonable basis for it's opposition, it's a golem of pure hatred and disgust in a suit vs. people who want to live full, free lives. editing to add: the first known uterine transplant was performed on Lili Elbe who received treatments through the Institute of Sexology in Germany. The Institute was famously destroyed by the Nazi regime. It's barely coincidental that fascism has risen again as medical science brings this technology to maturity. Trans women gave their lives for this medical miracle.
- lostmsu 2y ago
- smeej 2y ago> He told the BBC around 10 women have embryos in storage or are undergoing fertility treatment, a requirement for being considered for womb transplantation. Each transplant costs around £30,000, he says, and the charity has sufficient funds to do two more. Is this because they're not connecting the transplanted uterus to the fallopian tubes or something? Or is there some other reason that it wouldn't be possible to conceive the "old-fashioned way" post-transplant? Creating and freezing embryos otherwise seems like a very strange thing for a woman to have done who has no uterus, unless she was already considering surrogacy. Where was she expecting them to grow? Requiring the embryos to be created before knowing whether the womb transplant would be possible or successful seems really odd to me.
- saalweachter 2y agoSurrogacy is already a thing; stored embryos have a use without womb transplants.
- smeej 2y agoYeah, that's why I said "unless she was already considering surrogacy". There doesn't seem to be a lot of overlap between women who ate so desperate to carry their own child that they'd undergo a womb transplant, and women who are already so committed to having a biological child that they've prepared embryos to do so by surrogacy. But none of that answers my actual question anyway, about why it isn't possible to conceive naturally in a transplanted womb.
- Dildonics4All 2y ago[dead]
- im3w1l 2y agoFrom an individual perspective this is absolutely crazy and should never be done. But from a broader perspective it's clearly very beneficial for the advancement of science to have such fearless pioneers. Amazing stuff!
- mertleee 2y agoI'm not religious, but publishing this the day before Easter is disgusting.
- sebazzz 2y agoPretty amazing. I suppose that the effects of immunosuppressants on pregnancy and the unborn child are already well understood.
- dleeftink 2y agoI stopped and looked at the natal photo for a while. It is a feeling I have not had before. This new life, chanced not only by lineage but multiple family members and a host of research and medical staff. The image shows very little technology, but to me, is the epitome of how life and progress can unite.
- mbonnet 2y agoI was deeply moved looking at it as well.
- jeffbee 2y agoThis is incredible technology. But I am crying in American at "Each transplant costs around £30,000, he says."
- throwuxiytayq 2y agoCompletely dwarfed by the total cost of raising a child. It’s a surprisingly expensive hobby.
- tough 2y agoYea but in america such a transplant probably costs 300k just to go to the hospital ez prob also raising a child way expensier if you factor uni and such into it vs UK
- trollbridge 2y agoI don't think anyone in America is actually paying a bill for $300,000 for a transplant. It's either paid for by insurance, or if someone doesn't have insurance, via hospital charity or a state medical aid plan. The only exception would be an absurdly rich person who doesn't have insurance.
- wat10000 2y ago“American health care is incredibly expensive.” “That’s ok, other people bear the enormous cost.” Not really a win, that.
- thehappypm 2y agoThat’s not how it works! The bill of $300k gets negotiated down to like $20k.
- wat10000 2y agoThe negotiated rate is still super high. There are procedures where it costs less to fly overseas and get it done self-pay than the out-of-pocket cost with insurance in the US.
- amelius 2y agoThis is great news, but I wonder how that ever got approved given the safety implications for mother and child.
- bluescrn 2y agoWondering the same. Surrogacy would seem like a much safer option. Just use the working womb without transplanting it. Why put two people through major surgery, plus additional risks for the baby?
- lloeki 2y ago> Surrogacy would seem like a much safer option. Just use the working womb without transplanting it. In some jurisdictions the former could be illegal while the latter would be legal.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- romaaeterna 2y ago"Grace was born with a rare condition, Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome, where the womb is missing or underdeveloped, but with functioning ovaries" A rare, congenital, condition.
- lifeisstillgood 2y agoIt’s incredible and Inwish long life and happiness to the newborn and her family I would like to reflect on the timing of this - the UK Supreme Court just ruled something about a woman is a “biological” definition - and I am willing to put a lot of money on many people on both sides of that contentious debate struggling with the idea that “someone born without a womb is a woman” and “hey we can transplant wombs now” Thousands of scientists and medical practitioners have taken thousands of baby steps to get to this point. We should fund every single one of them - we never know where research will take us.
- remarkEon 2y agoThis is not actually a struggle whatsoever, it only is if you pretend it is thus. Humans have 2 legs and 2 arms. It I was born without legs, am I still a human?
- contravariant 2y agoThat's a gross oversimplification. Virilisation is a complex process with many factors. If you're still human if you're born without legs then clearly neither genetic or developmental traits determine someone's humanity. So at what point do we call someone a woman born without a uterus? When a 'normal' pregnancy would have resulted in them having a uterus? When different genetics would have resulted in them having a uterus? Or when she herself complains that she lacks a uterus?
- remarkEon 2y agoI'm applying the same logic, I'm not simplifying anything. You are using the word "humanity" to mean something different from what the rest of the thread is talking about. To address what I think your point is, many wish to expand the malleability of basic biological concepts based on edge cases. Edge cases for which we already have definitions and categories. You are doing so now, by attempting to entrench ambiguity on the entire concept of "woman" by observing that the woman in TFA was born with a specific, heritable, abnormality that prevented the nominal development of a uterus.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y ago[flagged]
- basisword 2y ago>> Nature, in its wisdom chose that that couple should not be able to have offspring. I think it’s arrogant to claim you know what “nature” chose, if indeed it “chose” anything at all.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y agoHeh. I do not believe so for one reason and one reason only. It is not exactly secret what it chooses on a rather daily basis. That as a race we have managed to remove ourselves somewhat from the grip of that choice is a testament to our arrogance. In other words, I do not think you are accurate. I know, because I see things in front of me. I am uncertain on how you know what you know.
- Ken_At_EM 2y ago+10 Points. Awful take.
- Teever 2y ago[flagged]
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 2y agoHow is it awful? There is already too many humans on this planet and here we are spending resources on bodies that would obviously not even begin to exist save for technology. If anything, I am likely more reasonable here than the emotional gasps of 'ooh science'. Is it an interesting solved challenge? Sure. Is it something that is going to further remove us from reality.. also yes.
- renewiltord 2y agoWe should have twice as many people on this planet. Add we're going to do it, and we're going to feed them, and they're going to come up with ideas and do things. It's going to be even more awesome than it already is
- Teever 2y agoThis is really cool but it's ultimately a stop-gap measure. Where we want to end up is with artificial wombs because that will ultimately give individuals much more control over their reproduction and will do away with the onerous physiological and psychological stresses that pregnancy puts on women.
- sitkack 2y agoI could see this being combined with pigs, to place human embryos in pigs to carry humans to term. An extra-uterine system to physiologically support the extreme premature lamb https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14194422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14194422
- TheBlight 2y agoPerhaps there's benefit to pregnancy for both the mother and baby and fully detaching them from the experience might have negative consequences.
- laxmin 2y agoActually we are still discovering and learning about the biology of birthing. We can now support extremely premature babies outside the womb, but as of now, the risks of growing a baby in an artificial womb is not overcome with the benefits. Why? Because you are trivialising the emotions of pregnancy and motherhood. It is not stress all the time, it is also joy and satisfaction and like everything in life, a roller coaster.
- foolfoolz 2y agobrave new world
- TrnsltLife 2y agoMy baby banting Soon you'll need decanting
- Boogie_Man 2y agoNote this is currently not possible without the use of In vitro fertilization
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- gbin 2y agoSo if they do a DNA test, her sister is the actual biological mother I guess.
- astura 2y agoNo, That's not how any of this works... The DNA comes from the egg, the uterus (aka womb) is just an incubation chamber. Would only have the sister's DNA if it was an ovary transplant.
- mschuster91 2y ago> Would only have the sister's DNA if it was an ovary transplant. Fun fact: fetal cells transmit back to the mother and can be spotted in virtually every organ afterwards - it's called "Fetomaternal cell microchimerism" [1]. It's not a far stretch to assume the transfer works also the other way around and you can detect maternal DNA in the fetus/child, but I'm not aware if there has been research around that. [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383574221000363 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138357422...
- veidr 2y agoYep, mom→fetus/child is "maternal microchimerism" and it is also widely studied (though less so than the reverse) and seemingly confirmed.
- amarant 2y agoI can't help but wonder if there is any hope of this working for trans persons in the future? Could someone born as a man have a transplanted womb and get pregnant through in-vitro fertilization, in theory? anyone here with more medical knowledge who can comment on how likely that is to work at some point in the future?
- thrance 2y agoApparently [1], it's not completely out of the question, but more research is needed before it can be safely attempted on a trans woman. However, I fear the largest hurdle will be a political one, with so many nutjobs [2] so hell-bent on imposing their dogmatic definition of gender on everyone. [1] https://www.euronews.com/health/2023/08/23/uterus-transplants-are-already-a-reality-what-does-it-mean-for-transgender-women-getting-p https://www.euronews.com/health/2023/08/23/uterus-transplant... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/apr/18/jk-rowling-harry-potter-gender-critical-campaigner https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/apr/18/jk-rowling-har...
- Thorentis 2y ago[flagged]
- thrance 2y agoWhat historical "truth" are you defending? Flat earth? Racism? You're being a bit vague. If you couldn't tell, that was a jab at your appeal to tradition.
- Spivak 2y agoI always find it fascinating where people draw off the line at natural given modern life is closer to "life in plastic" than anything resembling nature. We stole fire from the gods, domesticated ourselves via agriculture, reshaped the world in our image, and have literally slain two of the four horsemen.
- veidr 2y agoGlad for this family, but also: This is interesting to me at the margins, because one of the things I learned when my wife got pregnant the first time was that the womb is not exactly the warm cradle of nurturing that I had always (without thinking much about it) imagined, but in many ways a blast door or containment vessel to protect the mother (host) from the fetus (roughly, xenomorph) that would otherwise explode like an aggressive parasite (killing them both). So I mean, you probably don't want to have any leaks or weak stitches in your uterus transplant... Keywords: fetal microchimerism, placental barrier, trophoblast invasion
- thaumasiotes 2y agoYour list of keywords is missing "ectopic pregnancy", which seems like exactly the kind of issue your comment contemplates.
- gwerbret 2y ago> So I mean, you probably don't want to have any leaks or weak stitches in your uterus transplant... With this sort of surgery, they wouldn't be cutting into the uterus (womb) itself when extracting it from the donor, but instead will cut around it to remove it, along with some very essential plumbing. The receiving mum will also be on industrial-strength immune suppressants anyway. Where you DO have to worry about leaks and weak stitches is with said plumbing (uterine arteries and veins) -- they have to support virtual firehoses of blood through the duration of pregnancy, and their damage is one reason why a delivery can go south very, very quickly. Obstetric medicine is definitely a high-risk sport, which is why their malpractice insurance rates are head and shoulders above any other medical specialty. But I digress...
- dwroberts 2y ago> fetal microchimerism This is just a fact of reality for any women that have children though. Eg male chromosomes from fetuses being found in women’s brains: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3458919/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3458919/ (I don’t think this is believed to be unusual or an example of ‘containment failure’ of the womb)
- miroljub 2y ago[flagged]
- deadbabe 2y ago[flagged]
- casey2 2y agoWhose baby is it? If I get a transplanted womb and have hundreds of kids are they mine of the original owners? I would assume the current owner, but Anglo laws tend to be completely backwards when it relates to sex.
- timthorn 2y agoIn the UK, whoever gives birth to the child is the mother.
- nathan_compton 2y agoI don't think there is any womb out there that is going to produce 100 kids for you.