↓ Skip to main content

Human–animal chimeras: ethical issues about farming chimeric animals bearing human organs

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 2,792)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
18 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
34 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
257 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Human–animal chimeras: ethical issues about farming chimeric animals bearing human organs
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13287-016-0345-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rodolphe Bourret, Eric Martinez, François Vialla, Chloé Giquel, Aurélie Thonnat-Marin, John De Vos

Abstract

Recent advances in stem cells and gene engineering have paved the way for the generation of interspecies chimeras, such as animals bearing an organ from another species. The production of a rat pancreas by a mouse has demonstrated the feasibility of this approach. The next step will be the generation of larger chimeric animals, such as pigs bearing human organs. Because of the dramatic organ shortage for transplantation, the medical needs for such a transgressive practice are indisputable. However, there are serious technical barriers and complex ethical issues that must be discussed and solved before producing human organs in animals. The main ethical issues are the risks of consciousness and of human features in the chimeric animal due to a too high contribution of human cells to the brain, in the first case, or for instance to limbs, in the second. Another critical point concerns the production of human gametes by such chimeric animals. These worst-case scenarios are obviously unacceptable and must be strictly monitored by careful risk assessment, and, if necessary, technically prevented. The public must be associated with this ethical debate. Scientists and physicians have a critical role in explaining the medical needs, the advantages and limits of this potential medical procedure, and the ethical boundaries that must not be trespassed. If these prerequisites are met, acceptance of such a new, borderline medical procedure may prevail, as happened before for in-vitro fertilization or preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 255 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 82 32%
Student > Master 34 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 9%
Researcher 10 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 3%
Other 24 9%
Unknown 77 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 58 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Engineering 7 3%
Other 47 18%
Unknown 87 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 188. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 March 2024.
All research outputs
#215,879
of 25,743,152 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#9
of 2,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,200
of 368,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,743,152 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.