A Belgian woman has become the first to give birth to a child after having ovarian tissue that was removed and frozen nearly 14 years earlier transplanted back into her body:
The 27-year-old had an ovary removed at age 13, just before she began invasive treatment for sickle cell anaemia. Her remaining ovary failed following the treatment, meaning she would have been unlikely to conceive without the transplant. Experts hope that this procedure could eventually help other young patients. The woman gave birth to a healthy boy in November 2014, and details of the case were published on Wednesday in the journal Human Reproduction.
The woman, who has asked to remain anonymous, was diagnosed with sickle cell anaemia at the age of five. She emigrated from the Republic of Congo to Belgium where doctors decided her disease was so severe that she needed a bone marrow transplant using her brother's matching tissue. But before they could begin the bone marrow transplant, they needed to give her chemotherapy to disable her immune system and stop it from rejecting the foreign tissue. Chemotherapy can destroy the ovarian function, so they removed her right ovary and froze tissue fragments. At that time, she was showing signs of puberty, but had not yet started her periods. Her remaining ovary failed at 15. Ten years later, she decided she wanted to have a baby, so doctors grafted four of her thawed ovarian fragments onto her remaining ovary and 11 fragments onto other sites in her body. The patient started menstruating spontaneously five months later, and became pregnant naturally at the age of 27.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday June 13 2015, @01:16AM
One can argue that you are the one with the irrational desires. It appears that you wish to end your own family tree. Virtually all of life desires to reproduce, and to pass on it's genes. You presume that being different somehow makes you superior - but it's equally possible that being different means that you are defective. No, I'm not intentionally being insulting - not any more than you were intentionally being insulting when you you claimed to be more rational than all of your peers who wish to procreate.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday June 13 2015, @04:51AM
I'm not insulted. I'm right!
(where's my weedburner?)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @07:03AM
One can argue that you are the one with the irrational desires. It appears that you wish to end your own family tree. Virtually all of life desires to reproduce, and to pass on it's genes. You presume that being different somehow makes you superior
Irrational? Looks like you missed the part where the grand parent mentioned the over population problem the world is currently facing. So that makes his choise certainly rational, even heroic.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday June 13 2015, @07:14AM
One can argue that you are the one with the irrational desires. It appears that you wish to end your own family tree. Virtually all of life desires to reproduce, and to pass on it's genes.
None of which is particularly important, especially with as many people as there are now.
You presume that being different somehow makes you superior - but it's equally possible that being different means that you are defective.
This depends on what your goals are. If your goal is to ensure a good quality of life for the future, then breeding mindlessly probably isn't a good idea. And I suspect most people would at least entertain the notion of thinking about the future.
But I don't expect much from people who can't control themselves to begin with.