Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Penile transplant

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Swingshiftworker
    replied
    Originally posted by Info View Post
    So thanks to Swingshift for bringing this important fact into the light.
    You're welcome.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Swingshiftworker View Post
    The question that occurred to me when I read the penile transplant reports was whether it would be possible to just transplant the foreskin.

    I seriously doubt the the doctors and/or organizations that control organ donations would sacrifice a penis just for the purpose of transplanting a foreskin, but if they can transplant an entire penis, they certainly should be able to transplant just the foreskin and -- functionality/rejection and other issues aside -- if someone is willing to be circumcised for a "price" perhaps THAT might be possible.

    What do you think a foreskin donation would be worth? LOL!!!
    Aha! In order to have Science, you have to have scientific definition, so..........

    The problem with "just a foreskin" is that a foreskin isn't a "thing". It's a continuous feature of a natural penis, so I'm going to italicize the following because it's an important fact in several ongoing conversations, from Intactivism to tugging, to any discussion of the clinical (and especially important in this subsection):

    Please get this: there is no real start or stop to a foreskin, it was formed as INSEPARABLE from the penis. It takes a crusher or blade to artificially separate PART of the foreskin from a penis. Part of the foreskin. It didn't used to be a "part" of the penis in natural reality, and it didn't become a part until it was despised and ripped off. I hope this psychologically manufactured differentiation is understood. It seems to be hard for many folks to understand this fact. We are all so used to being a part of circumcision culture.

    So, it you think about it, cloning, or transplantation, or the Foregen stem-cells-on-a-scaffold hype, or anything else, would ALL demand replacing a foreskin AS A PART, separate, not an original feature. I hope this is understood. This is the only way it could EVER happen to a circumcised penis. It would be, in other words, artificial, not the "real thing" as so many think. This makes surgical risks, anti-rejection drugs, and rejection only part of the negative, with the fundamental negative being that "artificial" aspect, requiring an artificial (and highly risky) replacement. Nope, nothing I'd be interested in. I'm pretty much continuous everyplace else, and I want to stay that way until the flames start licking my feet.

    So thanks to Swingshift for bringing this important fact into the light.

    Leave a comment:


  • parsecskin
    replied
    Yeah, WTF? It looks like he's trying to grow a foreskin on his leg!
    It would be cool though, if you could grow a whole new body and download your conciousness and all your memories and experiences into the new body.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    That moral issue, ie growing another separate and complete person, weighs about 40 metaphorical tons, and it's a parsec away from anything legal, so it's difficult to push aside. And in this culture (US) there would be the tendency to throw out the old you, in favor of the shiny new him

    But we should wait, maybe rigbaba discovered a way; looks like he's starting...something.... with ankles, if I read the photo correctly.

    Leave a comment:


  • parsecskin
    replied
    Originally posted by Info View Post

    True about anti rejection drugs. When they work, they can cause problems in other areas of the body because they hammer your immune system into the ground. A suppressed immune system equals potential big-time problems. When they don't work, then donor tissue rots. No thanks, wouldn't want it.

    There isn't any reason to think that somehow cloning a penis would:

    1. Be an end-run for rejection. Nobody's tried it, so nobody knows about this, and considering that the Universe, and Nature, always wants a price to pay......;

    2. If this hypothetical penis is cloned from your own tissue, then no foreskin, because it was removed. As I understand it, cloning tissues requires all the tissues present to create that clone.
    I'm talking about growing a whole parts body. That being the case, it should be an exact replica of your whole body according to your DNA, less of course all the injuries. Including circumcision. If your DNA says male, there's no reason to believe the clone wouldn't be intact. Moralities aside.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swingshiftworker
    replied
    The question that occurred to me when I read the penile transplant reports was whether it would be possible to just transplant the foreskin.

    I seriously doubt the the doctors and/or organizations that control organ donations would sacrifice a penis just for the purpose of transplanting a foreskin, but if they can transplant an entire penis, they certainly should be able to transplant just the foreskin and -- functionality/rejection and other issues aside -- if someone is willing to be circumcised for a "price" perhaps THAT might be possible.

    What do you think a foreskin donation would be worth? LOL!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by parsecskin View Post
    The big problem with using donor tissue is rejection. This guy will have to be on immuno-supression drugs for the rest of his life so that his new dick doesn't literally rot off. Maybe we should grow complete clones for parts. Then no anti rejection drugs would be needed, and you could have YOUR foreskin back!
    True about anti rejection drugs. When they work, they can cause problems in other areas of the body because they hammer your immune system into the ground. A suppressed immune system equals potential big-time problems. When they don't work, then donor tissue rots. No thanks, wouldn't want it.

    There isn't any reason to think that somehow cloning a penis would:

    1. Be an end-run for rejection. Nobody's tried it, so nobody knows about this, and considering that the Universe, and Nature, always wants a price to pay......;

    2. If this hypothetical penis is cloned from your own tissue, then no foreskin, because it was removed. As I understand it, cloning tissues requires all the tissues present to create that clone.

    Leave a comment:


  • parsecskin
    replied
    The big problem with using donor tissue is rejection. This guy will have to be on immuno-supression drugs for the rest of his life so that his new dick doesn't literally rot off. Maybe we should grow complete clones for parts. Then no anti rejection drugs would be needed, and you could have YOUR foreskin back!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Thanks, but, if you ask me, it's more appropriate here in this subsection, and it's as likely that this subsection is where I'd also expect the "Look, they can do this now for everybody, so foreskin regeneration (or reversal) is just a few years away" crowd to pop up sooner or later. At any rate, can't hurt to have two conversations on it. So why not let this sit here, with the OP also calmly sitting, dozing with his eyes half lowered (and his tail lashing behind him)

    I take your point in the thread, though, and I generally agree with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Swingshiftworker
    replied
    There's already a discussion in progress about the same topic here: https://foreskinrestoration.vbulleti...hing-to-happen

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest started a topic Penile transplant

    Penile transplant

    Just to begin a clarification/reality-check if it's needed, and to head off any misuse of the information in later posts:

    http://www.npr.org/2016/05/16/478272...nis-transplant

    Aside from the article saying nothing about the realities of this surgery and its prognosis (or anything about the other 2 in existence), this experiment has in no way anything to do with so-called "foreskin regeneration", or the latest buzz-word, "foreskin reversal" (which made me laugh; their hype is really circling the commercial drain), and of course it doesn't have anything to do with what is available to the average patient, nor is it covered by insurance carriers, etc, etc.


    It will be interesting, though, to see if a certain money collection group uses the fact of this experimental surgery to, in some way, support what they say they're collecting money for; use it, in other words, as another claimed "success" by trying to stand next to it.
Working...
X