Imperial College London study into womb transplant for transwomen

[bettybeans]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned - I can't find it if it has - but wtf.
I have so many questions about and problems with this I don't even know where to begin.

There has been talk of this survey before. It's to assess the "perceptions and desires" (what else) of trans people. Not sure why Womb Transplant UK feel the need to get involved in this madness - I'm guessing it's a fundraising exercise.
www.bioethicsobservatory.org/2019/03/womb-transpalntation-transwomen/29654

"Ben Jones, a surgeon at Imperial and member of the Womb Transplant UK organisation which is planning the first [female-to-female transplant] operations this year, said a questionnaire of transgender women will help to determine ‘whether or not there is a desire to undergo this process’.

Several transgender men – those who were born women and then switched – have already given birth in the UK.

But in those circumstances it was merely a case of retaining the female reproductive organs after they transitioned, rather than having to implant female organs into a male body."

I’m going with hoax but I did just have a scary thought. I’d originally looked at it and thought that no ethics committee would ever let this happen given the extreme potential for harm to the foetus...but then I wondered if they even would have to consider it. Given that we don’t have any laws to protect foetuses from their mother (not saying we should or not, just observing) - pregnant women can choose to drink/take drugs/sky dive or whatever and can’t be prevented. If the ethics committee were discussing this could they say that the trans woman with the uterus implant can’t be stopped from taking the anti rejection drugs/oestrogen/whatever else is needed even if the tw knows it can/will harm the foetus? Or would it be that doctors are forbidden to prescribe the drugs to people carrying foetuses? Can doctors be forbidden? Or do we rely on them “doing no harm”?

a uterus implant which was rejected by the immune system, was what killed Lily Elbe, wasn't it? (the Danish girl)
Male bodied humans are perfectly able to create life via their penis/sperm, so god knows why they'd want complicated and risky surgery to grow a baby like a woman does.

Ben britton (mentioned in the screen shot above) wants to "queer" science spaces. He downplays the sex imbalance in STEM and focuses on identity politics. Of cause he does.

I'll shut up now. Sorry about the derail. They just do my head in

As far as I can recall there has only been one successful live birth from a uterine transplant (female to female) so far and that was in Sweden.
It is something that is definitely happening but is very much in early stages, and this is for women who were born with uterine abnormalities or no uterus or have had their uterus removed for medical reasons.
Just like we give other organ transplants to say Cf sufferers

I hope it’s a hoax.

A 25% live birth rate in - I presume - women who meet specific criteria, isn’t an encouraging start to begin experimenting with males.

An entry criteria of 16 is horrific. Even if actual surgery only happens in adulthood, it is wrong to start children on a pathway that could be socially difficult to back away from.

We rarely discuss the vulnerabilities of transgender people, except children, on these boards as we rightly centre women and girls. That doesn’t mean we aren’t concerned for the welfare of those affected by confusion over their identity and/or sexuality.

In this scenario, I’m really worried about the vulnerable people who could be exploited, and for the well-being of any putative babies.

What really bothers me is the following.
I work in science, it is tough times financially, so most projects are funded with grants.
The research into stillbirths and miscarriages in this country is still far from adequate. So are conditions that mostly affect women.

Yet, most medical research is aimed at mens, that includes male alopecia, even though you will agree that unfortunately female alopecia in this society is way less accepted and has a lot more impact on a woman's life.

And here we are, spending crazy money and talent on this?

F>|$}* patriarchy

As usual, follow the money. Other than the crowd funder on their web page, I can find no reference to how they are getting funded. Normally funding agencies are given prominent credit. And half a million quid doesn't go very far in medical research. Either there is someone funding it who doesn't want publicity, or there's not much happening.

I can imagine takeup would be very low except amongst a certain subset. Male people are unlikely to want to put themselves through the realities of pregnancy once they realise the toll it takes, except in some extreme circumstances. They'll leave the actual pregnancies to female people in 99% of cases I expect.

When I first read it my first inclination was to assign it to the hoax pile but with colleges and organisations and specific surgeon names attached I couldn't let it go. I had a vague recollection of seeing something a while back. it was probably this piece below:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6710751/Transgender-women-birth-time-thanks-pioneering-womb-transplants.html

I was stupid to think this would be about helping women.....

Can I hit the beard button?

another awful thing is that they'll use animals to do much of the experimentation.

I can imagine takeup would be very low except amongst a certain subset. Male people are unlikely to want to put themselves through the realities of pregnancy once they realise the toll it takes, except in some extreme circumstances. They'll leave the actual pregnancies to female people in 99% of cases I expect

Would be interesting to see the impact it could all have on abortion laws around the world though.

Men wont like being told no.

I honestly think that as a species we're totally fucked, and we're destroying the planet and other life forms too, while we're at it.
None of this is progress.

I doubt that this will happen in our lifetime, it's though of particular relevance to those born looking female but later it's realised they are intersex. Research is just that not that it's happening. As for the age, it's so far off that recruiting a 16 year old who may be 40 by the time the project proceeds is sensible

Idk if this is a hoax or not, but since it isn't legal or possible at this time, this 'survey' seems to me like a cruel form of bullying.
I wouldn't wave chocolate at an anorexic, I wouldn't taunt a childless women, but thats what this feels like.

I'll write what I wrote before. This business of uterine transplants into men appears to be about science but it is not. It's about getting the idea out there that men can give birth too, but not just yet, there are a few technical details to be sorted out first. So while we're waiting for the inevitable, let's get on with the social sciences side of things and accept that since men can give birth too (not yet, but soon, soon, it's bound to happen), then there are no real differences between men and women in terms of things that are material and significant. The only differences are simply surface ones like the chosen forms of appearance.

It is about trying to change how people think by assuming a medical horror is a run-of-the-mill thing just round the corner. It's Overton Window stuff, not science.

I doubt that this will happen in our lifetime

The pace of change in technology is accelerating. Think of how much the world changed in our grandparents lifetime. The world will change significantly more than that in our lifetimes.

Scientists are already working on creating artificial wombs, and have managed it for lambs born prematurely, keeping them alive in an artificial wombs for 4 weeks.

Futurists are already wondering how humans might develop if we were "free" from the restrictions of having to travel the birth canal. Would we be able to grow bigger heads and brains, for example?

This may sound like hokum or science fiction, but there are people who take these kinds of ideas very seriously and who have access to the money, technology and expertise to make it happen.

TBH I agree with whoever said that even if it's a hoax now, it'll almost certainly be possible one day (if we haven't gone extinct by then). And there will be demand for it - maybe not from most, given that SRS is a prerequisite and most don't want to give up their dicks - but among the most severely mentally ill there will be demand.

As to funding, the amazing thing about "being trans" is that it can happen to anybody, seemingly overnight. Women and people of colour struggle to reach high political office, become CEOs, gain recognition in STEM, but "transwomen" can achieve all that by the miracle of being indistinguishable from men, and then later "come out" as trans. It's no surprise that this group of people is unique in somehow being the most oppressed and vulnerable ever, and yet has so many members who are billionaires or working at the highest levels of political office. For that "transwoman" in Silicone Valley who is obsessed with transhumanism and creating sentient AI, £500K for something like this would be loose change.

nauticant I totally agree it's about shifting the Overton window, but the end goal isn't acceptance of transwomen as women - they're just a stepping stone to the Brave New World of tranhumanism, of designer babies and the increasing merging of humans with tech. If we don't wipe out humans with climate change, this is likely where we're heading. Millions (probably billions) are being invested in it already.

I know this sounds nuts, but spend some time listening to what futurists are saying and look at the money being invested in this. It is nuts, but it's real.

Look up Martine Rothblatt, for example, billionaire transwomen and transhumanist, who's investing in biotech, is on mission to recreate his wife's brain in robot form and who has written a book "From transgenderism to transhumanism: a manifesto"

There was an interesting MN thread on this the other day with a link to some good videos.

it's like frankestein, i can't believe this is real.

ByGrabtharsHammarWhatASaving cross posts!

You’d have to really, really want to carry your own kid to risk the side effects of anti rejection drugs!

Beyond the obvious increased vulnerability to viral and bacterial infections (prophylactic antibiotics, antivirals and antifungals can be prescribed) there is also a well-documented elevated post-transplant cancer and cardiovascular risk.

And, perhaps of particular interest to those taking hormones/having surgeries to ‘feminise’ one’s appearance, other side effects include:

Cushingoid facial oedema (moonface)
Hypertrichosis (abnormal hair growth everywhere, like the Victorian side show exhibits)
Gingival Hyperplasia (gums that overgrow your teeth)
Truncal obesity (and other weight gain)
Striae (extreme stretch marks)
Acne
Muscle weakness
Osteoporosis
Mood swings/depression

If the pay off is not dying due to organ failure, these are considered to be distressing but acceptable conditions but factor in the risk of birth defects/miscarriage/premature labour and the fact that infertility is not in itself life threatening, and I really cannot see how this is considered ethical for women, let alone men.

The NHS sometimes struggles to find enough critical care beds to cater for those on the current organ transplant list (although considering a young transman has already publicly stated that mastectomy for trans patients is just as important as mastectomy for those with breast cancer, I doubt such practicalities will enter the minds of enthusiastic would be womb-recipients).

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47668136