[Neuroethics of body transplantation]. / Neuroetica del trasplante de cuerpo.

INTRODUCTION: Recent contributions to the specialised literature address the topic of body transplantation, mostly produced by Sergio Canavero and a group of researchers from China. For several years they have been announcing that they will carry out the procedure, but it has still not been performed. AIMS: The aim of this study is to perform a neuroethical analysis of body transplantation, based on the methodology of Diego Gracia on ethics and bioethics and an analysis of facts, values and duties. Furthermore, we also propose that, with the knowledge available today, body transplantation must be addressed from the perspective of research ethics. DEVELOPMENT: As regards the facts, it can be said that, although the history of attempts to perform a body transplant dates back almost a century, there are many limitations preventing it from being performed with our current knowledge. This is due to the fact that no serious and rigorous preclinical research has been conducted (at most some anecdotal data can be found). With the data that is available, it does not even seem possible to think of designing a protocol to include human beings for body transplantation. In terms of values, according to the model developed by Emanuel, who proposes eight requirements that must be met to comply with the ethics of clinical research, it is not even possible to comply with one of them. Regarding duties, it would be wise to recommend that such a procedure should not be carried out on humans. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the scientific knowledge currently available and the values of research ethics, a body transplantation should not be performed in human beings either as clinical research or as clinical practice.

TITLE: Neuroetica del trasplante de cuerpo.Introduccion. Existe bibliografia reciente en revistas especializadas acerca del trasplante de cuerpo, generada fundamentalmente por Sergio Canavero y un grupo chino. Desde hace un par de años vienen anunciando que realizaran el procedimiento, pero aun no ha ocurrido. Objetivo. Realizar un analisis neuroetico sobre el trasplante de cuerpo, proponiendo la metodologia de Diego Gracia en etica y bioetica analizando hechos, valores y deberes. Se propone ademas que, con el conocimiento actual, el trasplante de cuerpo debe tratarse desde la etica de la investigacion. Desarrollo. Aunque desde hace casi un siglo hay antecedentes de intentar conseguir un trasplante de cuerpo, existen numerosas limitaciones para poder realizarlo con el conocimiento actual porque no hay investigacion preclinica seria y rigurosa (se encuentran a lo sumo datos anecdoticos). Con los datos disponibles, ni siquiera parece que pueda pensarse en el diseño de un protocolo de inclusion de seres humanos para el trasplante de cuerpo. En cuanto a valores, atendiendo al modelo de Emanuel, quien propone ocho requisitos para cumplir con la etica de la investigacion clinica, no es posible siquiera cumplir uno cabalmente. Lo mas prudente es recomendar que no debe realizarse un procedimiento asi en seres humanos. Conclusiones. Considerando el conocimiento cientifico disponible y los valores de la etica de la investigacion, no debe realizarse un trasplante de cuerpo en seres humanos, ni como investigacion clinica ni mucho menos como practica clinica.

[An exploratory study regarding the hypothetical human embryo donation in Chile]. / Un estudio exploratorio sobre la donación hipotética de embriones humanos en Chile.

OBJECTIVE: To explore opinions of patients who undergone to complex ART towards gamete and embryo donation, as well as the reasons to do it or not. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The seat was the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile. There were interviewed ten participants (seven women, three men), who had undergone at least to one ART, without comprising of donation programs. It was a cross-sectional study of descriptive bioethics, done with ethnographic qualitative methodology with a semistructured interview applying speech analysis to the resulting text. RESULTS: Regarding embryo donation, six participants would accept to donate them, five to fertility therapy and one to research. Regarding the cryopreservation, three participants would always accept it, and three with some restrictions, just one on them would rather to discard instead of donating a cryopreserved embryo. DISCUSSION: It could be suggested: gamete donation is more commented and generally accepted; embryo donation is a more conflicting and less discussed subject, as much to donate as to accept; cryopreservation is a complex subject, commented but also conflicting, whose acceptance or not, as well as the destiny of the probably cryopreserved embryos, depends on the believes that participants have about the origin of the life, personal ethics, and the religion. It could be possible to say that a hypothesis constructed in this study (to be verified in future quantitative researches) is that embryo donation could take place, for therapy of fertility, and exceptionally to research.