Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 2, Number 2—April 1996

The Dilemma of Xenotransplantation

On This Page
Article Metrics
citations of this article
EID Journal Metrics on Scopus

Cite This Article

I read with considerable interest Robert E. Michler’s commentary on xenotransplantation (1).

From my point of view, that of a basic virologist, the dilemma is not to know in what “foreseeable future, clinical xenotransplantation may achieve its targeted goal of extended graft survival,” but what deadly emerging infectious disease, most probably viral in nature, would arise in a recipient of a baboon or chimpanzee heart. While we face the terrific threat of AIDS, which clearly emerged from Africa and non-human primates 40 to 50 years ago, we are preparing a new infectious “Chernobyl.”

Monkeys and apes harbor approximately 50 simian viruses; some of them pose a serious threat to humans, especially the heavily immunosuppressed. Recently, an outbreak of encephalitis related to a new type of reovirus (2) occurred among baboons from a colony used in human organ transplants. Moreover, once unknown or unrecognized simian viruses, like HIV, may be efficient invaders of the entire earth’s population.

Xenotransplantation does not simply pose an ethical problem; it concerns the survival of the human species, an endangered species if transplant practitioners continue their course. Ronald Montalero, a virologist, was right when he said “unknown viruses were always a major concern in xenotransplants” (2). A moratorium on these procedures seems the best solution until all simian pathogens are identified and the risks they pose to humans are clearly established.


Claude E. Chastel
Author affiliation: Virus Laboratory, 29285 Brest Cedex, France



  1. Michler  RE. Xenotransplantation: risks, clinical potential, and future prospects. Emerg Infect Dis. 1996;2:6470. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Mystery virus fells donor baboons. Science. 1994;264:1523. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar


Cite This Article

DOI: 10.3201/eid0202.960219

Related Links


Table of Contents – Volume 2, Number 2—April 1996

Page created: December 20, 2010
Page updated: December 20, 2010
Page reviewed: December 20, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.