transplanted ? I suspect it is a misuse of "rejected"

Because at the begining, the author says:

Clinical xenotransplantation: the next medical revolution?

Burcin Ekser, Mohamed Ezzelarab, Hidetaka Hara, Dirk J van der Windt, Martin Wijkstrom, Rita Bottino, Massimo Trucco, David K C Cooper
The shortage of organs and cells from deceased individuals continues to restrict allotransplantation. Pigs could provide an alternative source of tissue and cells but the immunological challenges and other barriers associated with
xenotransplantation need to be overcome. Transplantation of organs from genetically modified pigs into non-human primates is now not substantially limited by hyperacute, acute antibody-mediated, or cel lular rejection, but other issues have become more prominent, such as development of thrombotic micro angiopathy in the graft or systemic consumptive coagulopathy in the recipient. To address these problems, pigs that express one or more human thromboregulatory or anti-infl ammatory genes are being developed. The results of preclinical transplantation of pig
cells—eg, islets, neuronal cells, hepatocytes, or corneas—are much more encouraging than they are for organ
transplantation, with survival times greater than 1 year in all cases. Risk of transfer of an infectious microorganism to
the recipient is small.

Get to the cloud.

What is your question? State it clearly.

Should "translanted" be "rejected" in the context?

The title of the thread has stated clearly:
transplanted ? I suspect it is a misuse of "rejected"

Transplanted is used correctly.

... to protect tissues, (to be transplanted), from the human immune response ...

No. Transplantation refers to removing a plant from the place in the Earth where it is growing
and planting it elsewhere, burying its roots in a new location.


This now refers to similarly removing an organ from a pig
and implanting it in a non-human primate, with the hope
that it will not be rejected. In both cases, something
is removed from its place of origin and it is implanted elsewhere.





David

Do you mean in that context "tissues to be transplanted " means "transplanted tissues?"

Yes.

Thanks.

The usage is a bit weird. Because that conclusion is based on the studies done, while "to be done" is a future tense.

Note, incidentally, a very, very common pervasive error of logic
that is continually perpetrated by the most educated men, including medical doctors, to wit:
use of the word "immune" when logically, the word shoud be IMMUNITY.

As set forth in the context above,
logically it shoud say ". . . the human immunity response. . ."
and the white cells in the blood are part of the human IMMUNITY system.

It is NOT that all the systems of the human body are VULNERABLE, except one system which is "immune";
rather we refer to the system of the body that is concerned with IMMUNITY.

Accordingly, it is the immunity system,
NOT the "immune" system, as it is so very, very ofen said and written.





David

no

the use in the quoted summary is correct

No, it means what it says....tissues to be transplanted....they have not been transplanted yet, but it is planned that they will be at a future date.

It is not weird at all. "to be done" used this way is a phrase meaning "intended to be done".

I wish OMsigDavid would cease prating his damned rubbish.

Do u always GET your wishes ??

What do u think your chances are of getting it THIS time ?





David

knowing you? zero.

what are the chances everyone is going to stop wishing precisely the same thing? zero.

It's on my Christmas wishlist.

Instead of hurling empty personal invective
Y not express the substance of the objection? with specificity ?





David

U r getting a lump of coal.