Transplanted identity issues.

[Luceiia]

An acquaintance has asked these questions:

Ok, before I get to the question, a little explanation is on order.....kids and I were watching a program a few nights ago on Discovery Health. In this program that I can't remember the name of, a human hand was transplanted from a cadaver to another human. (It turned out to be the hand of a convicted murderer.)

Anyway...my family and I have been discussing fingerprints ever since. In the transplanted hand, are the fingerprints forever the prints of the original owner (the cadaver) or over time as skin dies and renews itself, does the recipient's own body completely assimilate the hand, and use its own genetically predeterimined roadmap to replace the fingerprints with its own?

This leads to question number 2....assuming the hand always carries the prints of the original owner and not the new recipient...what does that do to things like identities and fingerprinting if the new owner does something and gets arrested? The hand already has a record so to speak, seeing that it came from a convicted murderer..does this record pose any threat to the new owner, should he get on the wrong side of the law?

And question number 3....if you took a tissue sample from the transplanted hand, would the DNA from the hand match the original owner, or the new owner?

My answers:

1) Print patterns would remain, not morph into the new owner's previous patterns. I assume prints are created based on genetics interfacing with environmental factors (lay of the fingers/hand against various objects, rate of tissue growth due to amounts and concentrations of various nutrients/chemicals, etc), but once the 'bricks' are laid they would be maintained as-is. Thus, the new fingerprints would simply be maintained as-is, imo.

2) Would depend on whether various crime agencies have a method in place for dealing with such a rare occurrence, as well as how efficient they are in implementing the method. Best guess is the new owner will have to provide documentation to prove they are not the previous owner, should they ever get into legal trouble.

3) Probably depends on the type of tissue and the length of time after the hand was attached to the new owner. I know most tissue is replaced every X number of years, and replaced tissue would contain the new owner's DNA. Bone, perhaps, would be one tissue that may retain the original owner's DNA for many years.

These are my quasi-educated guesses. Any comments or corrections are welcome.


Luceiia

 

[richardm]

1) Print patterns would remain

Yep.

2) Would depend on whether various crime agencies have a method in place for dealing with such a rare occurrence, as well as how efficient they are in implementing the method. Best guess is the new owner will have to provide documentation to prove they are not the previous owner, should they ever get into legal trouble.

I can't imagine it being a problem. You'd have records of when the surgery was done, and the crime sheets would have an earlier date.

I suppose it's possible that some future master-criminal could have new hands grafted on to disguise himself, but these days DNA testing is already remarkable in terms of the small amounts required of source material required, and I suspect they'd find some other corroboration.

3) Probably depends on the type of tissue and the length of time after the hand was attached to the new owner. I know most tissue is replaced every X number of years, and replaced tissue would contain the new owner's DNA.

Would it? That's an interesting question.

 

[Dragonrock]

3) Probably depends on the type of tissue and the length of time after the hand was attached to the new owner. I know most tissue is replaced every X number of years, and replaced tissue would contain the new owner's DNA. Bone, perhaps, would be one tissue that may retain the original owner's DNA for many years.

That is an interesting question. If you get a heart transplant then the heart always maintains the DNA of the donor. Would a hand do they same? The tissues of the hand are probably more similar to the arm tissues it is attached to than a heart is to what it is attached to. Is there a slight crossing over fromt he hand to the arm and vice-versa leading to a DNA mosaic around the site of the join? Given unlimited time would this mosaic affect continue thoughout the body or at some point would it reach a level of stasis?

Now, that being said, does this transplanted hand still allow him to use a remote control?

 

[Luceiia]

Re: Re: Transplanted identity issues.

Now, that being said, does this transplanted hand still allow him to use a remote control?

Probably depends on whether the donated hand came from a male or a female...


Luceiia

 

[Agammamon]

I suppose the donor's original tissue could be replaced by the receipient's, slowly, with R's cells slowly moving up and replacing D's. But this would be countered by D's cells replicating like normal so I assume that the hand would retain it's orignal DNA effectively indefinately, and that the tissue crossover would be limited away from the attachment site.