What’s Behind China’s Denial of Forced Organ Harvesting?

August 27, 2016

(Minghui.org) The Chinese state-sanctioned forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience, including Falun Gong practitioners, became a focus of media attention during the 26th International Congress of The Transplantation Society in Hong Kong from August 19 to 23, something the Chinese government did not expect.

The New York Times published three reports on the issue. On August 19 the president of the Transplantation Society, Dr. Philip J. O’Connell, is quoted as saying, “The Chinese claim that the world accepts its organ transplant system is rebutted.”

Dr. O’Connell said to the Chinese speakers at the convention,“It is important that you understand that the global community is appalled by the practices that the Chinese have adhered to in the past,” according to The New York Times article.

On August 18, the evening before the convention began, two Chinese state-run associations held a special session on organ transplantation in China. The speakers at the special session included the former Chinese health minister, Huang Jiefu, and the director of the hospital affiliated with Zhejiang University, Zheng Shusen, two top figures in the Chinese organ transplant community.

Surprisingly, or maybe not, the only reporters allowed in the special Chinese session were from the Chinese state-run newspapers and TV stations and a few Hong Kong pro-communist media.

The next day, more than 20 Chinese media told the world the same story: This special Chinese organ transplant meeting showed that the Chinese organ transplant world had been truly accepted by The Transplantation Society, and former health minister Huang Jiefu vehemently denied the accusation leveled by the international community against Chinese forced organ harvesting.

In The New York Times article on August 19 Dr. O’Connell said, “So they may say that, but that’s not what the truth is.”

A New York Times article on August 17 covered the heated argument over Chinese forced organ harvesting before the convention. Several human right organizations and physicians wanted to boycott the convention, because some speakers were suspected of being involved in the forced organ harvesting, including Huang Jiefu and Zheng Shushen.

A group of physicians and ethicists published an article in the American Journal of Transplantation, criticizing “the decision to hold the conference in China as premature” according to The New York Times article “Debate Flares on China’s Use of Prisoners’ Organs as Experts Meet in Hong Kong” on the 17th.

More than 10 papers submitted to the convention were rejected because of the unclear sources of organs. The director of the hospital affiliated with Zhejiang University, Zheng Shusen, was invited to speak, but his speech was cancelled, and his paper is under investigation. Zheng missed the opening ceremony and returned home before the meeting started.

At the press conference on August 19, Dr. Jeremy Chapman, the former president of the Transplantation Society, said that Zheng’s paper may have violated the society’s rule that no organs from executed prisoners be used in research, although Zheng’s name was not mentioned.

If it turns out that the authors did violate the rule, Dr. Chapman said, “Then they will be named and shamed, and they will be excluded from our meetings forever — and from publication in transplantation journals.”


Falun Gong practitioners hold a protest outside the conference venue.

In June 2016, three independent investigators from Canada and the U.S.—David Kilgour, David Matas, and Ethan Gutmann—published a 680-page joint report on the state-sanctioned organ harvesting in China. The report estimated that 60,000 to 100,000 organ transplant surgeries have been conducted in China every year, the majority of which used organs from Falun Gong practitioners.

Zheng Shusen’s own experiences offer indirect evidence to support this accusation.

Zheng Shusen, 66, is one of the most experienced liver transplant surgeons in China. According to the state-run publication Guangmingwang and the China Association for Science and Technology, Zheng has carried out 1,850 liver transplants as of March 2016.

According to an article on the website of his institute, the Center for Liver Transplants, on January 28, 2005, Zheng once performed 5 liver transplants in one day and 11 total in that week alone.

Zheng told the media in 2006 that, from 1992 to 1998, there were only 78 liver transplants in the whole country, but this number has increased dramatically since 1999, which coincides with the beginning of the persecution of Falun Gong in 1999.

What stands out in Zheng’s experience is “liver transplants for acute hepatic failure” (LTAHF), which refers to patients who must get a liver transplant within 72 hours or die. Based on the data from Zheng’s research papers published in 2005, his institute carried out 46 LTAHF procedures from January 2000 to December 2004.

Since this kind of transplant cannot be pre-arranged, it is extremely rare in Western countries. However, among 4331 cases listed in the official Chinese Report on Liver Transplant Registration in 2016, 1150 were LTAHF procedures, 40% of the total!

The large number of LTAHF cases is considered strong evidence of the existence of organ harvesting from living people in China.

It is noteworthy that Zheng is the chair of the Provincial Anti-Cult Association in Zhejiang Province. One of the major functions of this state-run association in the last two decades has been to aid and abet the persecution of Falun Gong.

Zheng himself has been actively involved in slandering and vilifying Falun Gong. He was the chief editor of a book published in 2009 that defames Falun Gong.

Although Zheng never revealed the source of his organs in his papers, his role in the anti-Falun Gong campaign certainly suggests a convenient source of organs to supply the immense organ transplant industry in China.

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting

Hearing on Organ Harvesting Held by U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs

June 26, 2016 | By Minghui correspondent Wang Ying

(Minghui.org) A joint subcommittee hearing titled “Organ harvesting: An examination of a brutal practice” was held by the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs on June 23, 2016. Several witnesses gave testimony that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) conducts live organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners at the scale of genocide, and that the heinous crime is exceedingly cruel.

2016-6-24-congress-01
Hearing venue

Mr. David Matas: Large Number of Falun Gong Practitioners Are Killed for Organs

2016-6-24-congress-02
Canadian human rights attorney David Matas (left)

David Matas, one of three co-authors of a recent report on organ harvesting, said in his testimony, “David Kilgour and I have been researching, writing, and speaking on the killing of Falun Gong for their organs now for ten years. Ethan Gutmann is a journalist who interviewed us on our work, and then did his own.”

“Since David Kilgour and I published Bloody Harvest, the third version of our report in book form, and Ethan Gutmann published his book The Slaughter, we three have remained active in writing, researching, investigating, and speaking on organ transplant abuse in China. Yesterday, at the National Press Club, we released an 817 page update to our work. It is now available online.”

He stated, “The ultimate conclusion of the update is that the Chinese Communist Party has engaged the State in the mass killings of innocents, primarily practitioners of the spiritually-based set of exercises Falun Gong, but also Uyghurs, Tibetans, and select House Christians, in order to obtain organs for transplants.”

“The fact that the evidence we have now examined shows much larger volumes of transplants than the Government of China has asserted, points to a larger discrepancy between transplant volumes and Government of China-identified sources than we had previously thought existed. That increased discrepancy leads us to conclude that there has been a far larger slaughter of practitioners of Falun Gong for their organs than we had originally estimated.”

Ethan Gutmann: “This Is the Familiar Specter of Human Genocide—Cloaked in Modern Scrubs.”

2016-6-24-congress-03
Journalist Ethan Gutmann

Investigative journalist Ethan Gutmann testified at the hearing, “…in 1999, State Security launched the campaign to eliminate Falun Gong. By 2001, over one million Falun Gong incarcerated within the Laogai System were subject to retail-organ testing, and Chinese military and civilian hospitals were ramping up their transplant facilities.”

“In early 2006, the Kilgour-Matas report was published. Beijing conceded that they used prisoner organs, ostensibly banned foreign organ tourism to China, and provided prisoners with permission-to-donate forms. In 2012, this thin tissue was shredded by the revelation that Bo Xilai’s protege, Wang Lijun, ran a live organ harvesting center which had performed thousands of transplants.”

He stated, “…this is the familiar specter of human genocide—cloaked in modern scrubs.”

He indicated that their newest investigation report shows that the Chinese regime’s forced live organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience is continuing at an alarming scale.

Charles Lee: China Has A Large Organ “Donor” Bank of Living Persons

2016-6-24-congress-04
Charles Lee, M.D., director of Public Awareness, World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG)

Charles Lee, M.D., director of Public Awareness, World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong (WOIPFG), testified at the hearing, “So far, WOIPFG has collected more than 3,000 academic papers on organ transplants in China, and has analyzed over 300 of them, with descriptions of donors from over 200 hospitals in 31 provinces and municipalities in China. Nearly all of them were written after 1999, especially between the years of 2000 and 2008.”

“By analyzing the descriptions of the gender, age, health condition, and cause of death of the ‘donors’, the procedure of organ removal, the data on the warm and cold ischemia time (that is, respectively, the time from the cessation of circulation until the perfusion of the organ with cold preservative chemicals; and the time from when the organ is perfused until it is transplanted into the recipient) and the rapidity of organ matching, we are able to point to the clear existence of a large organ ‘donor’ bank consisting of living persons.”

“This new set of evidence also strengthens the previous conclusion that the Chinese regime is harvesting organs from living people, and that very large numbers of captive and healthy Falun Gong practitioners have been kept as living ‘donors’.”

To show the abundance of organs available in China, he gave an example in which multiple organs were sourced for a single transplant surgery: “One typical case was Huang Jiefu’s liver transplant operation in Xinjiang in September, 2005. Huang was then the vice minister of the Ministry of Health. The first donor’s liver was discarded due to the discovery that the patient was suitable for autologous liver transplant. Then he called for another three ‘standby livers’ from three different places: Chongqing, Guangzhou, and Xinjiang (in case the autologous liver transplant failed).”

“Matching livers were quickly found in both cities, and the matching livers arrived in Xinjiang almost at the same time, at 6:30 p.m. on September 29. Huang’s operation lasted from 7 p.m. on September 29 to 10 a.m. on September 30. After 24 hours of observation, Huang announced that the operation was successful; therefore, the sparelivers were no longer needed.”

Charles pointed out, “The acceptable cold ischemic time (that is, the time from when an organ is cooled and perfused with chemicals as it is removed from the donor, until it is transplanted) for a liver is 6-10 hours. In China it is sometimes longer, but should still be within 15 hours. Therefore, one can safely say that the ‘two spare livers’ brought from Chongqing and Guangzhou could only be two intact living persons, otherwise, the extraction time, flight time, Huang’s operation time, and observation time would be at least 50 hours, the livers would have no value. Yet they were called spare livers.”

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher: The Chinese Communist Party is One of the Largest Forces for Evil in the World Today

2016-6-24-congress-05
U.S. House Representative Dana Rohrabacher

U.S. House Representative Dana Rohrabacher said during the hearing, “The Chinese Communist Party is one of the largest forces for evil in the world today. The systemic government-sponsored harvesting of organs is a monstrous crime. The Chinese regime not only deprives its people of their basic rights on a daily basis, but literally steal their body parts for profit.”

“Falun Gong practitioners, a peaceful and respected Chinese movement, continues to suffer greatly at the hands of the CCP,” said Rep. Rohrabacher. “They are victims of forced organ harvesting.” Under the efforts of human rights advocates, journalists, and investigators, the CCP’s atrocities are becoming known to the world.

Representative Smith: The CCP’s Atrocity is Barbaric

2016-6-24-congress-06
U.S. House Representative Chris Smith

U. S. House Representative Chris Smith said, “The Falun Gong repression is especially brutal, ugly, and vicious. I strongly believe that the 17-year-long campaign to eradicate Falun Gong will be seen as the biggest shame in recent Chinese history.” He commented that the organ harvesting by the Chinese regime and doctors is reminiscent of what happened in Nazi concentration camps during World War II.

He indicated that it was a little discouraging that more people aren’t coming forward to investigate the perpetrators in the persecution of Falun Gong and organ harvesting, but that this will change.

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting

A Formidable Organ Supply Chain in China Based on Killing – New Report Released at National Press Club

June 24, 2016 | By Minghui correspondents He Yu and Mu Wenqing

(Minghui.org) Three international investigators released an in-depth update on the killing of prisoners of conscience for their organs in China at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on June 22, 2016.

Their extensive research, based on media reports, medical journals, hospital websites, and web archives, concludes that the number of transplants performed in China–and the number of victims–are much higher than previously estimated.

David Kilgour, former Canadian Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific, and human rights lawyer David Matas, published Bloody Harvest: Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China in 2009 to shine a light on the harvesting of organs from living Falun Gong practitioners in China, millions of whom have been detained or imprisoned for their belief.

Ethan Gutmann, an award-winning China analyst and investigative journalist, published The Slaughter: Mass Killings, Organ Harvesting, and China’s Secret Solution to Its Dissident Problem in 2014, after conducting an independent investigation.

2016-6-23-oh-dc-1
David Kilgour, former Canadian Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific, led a press conference on the release of their new report at the National Press Club on June 22.

2016-6-23-oh-dc-2
Human Rights Lawyer David Matas, published Bloody Harvest: Organ Harvesting of Falun Gong Practitioners in China in 2009, together with Kilgour.

This report’s release and press conference came several days after the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed H.Res. 343 on June 13, condemning the systematic, state-sanctioned organ harvesting from non-consenting prisoners of conscience in China, including from large numbers of Falun Gong practitioners and members of other religious and ethnic minority groups.

“China has been perpetuating perhaps some of the most gruesome and egregious human rights violations against Falun Gong and other prisoners of conscience, yet has hardly faced any criticism, let alone sanctions, for these abuses,” explained Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), who initiated this resolution last year. She stated that the persecution and organ harvesting “must be opposed universally and ended unconditionally.”

In-Depth Investigation

This new 680-page report (available for download at www.endorganpillaging.org) provides a comprehensive update to the investigation work by the three authors over the past decade. With more than 2,300 references, it includes a large volume of information collected from media reports, promotional materials in China, medical journals, and hospital websites.

Because many Chinese transplant-related websites were deleted or modified after forced organ harvesting came to light in 2006, the report also delved into information found in website archives. In addition, the investigators examined the number of transplants, hospital bed capacity, medical staff training, and government policies and funding.

Organ Transplants On Demand

In most countries, patients have to wait years for a kidney or liver transplant. In China, however, many matching organs were located within weeks–or even days, including thousands of emergency liver transplants for patients requiring a new organ within 72 hours. Some hospitals even offered guarantees of finding a living or kidney donor within two weeks.

From promotional materials or websites of Chinese hospitals, it was claimed that donors are readily available for patients who need organs. In case of rejection, some hospitals were able to source multiple organs for one patient.

Moreover, hospitals listed their fees for organ transplants online. Some have built amenities to attract attract foreign patients (transplant tourists), a number of whom were charged hundreds of thousands or even millions of USD for an organ transplant. Waiting times were generally short, many on the order of weeks.

2016-6-23-oh-dc-3
Ethan Gutmann, an award-winning China analyst and investigative journalist, presented updates for forced organ harvesting in China.

Large Number of Organ Transplants, Few Donations

Another phenomenon the investigators found was the huge number of organ transplants performed in China. According to hospital websites, doctors’ experiences, or media reports, some medical teams performed organ transplants one after another, with hardly any breaks. Some transplant centers’ bed utilization regularly exceeded 100%. As new buildings are constructed, facilities expanded, and beds added, organ transplant chief Huang Jiefu announced his plan in 2015 to issue transplant licenses to more hospitals, from 169 to 300.

Because of Chinese traditions requiring that bodies be preserved whole after death and the lack of an effective donation system, voluntary organ donation is very rare in China. However, the large number of organs located within such short timeframes raise questions regarding their sources. The sources claimed by Chinese officials–executed prisoners (before 2015) and voluntary donations–account for only a small fraction of the number of transplants performed.

After forced organ harvesting first attracted international attention in 2006, Chinese institutions rushed to modify or delete online data related to organ transplantation. Although China’s official number of transplants is around 10,000 a year, this number could easily be surpassed by just a few hospitals. In 2007, more than 1,000 hospitals applied for organ transplant permits from the Ministry of Health in 2007, indicating that they at least met the minimum transplant bed counts required.

Based on minimum capacity requirements stipulated by the Ministry, the 146 hospitals permitted to conduct kidney and liver transplants could have conducted at least one million transplant surgeries since 2000. In reality, all of these institutions are operating well above the minimum capacity. In addition, many institutions without permits from the Ministry are also conducting organ transplants at scale.

A State Crime

After news media exposed forced organ harvesting in China in 2006, evidence has shown that this practice has continued, although it became more secretive. Because of “problems with the organ sources,” as stated by a well-known transplant doctor, the number of transplants are often under-reported and poorly documented, making a determination of accurate numbers very difficult.

The report also covered the involvement of military, Communist Party, and government organizations in carrying out organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience, including the disappearances and forced medical tests of Falun Gong practitioners in state custody.

From sources of patients to hospitals’ credentials, capacity, personnel qualifications, and funding, the report collects detailed information in conjunction with whistleblower testimonies from witnesses to establish a network of systematic supply chains of organ harvesting, a profit-driven and state-sanctioned crime.

The tragedy does not end with organ harvesting and organ transplants. When many plastinated body exhibitions toured around the world, the sources of the bodies—most of them from China—was a mystery. Increasing evidence has linked them to detained Falun Gong practitioners, and many of them are discussed in the report.

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting

Film Human Harvest Shown in the British Parliament

November 10, 2015 | By Minghui correspondent Tang Xiuming

(Minghui.org) A screening of the documentary film Human Harvest: China’s illegal organ trade was held in the British Parliament for the first time on November 4, 2015. The film was honored as the best 2015 International Investigative Documentary by the Association of International Broadcasters (AIB), and has received the prestigious Peabody Award.

2015-11-10-film-gb-1
Poster for documentary film Human Harvest: China’s illegal organ trade

Human Harvest follows Nobel Peace Prize nominees David Matas and David Kilgour as they investigate the atrocities of illegal organ harvesting in China, particularly of Falun Gong prisoners of conscience. They estimate that 40,000 to 60,000 people have been killed for their organs in China.

The film has been shown in over 20 countries to great critical and audience acclaim.

The AIB wrote in announcing the award: “Our judges said that this program effectively captures the horror of the story through credible testimony and proactive research. Complemented by outstanding production values and solid structures, this documentary told a story that definitely needs to be more widely known.”

Officials Express Concern About the CCP’s Live Organ Harvesting

A Lord of the upper house said the film was “Stunning” after watching it. He also wished to know whether the organ harvesting atrocities still continue.

Dr. Alex Chen, representative of DAFOH (Doctors against Forced Organ Harvesting), answered the question. He pointed out that China’s promise to stop using organs from death-row prisoners is a semantic trick. He continued that actually death-row prisoners are still being used as organ source but they are categorized under “voluntary donation” like ordinary citizens. However the use of “voluntarily donated” prisoner organs in China continues to violate international ethical guidelines. The World Medical Association (WMA) states unmistakably in its policy that “in jurisdictions where the death penalty is practiced, executed prisoners must not be considered as organ and/or tissue donors.”

Filmmaker Wants to Raise Awareness

2015-11-10-film-gb-2
Director Leon Lee attends the award ceremony in London

Filmmaker Leon Lee said, “Facing such a crime against humanity, as a human being you have a decision to make… It is a powerful thing to have more people know the issue. The more people know it, the more positive effect on stopping the crime there will be. From feedback from screenings in many countries including the screening in the UK Parliament, we are confident the crime will be stopped.”

NGO Chair: Live Organ Harvesting Must Be Stopped

2015-11-10-film-gb-3
Daisy Arcilla Brett-Holt, Chair of Worldwide Philippine Jury Initiative PH &UK, watches the film in the UK Parliament at 1 pm on November 4, 2015.

Daisy Arcilla Brett-Holt, Chair of Worldwide Philippine Jury Initiative PH &UK, had been a teacher in Philippine, UK and Nigeria. She watched the film in the UK Parliament on November 4.

She said, “My God, I heard that some kidney patients in the Philippines went to China. But I have never thought they went there for organ transplants. This is horrible. This is a powerful film.”

She continued, “How to change it? Just continue telling people about the crime and draw attention of more people. When more people are moved, they will demand change.”

“The CCP seems powerful and the current situation is hard to change. But I believe as long as you continue doing this, it will change sooner or later.”

Chinese version available

Category: Voices of Support Worldwide

BMJ Blog Publishes “China’s Semantic Trick With Prisoner Organs”

October 29, 2015

(Minghui.org) The BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal), a weekly peer reviewed medical journal, published a blog entry entitled, “China’s semantic trick with prisoner organs” on October 15, 2015, by K. Allison, et al.

The authors stated, “Since 2006, mounting evidence suggests that prisoners of conscience are killed for their organs in China with the brutally persecuted Buddhist practice, Falun Gong, among others, being the primary target. This issue has increasingly captured the attention of public media (e.g. BBC radio report and recent SBS and CBC television reports) and the political sphere (e.g. the European Parliament resolution ‘Organ harvesting in China’ of 12 December 2013 and the like named European Parliament workshop on 21 April 2015).”

Under pressure from the international community, China transplant officials admitted to harvesting organs from death-row prisoners years ago, to shift attention to its practice of forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience. But the World Medical Association (WMA) states unmistakably in its policy that “in jurisdictions where the death penalty is practised, executed prisoners must not be considered as organ and/or tissue donors.”

To avoid continued external criticism, “On 3 December 2014, the director of the China Organ Donation Committee and former vice-minister of health, Huang Jiefu, announced that China would cease using death-row prisoners’ organs for transplantation after January 2015. Since then, many medical professionals and international journalists have believed that China has stopped using executed prisoners as a source of organs. This, however, is a misjudgement of the situation in China.”

The authors pointed out that, “The term ‘death-row prisoners’ organs’ to which Huang referred is different from the common definition of prisoner organs. The announcement by Huang refers to the intention to stop the use of organs illegally harvested without the consent of the prisoners. If ‘consent’ is obtained, organ procurement from executed prisoners is legal according to current Chinese laws.

“These prisoner organs procured with ‘consent’ are now classified as voluntary donations from citizens. The re-defining of prisoners as regular citizens in this context is facilitated by the fact that there is currently no law in China that distinguishes prisoners from regular citizens for organ sourcing.

“However the use of ‘voluntarily donated’ prisoner organs in China continues to violate international ethical guidelines. It is a fundamental principle in transplant medicine that organ donations must be made voluntarily, which in turn requires autonomous, informed decision making. Even with ‘consent,’ using organs from prisoners is not acceptable: prisoners are neither free from coercion nor always fully informed, nor able to freely consent, nor are their families.

“Such organs are still being used for transplantation, but are no longer considered as prisoner organs in China:

China Daily reported on 4 December 2014: ‘Prisoners are still among the qualified candidates for donations, but their organs will be registered in the computerised system instead of being used for private trades, which will be the main difference in the future, Huang told reporters.’

People’s Daily reported on January 28, 2015: ‘According to Huang Jiefu, death-row prisoners are also citizens. The law does not deprive them of the right to donate organs. If death-row prisoners are willing to atone for their crime by donating organs, they should be encouraged.’

“All these statements collectively deliver a clear message: death-row prisoners are still allowed or perhaps even encouraged to ‘voluntarily’ supply organs in China. These organs are now classified as voluntary donations from citizens.”

Apparently, China plays a semantic trick on the issue. Prisoner organs are continuously harvested under a different saying to avoid condemnation. “China’s semantic trick with prisoner organs works very ‘successfully’ and has already begun to bear fruit.”

The authors noted, “Still, there is currently great confusion in the international community regarding this issue due to a lack of transparency in China. For example, at the European Parliament workshop on ‘organ harvesting in China’ on 21 April 2015, the former president of the Transplant Society (TTS), Francis Delmonico, erroneously stated that ‘organ procurement from executed prisoners has been illegal since 1 January 2015, by the law of China.’ Very recently, Jeremy R Chapman, editor-in-chief of the journal Transplantation, stated in a commentary in the July issue that ‘the use of organs from executed prisoners is now, by government mandate, illegal.’ These interpretations are in clear contrast to the aforementioned statements of Chinese transplant officials who in 2015 continue to openly defend prisoner organ ‘donation.’”

Furthermore, the authors found, “The announcement of December 2014 itself is neither a law nor a governmental regulation. It is only at best a statement of good intentions but has no force of law. The announcement is not even mentioned in the policies of the PRC National Health and Family Planning Commission, which administers the China Organ Transplant Response System (COTRS). And to underline the legal uncertainty, the 1984 Regulation that permits the use of executed prisoners’ organs has not been abolished.”

The authors pointed out, “After repeated past unfulfilled promises from China, such as the Chinese Medical Association letter to the WMA in 2007, and the failed Hangzhou Resolution in 2013, announcements alone, without subsequent legal actions and without verification that those respective laws are implemented, should not be regarded as satisfactory by the medical community.

“If this semantic trick (labelling prisoner organs as voluntary donations from citizens) is accepted by the international medical community, China would officially bypass international ethical guidelines, and the unethical practice of organ harvesting from prisoners may become a never-ending story.”

They continued, “Moreover, the new ‘standard’ may foster the increase of forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience as well.”

“By re-defining prisoners as regular citizens for ‘voluntary’ organ donation, China’s national organ procurement system may be abused to whitewash organ sourcing from both death-row prisoners and prisoners of conscience.”

They concluded, “Therefore, by reason of international ethical standards and vulnerable populations at risk of abuse, the use of organs from any kind of prisoners must be prohibited by law in China. China must make its organ donation system transparent and verifiable to independent professional organizations and open to international inspections to gain credibility. Until then, sanctions should remain.”

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting

Huaxi Hospital’s Organ Transplant Practices Raise Red Flags

July 01, 2015 | By a Falun Gong practitioner in China

(Minghui.org) Evidence of the Chinese Communist Party’s involvement in harvesting organs from living prisoners of conscience was first disclosed in 2006. Although the international community has condemned this atrocity, China is still considered one of the world’s top transplant tourism destinations.

The following are a few of the many suspicious organ transplant surgeries that were performed at the Huaxi Hospital in Sichuan Province, China after 2006.

Three Donor Livers Become Available Within 60 Days

The Chengdu Business Daily in China earlier this month carried a series of articles on the plight of Liu Shengping, a music teacher at Chengdu College of Arts and Science.

He was diagnosed with cirrhosis of the liver and had waited in a local hospital for nearly 60 days for a liver transplant.

However, when doctors made two livers available to him, on two separate occasions, he was unable to come up with the requisite 300,000 yuan (about $48,000 US) to cover the costs of his liver transplantation.

Having lost all hope of ever being able to afford the operation that would save his life, he gave his students “one last lesson.”

When news of his heartfelt story began to go viral, donations started to pour in. On June 3, 2015 a donor liver had suddenly become available, and a successful liver transplantation was performed on the morning of June 4.

The Chengdu Business Daily did not bother to mention the source of the first two livers, nor how it was possible that all three livers had mysteriously become available within a short two-month period.

However, the newspaper did reveal the source of the third liver, saying, “On June 3, a liver donor was transported from Beijing to the hospital where Liu Shengping had been staying, arriving at 1:50 a.m. Was this the opportunity that Mr. Lui had been waiting for?”

“The doctor on duty explained: ‘The donor was a 31-year-old man who had just died from a stroke. When we checked on the health of his liver, we found that all medical parameters were within normal range. Thus, we concluded that he would make a suitable donor for Mr. Liu’s liver transplant surgery. We went ahead and scheduled the operation for the next morning.’”

The article did not mention the doctor’s name or his position at the hospital, nor did it give any details about the donor, such as his name and occupation; the time of his stroke and eventual death; the time of the transplant operation; how the hospital had been able to quickly ascertain that the donor was a perfect match for Mr. Lui; the procedure that the hospital followed to ensure that the donor had indeed willingly donated his organs to humanity, and whether he was conscious when he arrived at the hospital.

Finding a Liver Within Two Days

The Tianfu Morning newspaper reported on a three-day liver transplantation that had involved eight professors and eight nurses at the Huaxi Liver Transplant Center in Huaxi Hospital, from September 12 to 14, 2006. The first transplant of its kind had been performed there in 2005, and had been hailed a complete success.

Huang Fuyu volunteered to donate a portion of her liver to her husband, Lan Siquan, who had been suffering from an acute case of cirrhosis of the liver.

The couple had entered Huaxi Hospital on September 5, 2006. However, when doctors reviewed the results of Huang’s physical exam on September 10, they concluded that although her liver was very healthy, it was small. Thus, removing too much of it from her body would likely put her life at risk.

“Thus, after many rounds of discussions,” the newspaper reported, “the Liver Transplant Center in Huaxi Hospital decided to perform a challenging multi-liver transplantation.”

“Fortunately, the center managed to find a suitable volunteer donor within two days of the couple’s scheduled surgeries. The husband and wife bid farewell to each other from their gurneys, and the doctors successfully performed the transplantations.”

The article failed to address the unlikelihood of the hospital finding a suitable, healthy volunteer donor within such a short span of time; nor did it provide any pertinent information about the donor, such as his name, place of residence, and cause of death.

It makes one wonder if this “volunteer” donor had actually come from a large organ bank of people who are being systematically killed in order to fuel China’s international organ trade.

Conflicting Evidence Regarding Lung Transplantation

The Yanzhao Metropolitan News on September 12, 2007, reprinted an article from Chengdu Daily, titled, “The first successful whole lung transplantation.”

The article states, “A reporter from Chengdu Daily attended a press conference held at Huaxi Hospital and found that doctors there had performed China’s first successful whole-lung transplant on August 8, 2007.”

The patient, 38-year-old Huang Yisheng, had been employed at a Shannxi City coal mine for 17 years. One day in December 2006, he collapsed while working and was taken to a local hospital. Several doctors diagnosed him with severe pulmonary fibrosis and pneumoconiosis, or black lung disease—caused by inhaling excessive amounts of coal dust.

An investigative journalist had called Huaxi Hospital and asked a doctor about lung transplantation. The doctor explained, “Since the lung is a respiratory organ connected directly to the heart, lung transplantation is by far the most difficult organ transplant to perform.”

When the journalist asked for the name of the surgeon who had performed Huang’s organ transplantation, the doctor became very evasive.

The article also mentioned that all of the transplantation surgeons at Huaxi Hospital were taught how to perform surgery on animals.

So when did these Chinese surgeons first begin to perform human organ transplants, and how long have they been performing experimental human lung transplants?

The article did note that another hospital in China had previously performed a successful half-lung transplantation, but it did not mention if this same type of transplantation had been carried out at Huaxi Hospital.

However, if China’s first whole-lung transplantation was indeed performed at Huaxi Hospital—as the article claims it was—then why wasn’t there any mention of any half-lung transplants being performed there?

How did the main transplantation surgeon, Liu Lunxu, manage to successfully perform a whole-lung transplantation without prior experience in half-lung transplants?

Is it possible that the hospital is covering up the fact that it has been performing half-lung transplants, and possibly whole-lung transplants, for quite some time now?

A few days after the Yanzhao Metropolitan News article first appeared, an investigative journalist posing as a prospective donor recipient called the hospital and asked a doctor on duty, “Where do you manage to find matching donor lungs, and in record time, too?” The doctor replied, “You should just concern yourself with coming up with the money for the surgery. We have donors.”

When the journalist asked, “When did your hospital first begin to perform experimental transplants on humans, and what is your success rate?” The doctor answered, “These are sensitive questions. I cannot answer your questions. All I can say is please don’t worry.”

From the doctor’s own words, one can easily see that the source of the hospital’s organs is questionable, at best.

Also, a hospital would not advertise its lung-transplantation services if its surgeons’ skills and techniques were not up to par.

That being so, it is likely that Huaxi Hospital has been secretly performing whole-lung transplants for many years now.

The Huaxi Hospital website states that in 2006, “140 liver transplants were performed within the past four years under the direction of Dr. Yan Lunan at the Huaxi Liver Transplantation Center. Among these cases, only seven donors were family members.”

Assuming that these figures are correct, is it possible that at least some of those 140 livers had come from Falun Gong practitioners, who are being routinely persecuted by the Chinese regime for their faith?

A lot of hard evidence indicates that this may be so.

Chinese version available

Category: Organ Harvesting