Part, Chapter, Paragraph

 1 I, 1,1      |      survived for 70 days in one case and 26 days in the other. ~
 2 I, 1,1      |      three cases) or livers (one case); in no case did the recipient
 3 I, 1,1      |         livers (one case); in no case did the recipient survive
 4 I, 2,4      |       for longer periods, in one case for 460 days. None of the
 5 II, 1,8     |      mercy of man. In the former case, the use of animals is seen
 6 II, 1,8     |      also allowed. In the latter case, man can use animals arbitrarily
 7 II, 1,8(56) |   Pimlico, London; Regan T., The case for Animal Rights, 1983,
 8 II, 1,9     |       benefit for man, as is the case with xenotransplantation
 9 II, 1,9     |            However, even in this case, there is the ethical requirement
10 II, 1,11    |   significance must be assessed, case by case, specifically in
11 II, 1,11    |        must be assessed, case by case, specifically in relation
12 II, 1,11(61)|  encephalon transplant can in no case be considered morally licit,
13 II, 1,11(61)|       Different, however, is the case of a gonad transplant performed
14 II, 2,12(64)|         of Medical Progress. The case of Xenotransplantation,
15 II, 2,14    |          applied to the specific case of xenotransplantation. ~
16 II, 2,15    |      longer expressed. In either case, such animals will express
17 II, 2,16    | precautions to be adopted in the case of infection (in particular
18 II, 2,16    |         e.g. in the hypothetical case of a life-saving xenotransplant
19 II, 2,17    |      care resources used in this case is justified by the urgent
20 II, 2,18    |   derived from humans (as is the case with animal organs genetically
21 II, 2,18    |  objective - in the hypothetical case of patents connected with