
China harvested organs from political prisoners, says tribunal - crunchiebones
https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5250
======
blhack
Why does the west continue to tolerate China as a trading partner?

China is pretty obviously building their empire. They, as a government, appear
to have almost no regard whatsoever for human life. They, as a government,
appear to have absolutely no regard whatsoever for national sovereignty. They,
as a government, appear to have absolutely no regard for the environment.

It just seems completely inevitable to me that China eventually wants to
conquer the world. Why is the west enriching them, and by proxy funding their
research into war machines when it seems obvious that these things will
eventually be used against us?

These acts are atrocities, no doubt. But these atrocities aren't being
committed by some dictator in some small, isolated country. These atrocities
are being committed by a regime that has all but said that it intends to
conquer the rest of the planet and export these atrocities as the standard
operating procedure for the entire planet, and which very probably WILL DO
THIS if something doesn't occur to change the course.

People are upset about the "trade war" we are currently in, or about to be in,
or were in, or whatever the pundit of the hour says. I can't say I agree that
restricting trade with China, and encouraging the infrastructure being built
there to be built in the US, or at the very least in a country that respects
human rights instead, is a bad thing.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
We fund them because it helps the people in charge get rich off the backs of
cheap Chinese labor.

We (the U.S) tolerate their disrespect for human rights because we also do not
respect human rights, as demonstrated by our relationship with Saudi Arabia,
our many horrible wars, etc. We also do not respect national sovereignty, as
demonstrated by our covert wars in South America, our firebombing of Vietnam,
Laos, and Cambodia, and our occupation of the Middle East.

We do business with them because they are like us. Or at least, like our
business people. They want to grow their power as our businesses do. Not all
business people are like this, but we allow the influential businesses to
support these actions and we as a people do not stop it.

~~~
blhack
>We (the U.S) tolerate their disrespect for human rights because we also do
not respect human rights

I'm sorry but this statement is just absolutely and completely ridiculous. I
don't know if you've either never been to The United States, or you've never
left The United States, but the difference between the respect that we have
for human rights, and the respect that _much of the rest of the world_ has, is
stark.

~~~
throwba43yt
The US talks about respecting human rights, but has no problem with 1 million
dead Iraqi civilians.

Individual Americans may respect human rights. Just like individual Chinese do
as well. But when you challenge them as a nation, well, then the needs of the
stong outweigh the needs of the weak.

~~~
veridies
> has no problem with 1 million dead Iraqi civilians

And how many Kurds were killed by Saddam Hussein? How many Shias? I think the
Iraq war was a terrible mistake but that doesn't mean that supporting it means
you don't care about Iraqis.

~~~
stanfordkid
We need to grow out of this culture of attributing any value to “caring”. The
fact that Americans “care” that 1 million Iraqis died is not only meaningless,
but also facetious.

We elected a government and enabled a system that led to this. How can we
judge China as worse? More importantly why do these judgements fundamentally
even matter?

The real question Americans should ask themselves is : what is our vision for
the future? How can we regain our glory?

Anything else assumes authority without investment. A strategy that is
destined for failure.

------
alehul
When I was younger, maybe five years ago or so, I was living in Boston and I'd
consistently see a pack of Chinese protestors outside the public library at
Copley (very popular area) holding up signs, looking to gain attention for
this very issue. They spoke to me as best as they could, handed me a pamphlet
with hard-to-parse English but nonetheless gruesome descriptions, and asked
for my signature along with any other help I could offer.

I was pretty skeptical that this story was as one-sided as they (along with
any other protestor/activist) would represent it to be. I remember wondering
what I was really signing a petition for, and hesitation in doing so.

This report fills me with regret for not feeling more empathy, as I must
imagine they knew people or knew of people who this had happened to, in order
to sit out there all day, so consistently. I haven't seen any of the
protestors in years, despite their previous frequency-- I hope they're all
well, as are their families.

Has anyone else seen this in other cities, or had other experiences with these
folks in Boston?

~~~
ir193
I can guarantee you many Chinese protestors you can see in US are protesting
for political asylum. For them, protesting for is only a way to green card.
Almost every Chinese Uber driver I met in SF are under political asylum

~~~
onetimemanytime
>> _Almost every Chinese Uber driver I met in SF are under political asylum_

USA hands asylum like candy (overworked courts?) but honestly, if 5% of what
we read is true, the Chinese deserve it.

------
miles
Organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China)

~~~
eric_b
> "According to the reports, political prisoners, mainly Falun Gong
> practitioners, are being executed "on demand" in order to provide organs to
> recipients."

Wild... I had no idea this was going on. There are a lot of things about China
that I disagree with, but this might be the worst thing I've heard so far.

~~~
reaperducer
Imagine how much more efficiently the Chinese government could identify
involuntary donors if it had better access to people's personal information.

Perhaps through a search engine of some kind. One with a harmless-sounding
name. Maybe "Dragonfly" would be a good name.

~~~
vatueil
I guess it wouldn't be HN if we didn't tie every story back to our own issues.

In this case, if Google ever does return to China I doubt the authorities
would find it more useful for such purposes than existing sources such as
iCloud, Bing, and Baidu already are.

~~~
throwaway2048
Hey, at least everyone else is doing it too!

~~~
vatueil
The point is more that the parent comment raises a different issue that
doesn't really address the topic at hand. Even if another search engine did
appear, it wouldn't allow the authorities to target dissidents more
effectively than existing services already do.

If we want to actually make a difference, we might consider calling for those
existing services to change their ways. Harder to pressure the domestic
Chinese companies, of course, but it's surprising how little attention is paid
to Western companies who are actually in China and benefitting from it.

------
michaelmrose
So how many victims are there? CNN said in 2016 that there were 10k legal
transplants and 60-100k actual transplants based on looking at actual volume
of transplants at the largest hospitals and supposes that executed minorities
compose the difference. Keep in mind that one victim could be sufficient to
provide fodder for a number of operations.

[https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/23/asia/china-organ-
harvesting/i...](https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/23/asia/china-organ-
harvesting/index.html)

Do we have actual hard numbers? The 4000 fulun gong seem insufficient for the
volume reported.

~~~
tzs
Don't forget that one body can supply parts for several different transplants.

~~~
snthd
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Go...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China#Discrepancy_in_known_sources_of_organs)

> Because China lacks an organized organ matching and allocation system, and
> in order to satisfy expectations for very short wait times, it is rare that
> multiple organs are harvested from the same donor.

~~~
michaelmrose
So 1 illicit transplants is actually 1 murder that is absolutely horrifying.
If this has been going on since 2006 we could be looking at mass extermination
hundreds of thousands.

------
hnaccy
You can't get much more dystopian or abhorrent than using a political minority
as livestock.

~~~
DannyB2
The word 'harvested' is so much nicer than 'stolen'. That makes the 'optics'
better.

(i feel sick now)

~~~
thinkingkong
On the contrary. Harvesting organs is terrifying.

~~~
kurthr
Just add one more word... harvesting Human organs, and the alliteration sends
a shiver down you spine.

------
AdmiralAsshat
I remember first hearing about this in the context of the Bodies exhibit[0]
and concern from some people not to accept "donations" from China, as they
might've come involuntarily from political prisoners.

Looks like their concern was well-placed.

[0][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodies:_The_Exhibition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodies:_The_Exhibition)

------
sonnyblarney
Interning millions of people on the basis of their ethnicity/religion, and
then harvesting their organs ... now where have we heard this one before?

I won't make the direct comparison because it'd normally seem hyperbolic in
2018 ... but this is happening in 2018.

If this is true, it has to change the narrative quite firmly.

~~~
craftyguy
Why are you singling out Tim Cook? All world leaders (both political and
corporate) that appease China are to blame.

~~~
sonnyblarney
I believe that since Apple is claiming moral imperative every day in their ads
and interviews, and because they have material relationships with China (which
governments merely facilitiate) - and that Apple & co are the primary
beneficiaries of 'global China' (not for example, Justin Trudeau) ... then
they have the first move.

World leaders behind the scenes are very wary of China, they're a) afraid of
speaking out and b) have to be diplomatic on some level.

The rubber hits the road (i.e. the 'money') is Apple.

And yes - of course world leaders should be far more aggressive about this.

Sadly, as aggressive as Trump can be, I'll bet he turns a blind eye if he gets
a good trade deal.

Though I'm no fan of his, I'll bet he could garner an instant 10% boost in
global approval by requiring the closure of those camps as part of any future
trade deal. And the thing is - he actually does have enough leverage to get
away with it. It would be a major, major international coup of the
humanitarian kind ... something so many of his more social/lefty peers could
only dream of doing. It'd be nice to seem him try, but I'm not holding my
breath.

------
nneonneo
So it's worth noting that allegations about organ harvesting have been
circulating since at least the 2000s. There is likely (almost certainly)
credibility in the claims that political prisoners (mostly Falun Gong
practitioners) were harvested for organs in the early 2000s. From what I can
tell, the tribunal is validating that these abuses occurred.

However, there is not any hard evidence (that I know of - I'd be happy to be
corrected) of recent harvesting or coerced organ donation from recent years -
in particular, in 2015 China agreed to stop using prisoners as organ sources
([https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/04/china-stop-
usi...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/04/china-stop-using-
executed-prisoners-organs-transplant-demand-donations)).

So I'll be curious to hear the final report - whether it mentions recent
abuses or not.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
China agreed to stop using prisoners as forced organ donors many times before
2015. They didn't even say "we really mean it this time", so I'm not sure how
much credibility you can take from their statement.

The big problem is that the provinces and local governments aren't really that
great at following the central government's direction unless the latter is
really serious (who can't focus their attention on some many things).

~~~
ryacko
China has mass surveillance. The amount of money that would change hands for
organs would raise red flags, as well as the likelihood of using a known
broker.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Just because China has mass surveillance and is partially a police state, it
still is a chaotic place where you can mostly jay walk with impunity. State
organs are poorly organized and integrated, and there is no easy way to verify
the implementation of whatever edicts come from the top.

The central government also don't care if some local politicians are involved
in the prison organ trade for a few extra rambos, as long as they keep it
under the radar....

------
DeonPenny
Crazy that people are just finding this out. They've done this to three major
groups of people.

~~~
gotts
which three major groups were you referring to?

~~~
TomMarius
Uyghurs, Falun Gong, non-communists?

~~~
wollstonecraft
Uyghurs are probably not a tissue match for Han.

~~~
barry-cotter
Uyghurs are more or less half East Asian, half West Eurasian though
ethnogenesis is long enough ago that they’re fairly thoroughly mixed. Naively
you might expect they’d be half as likely to match Han. It’s probably lower
than half but I’d be very surprised if it was less than a quarter. There are
six loci that are important for transplant rejection or acceptance though
there are hundreds of alleles for those loci[1]. And there are almost
certainly more Uyghurs in “re-education camps” than any other group at the
moment. If there are ten times as many Uyghurs imprisoned as everyone else
combined but they’re 1/4 as likely to be a good transplant match there’ll be
2.5 times as many Uyghurs harvested.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_histocompatibility_compl...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_histocompatibility_complex)

------
stanfordkid
Why do people fall for this sort of stuff so easily? There is a pattern of
western governments regularly organizing subversive, extremist, headline
grabbing testimonies to further foreign policy objectives:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony)

I don't think the Chinese government is great either, but I'm pretty cognizant
that the level of anti-China FUD is directly proportional to the accelerating
economic growth and foreign influence of the nation. China is causing very
positive economic development in Africa, Pakistan and other regions that are
more than happy to partner with it.

I for one am not so worried about a Chinese Surveillance state being thrust
upon Europe or the US.

~~~
nneonneo
This probably isn't even organized by Western governments - most likely this
is meant to support the Falun Gong. I've seen a noticeable uptick in Falun
Gong's efforts to highlight the organ harvesting issue over the last few
months.

------
pasbesoin
U.S. perspective, writing this.

I find this is an area where a "moral decision" is rather clear-cut.

And it highlights the... "amorality", at best, of much of our relationship
(whether speaking at the personal level or the state/economy level) with
contemporary China.

With our technology, we've enabled and empowered a political and economic
structure that has not... "sorted its shit" as part of achieving same.
Simultaneously, we've hollowed out our own system -- the checks and balances,
as well as raw job counts.

The U.S. is far from perfect. Nonetheless, literally, physically "ripping the
life" from one person, as a judgement, to benefit another. That is some
symbolism. And a hallmark of what our own society has at least publicly
considered to be "dystopia".

\----

P.S. I responded to a reply with the following, but the child comment was
deleted before I finished. It was a more than fair point about what happens
(over here), and the opportunity for response allowed me to better qualify
the... "us versus them" \-- or perhaps lack of a "versus" \-- present in my
original comment. So, copy/pasta of that reply of mine:

My "the U.S. is far from perfect" is an understatement -- one I worried about.
I agree with your point, and I find the behaviors you point out abhorrent.
Prison for profit; Econ. 101 teaches you what you're going to get from that.

The U.S. has, however, been pretty aggressive in regulating organ transplants.
When they happen. How limited, hopefully ethical, supplies are distributed.

Of course, over this hangs the spectre of economic disparity, corresponding
health insurance disparity and health care access...

Yes, the U.S. is making plenty of life-altering, life-destroying decisions.
The "death panels" that actually exist but don't make it into the political
discussion (i.e. not the ginned up political phantoms).

And, some of those disparities seem to have been severely exacerbated,
domestically -- progress actively reversed -- through off-shoring,
outsourcing, and the winner-take-all, short-term reward.

As I grow more depressed writing this, well, at least we aren't ripping out
"prisoners'" organs -- yet.

(We go overseas and buy nice foreigners' kidneys, for that.)

~~~
josephpmay
At first look, from a Western perspective, this is 100% clear-cut morally bad.

But I've also learned a limited amount about the Chinese moral perspective in
college, and it can be a useful exercise to examine how someone who doesn't
have a Judeo-Christian/Locke moral framework may view this practice.

In some ways, the harvesting of organs from political prisoners can be viewed
as the trolley problem. Killing one political prisoner (an 'undesirable' in
Chinese society) could save a number of lives of upstanding citizens.

The practice disgusts me personally, but I can see a reasonable argument in
support of it.

~~~
marvin
You could take almost anyone, really. Just measure every citizen according to
their contributions to society, and when four productive and useful citizens
have need of a heart, a liver, two kidneys and a pancreas between them, just
harvest a citizen that's not as productive as all of these four combined.

Of course, you maximize utility by choosing someone who does not contribute a
lot to society, and _ideally_ someone who is a net negative. That's a win-win
situation. The West is incredibly wasteful with our pie-in-the-sky dreamy
research on artificial organs, when such a net positive solution is readily
available.

It's frightening that a moral argument can be made along these lines. Does
anyone really subscribe to this view? I am unfamiliar with Eastern philosophy,
but this seems ludicrous.

~~~
vkou
> You could take almost anyone, really. Just measure every citizen according
> to their contributions to society, and when four productive and useful
> citizens have need of a heart, a liver, two kidneys and a pancreas between
> them, just harvest a citizen that's not as productive as all of these four
> combined.

On what basis do we determine who gets life-critical medical care?

------
jhallenworld
Respect for life is pretty low in China in other ways, take a look at the
experience of having a baby:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBgZ_xNXViw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBgZ_xNXViw)

~~~
pesfandiar
Coming from a Middle Eastern country, I understand very well what low respect
for life could look like. It runs through all layers of the society/culture,
and probably takes generations to fix.

For a better depiction of how low the respect of life could be, I suggest (at
risk of psychological trauma) reading or viewing videos about how some drivers
in China would rather run over an injured pedestrian (in some cases small
children) a few times to ensure they're dead. Apparently a dead victim costs
less than ongoing medical bills.

------
empathy_m
I was trying to understand what the Chinese perspective is on this. What do
people who live in China or who were born there think about whether or not
people in China have harvested organs from political prisoners and/or continue
to do so?

Here is the best most levelheaded response I found, on Quora from someone who
frequently presents a particular point of view: [https://www.quora.com/Are-
there-not-people-within-the-Chines...](https://www.quora.com/Are-there-not-
people-within-the-Chinese-government-who-oppose-the-human-harvest-of-
organs/answer/Feifei-Wang-6)

She writes that organ harvesting is illegal, that nearly everyone in China
opposes it, and that if someone were caught doing it, they would go to jail.

I'm not sure how to square that with a finding from a tribunal in Britain that
"state organised or approved organisations or individuals" engaged in "forced
organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience has been practised for a
substantial period of time, involving a very substantial number of victims".

I guess she would probably respond by saying that the source is dubious and it
cannot be true because the state wouldn't break the law like that?

Is that the view?

------
lordnacho
If you're wondering how people can see through all manner of moral repugnance,
here's Sacha Baron Cohen exploiting this for laughs:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P65pZhZ-
pks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P65pZhZ-pks)

Includes a segment about a Chinese dissident being eaten. Boggles the mind how
the guy apparently thinks this is real human flesh and not only that, it's
from a prisoner.

------
stunt
Not defending China but this might be simply fake news. Haven't seen it in any
major news network or human right organization talking about this.

I wouldn't be surprised if there is just a campaign against China these days.
I see bad news every day on the internet about China.

------
throwaway5411
I quietly wondered, some weeks ago, when China’s “Khashoggi moment” might
occur. This probably isn’t it, unless an individual story can emerge that can
capture the public’s revulsion in a way that, for some reason, only an
individual story can.

It took one journalist’s murder and dismemberment to finally make Mohammed
Bin-Salman politically radioactive in a way that thousands of dead and
starving Yemenis could not. As we continue to ignore the Uighur internment
camps, and probably this as well, what will it take for Xi?

~~~
mc32
China took and kidnapped their own international official personified in the
head of the Interpol. Not much more than a squeak. So, I don't think you're
going to hear about "unknowns" much.

The Saudi journalist is an odd exception. Any other journalist (remember the
Russian journalist assassinated, or the Maltese journalist). Like there is a
squeak but not much else --which tells me there is something about the Saudi
case.

~~~
hutzlibu
Well, but he was not murdered. "Just" imprisoned in unconvential ways so to
say. So you can't really expect the same outcry.

~~~
mc32
True, but a person of great stature and responsibility, Not the UN sec
general, but imagine the UN sec general gets kidnapped by Portugal and....
crickets...

------
68c12c16
i remember reading another report by washington post on this issue a year
ago...i am posting the report link here and perhaps it could provide us with a
bit more details regarding the problem...

    
    
      news title: China used to harvest organs from prisoners. 
                  Under pressure, that practice is 
                  finally ending. 
      date: 2017/09/14
    

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-the-
fac...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/in-the-face-of-
criticism-china-has-been-cleaning-up-its-organ-transplant-
industry/2017/09/14/d689444e-e1a2-11e6-a419-eefe8eff0835_story.html)

------
csense
China's arresting Canadians in revenge for the Huawei executive's arrest. Are
those Canadians going to be murdered for their organs if the Huawei executive
is extradited?

~~~
everybodyknows
Of course not -- hostages need to be alive to have negotiating value.

------
awakeasleep
Will this be added to Google's Project Dragonfly censorship engine?

~~~
peterwwillis
"Like, I know harvesting organs of prisoners is bad, but can we just talk
about Google products for a second"

~~~
t0astbread
Well, it's relevant. If Google delivers projects like Dragonfly that means it
has no problems supporting practices like these.

------
unfunco
As an aside, Jimmy Carr mentioned in a TV show a few weeks back that his
friend had liver disease, and couldn't get a liver transplant on the NHS, so
went to China and bought a liver off a man on death row.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97SjHFuZilI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97SjHFuZilI)

------
jfhufl
Reminds me of the organ banks in Niven's Known Space, Series. Governments made
being sent to the "organ banks" the favored punishment for crimes. Also gave
way to OrganLegging:

    
    
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organlegging
    

Lovely.

~~~
berbec
I recall a horrifying story Niven wrote about a man running from the police to
escape his death sentance. At the end of the story, he is caught and brought
to justice for running a red light.

------
echaozh
Not sure how people can sit outside China for 3 days and gather enough
evidence to believe "beyond doubt" that the organ harvesting thing is true.

Also, if you look at what Falun Gong teaches, the credibility of the believers
should be at question. Per Wikipedia, the grandmaster of the cult believes
that homosexuality is a sin, democracy and science are both bad things, and
aliens are constantly interfering with Earth affairs.[1] If Falun Gong is not
against China, but against, say Thailand, how many of you will blindly believe
their accusations? What about Canada?

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teachings_of_Falun_Gong](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teachings_of_Falun_Gong)

------
thinkloop
any tricks to get full article?

~~~
pizza
use sci-hub

[https://sci-hub.tw/https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5250](https://sci-
hub.tw/https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5250)

mods delete this comment if it's inappropriate but this is a pretty
bewildering release

~~~
crunchiebones
ah, the link can't be changed.. sorry

------
chapium
wow...

“During the 2000s, analysis of various sources of emerging evidence led to the
conclusion that people who practised Falun Gong were being killed to provide
the organs fuelling China’s transplant boom. “It is common for Chinese
transplant professionals to parrot the Communist Party line saying that those
who have been speaking out . . . have a ‘political agenda.’” In 2006 a
whistleblower claimed that more than 4000 Falun Gong practitioners had been
killed for their organs at the hospital in China where she worked. Subsequent
independent investigators, including David Kilgour, former Canadian secretary
of state for the Asia-Pacific, David Matas, an international human rights
lawyer, and the investigative journalist Ethan Gutmann, have concluded that
such practices occurred

------
aldoushuxley001
It's also rumored they actively seek to harvest organs from Falun Gong
practictioners...

~~~
chapium
Not rumors, judging by the contents of this article.

------
rhegart
The false dichotomy of comparing the “evils” of USA whenever horrifying news
comes out of China is worrying. Stretched to the extreme it’s the equivalent
of bringing up Obama droning killing innocents when comparing The Nazis and
Hitler. Our minds conflate the 2 things as bad and we compartmentalize them as
such together.

There is a world of difference between the 2. Imagine if the world order was
not created by US and instead China, things would be 10000x worse. When you
are the sole superpower, other countries would abuse that privilege to benefit
themselves a thousand fold more than the US does. We didn’t think about China
as a serious threat 10 years ago because they were poor and not powerful yet
the barbarity was worse then. It’s just more pronounced now because they have
more power.

The same is true for all countries going to the world stage. Nigeria doesn’t
seem like a threat now but in 50 years when it’s more population than the US
the racism and backwards beliefs will result in terrible world crimes. The
same can be said of Vietnam, and India too. (I am Indian). If these countries
get as powerful as China you’ll see them expanding military, bullying
neighbors, petty tribalism stuff.

It seems nationalist but I agree with trump to bring our economic industries
home. Improve quality of life in these countries and improve human rights,
wealth etc. but not to the degree where they are untouchable militarily and
economically. Because China is not the worst to come, they are not even close.
We don’t think of Vietnam and others as a threat but their tribalism runs deep
as well. It takes 1 nationalist leader to increase the pace but when they have
power like China almost everyone will abuse it.

~~~
EthanHeilman
I think you are being downvoted for being off-topic.

>It seems nationalist but I agree with trump to bring our economic industries
home.

It's worth a try although the chance of it happening given the complexity of
modern industrial good is near zero. I don't think Trump actually wants this
and if he does his actions are having the opposite effect. To seriously grow
an industrial base in the US would require very open borders, a massive
federal investment + subsidy and a complete elimination of tariffs.

~~~
tropo
It would require very open borders on BOTH sides, or at least on the side that
the USA doesn't directly control.

With the heavy tariffs imposed by China and others on goods from the USA,
manufacturing naturally moves there unless the USA retaliates.

------
throwawayofis
China harvested organs from political prisoners on substantial scale, says
tribunal Richard Hurley The BMJ Forced harvesting of organs from prisoners of
conscience in China has been “substantial,” says an interim judgment of an
independent “people’s tribunal” set up to determine whether the country’s
transplantation practices breached international criminal law. The former
English judge Geoffrey Nice QC, the tribunal’s chair, said after a three day
evidence gathering session, “We, the tribunal members, are all certain,
unanimously, beyond reasonable doubt, that in China forced organ harvesting
from prisoners of conscience has been practised for a substantial period of
time, involving a very substantial number of victims . . . by state organised
or approved organisations or individuals.” The tribunal found that the
practices breached the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including
articles 3 (right to life), 6 (recognition as a person before the law), 7
(equality before the law), 9 (not to be subject to arbitrary arrest), 10 (full
equality to a fair and public hearing in determination of rights), 11
(presumption of innocence), and 5 (torture). The Chinese government and the
Transplantation Society, which has “official relations” with the World Health
Organization and offers “global leadership in transplantation . . . and
guidance on ethical practice,” had not submitted evidence. The Independent
Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting from Prisoners of Conscience in China
heard evidence in public in London on 8-10 December. A seven strong panel
questioned 30 witnesses, including refugees from China, doctors, and
investigators. Its full judgment, due early next year, could have major
implications for doctors and institutions worldwide that collaborate with
China on transplantation related activities. The Chinese ambassador to the UK
and prominent doctors in China involved in transplantation were invited
repeatedly to give evidence but had not responded, said Nice. The tribunal
invited evidence from the current and former presidents of TTS. Three said
that they would not attend the hearings, he said. Nice emphasised that the
tribunal remains open to receiving evidence through its website
([https://chinatribunal.com/call-for-](https://chinatribunal.com/call-for-)
evidence). Jean-Pierre Mongeau, executive director of the Transplantation
Society, told The BMJ, “While TTS will not be providing a testimony at this
time, we have been a firm supporter of the reform in China, and we applaud the
laws that have been enacted.” In 2007 China banned commercial organ trading,1
and a 2011 law insisted on consent.2 In 2015 China vowed to halt the
harvesting of organs from death row prisoners (not prisoners of conscience).3
4 The tribunal was convened by the non-profit International Coalition to End
Transplant Abuse in China (ETAC), which includes lawyers, academics,
ethicists, doctors, researchers, and human rights advocates. However, the
tribunal is independent from the coalition, and the tribunal’s panel is
working “pro bono,” Nice said. Susie Hughes, executive director of ETAC, said,
“From 2000, there was a rapid increase in the number of transplants [in
China]. The source of the organs underpinning this high level of activity has
never been explained in a credible way by the Chinese government. “During the
2000s, analysis of various sources of emerging evidence led to the conclusion
that people who practised Falun Gong were being killed to provide the organs
fuelling China’s transplant boom. “It is common for Chinese transplant
professionals to parrot the Communist Party line saying that those who have
been speaking out . . . have a ‘political agenda.’” In 2006 a whistleblower
claimed that more than 4000 Falun Gong practitioners had been killed for their
organs at the hospital in China where she worked. Subsequent independent
investigators, including David Kilgour, former Canadian secretary of state for
the Asia-Pacific, David Matas, an international human rights lawyer, and the
investigative journalist Ethan Gutmann, have concluded that such practices
occurred Sitting on the panel alongside Nice are Martin Elliott, professor of
cardiothoracic surgery at University College London, Andrew Khoo, who has a
private law practice in Malaysia, Regina Paulose, a US attorney who focuses on
international criminal law and human rights, Shadi Sadr, an Iranian human
rights lawyer, Nicholas Vetch, a UK businessman, and Arthur Waldron, a US
historian and professor of international relations at the University of
Pennsylvania. Nice said, “It was decided not to have a panel of people already
knowledgeable about, or particularly concerned about, allegations of forced
organ harvesting that have already been made” Informal people’s tribunals fill
a gap, he said, when formal national and international bodies failed to deal
with allegations of serious crimes by states or state supported bodies. One
For personal use only: See rights and reprints
[http://www.bmj.com/permissions](http://www.bmj.com/permissions) Subscribe:
[http://www.bmj.com/subscribe](http://www.bmj.com/subscribe) example was
Bertrand Russell’s 1967 tribunal that investigated US policy in the Vietnam
war.

~~~
peterwwillis
Pastebin links are better for this kind of thing

------
_zachs
You have to give it to Trump for really sticking it to China in trade.

------
jhcl
Looks like members only content, can't get through the paywall.

In the meantime the short description does trigger the discussion why the US
still lets Guantanamo Bay violate the human rights.

------
pleasecalllater
And nothing will change, as usually. Russia attacked Ukraine - lots of
countries said how unhappy they were and that's all - nothing happened.

China is too strong, so companies will still make deals, will still buy and
sell there, will just do whatever the China government wants. The same with
the politicians bought by the companies.

Any tribunal will not change anything. Even UN is paralyzed as the all
sanctions against China will get China's veto and there won't be any decision.

Even when Mr. Trump made concentration camps for children (just like Germans
did during the WW2) did anything change after publishing the information about
that?

So my final thought is quite sad: nothing will change, live on, be happy that
you live in such a country which respects some other values (e.g. exploits
work of children in Asia but not your children, so you can think that nothing
happens).

------
a-nikolaev
The word "substantial" is very vague and a bad sign for any scientific and
evidence-based publication.

Then, when such news show up while Trump is trying to make his deal with the
Chinese and (it seems) even got a hostage recently, this makes me feel a bit
suspicious of this article, especially since its content is pay-walled.

(I'm not defending organ-harvesting, which was already reported in the past,
but the article must be specific about what has or has not happened, and
should not use such vague statements.)

~~~
malmsteen
Tbh you can see a conpiracy everywhere, even with your comment for example:
you could be geniunely suspicious.

Or you could be a die hard trump supporter who prefer to say its suspicious
because you don't like that attacking china whill lead in the future to
attacking trump policy.

I wonder which one

~~~
a-nikolaev
Well, if Trump say something about this topic on TV in the next couple of
days, then I'm right. In any case, they promise to deliver a full report on
that investigation in early 2019, hopefully it will be more informative. (My
main point is not that the article might be politically motivated, but that
its main statement is very imprecise and allows interpretations.)

------
zachguo
A good never-falsifiable story, just like those made up by people who are
trying to get and maintain an asylum visa to US.

~~~
barry-cotter
There are more transplant operations in China than are consistent with rates
of organ donation. Far, far more. What’s your alternative explanation?

------
jamesjue
From the article, "The Independent Tribunal into Forced Organ Harvesting from
Prisoners of Conscience in China heard evidence in public in London on 8-10
December. A seven strong panel questioned 30 witnesses, including refugees
from China, doctors, and investigators.". Clearly, solid and irrefutable
conclusions on such a serious matter only need 3 days of hearing from 30
witnesses.

~~~
ArchTypical
> a serious matter only need 3 days of hearing from 30 witnesses.

Making statements about immoral acts by the Chinese government is probably
something that takes a little bit of secrecy, security and assurances in the
modern era. I have to wonder if you understand the situation.

