No. In spite of better tissue matching , more organ availabilty , and better surgical techniques and anti-rejection drugs, there are still failures.
nipples
False.
2 million
If you're talking about organ transplants, it's because there were no anti-rejection drugs available on the market prior to this.
Generally if transplantation did not have reasonable outcomes, they would not be funded. (Since only effective treatments are worth funding). Organ transplants remain the best, and in some cases, only, way of curing end-stage organ diseases. This does not mean to say that everybodys' organ transplant will be completely successful, but to date it remains the best "cure" for end-stage diseases.
the liver NIBF~ It's probably the skin if you are trying to get the whole thing also the skin is the fastest organ to be rejected from the body
why were transplants between 1800 and 1950 not successful?
The first successful kidney transplant between two twins. Proved that it was possible and aided in the understanding of 'rejection'.
erm the doctor
yes
Transplants between 1800 and 1950 were not very successful, this is because there was not things like tissue typing and immunosuppressive drugs available, these are important because tissue typing test that the tissue is compatible with the body it will be transplanted to, and immunosuppressive drugs destroy the immune system so that the antiboddies wont destroy the new organ.
Who Knew - 2010 Organ Transplants 5-46 was released on: USA: 16 December 2011