I don't think this correct biologically and ethically. The normal blood donation is still available in all countries and is the ideal way to transfusion blood. The artificial blood now is growing vastly and there are a lot of publications regarding that and hopefully will see it soon in the market to assess the blood needing.

I would agree to Fahad re. the ethical and biological problems.

We have some past experience with sera from animals (e.g. passive immunisation against diphtheria and other infections in the last century), where alloimmunisation took place in quite a percentage of patients. The past experments with bovine hemoglobin also showed, that this is not the correct way of treating anaemia.

Instead of relying on xenotransplants, money and energy should be spent for implementation of a basic, but well organised blood donation service. This starts with education of the population re. blood donation and ends with a sufficient logistic structure. In between, all steps can be learned by twinning with other countries and benchmarking with ones neighbours.

Rather than investing in xenotranplant research, I would recommend to invest in blood banking. AABB, EBA, ISBT, WHO and other organisations offer their help for developing countries.

I am not sure that such hypothetical scenario would be unethical and biologically incorrect. The question is a blast for brain storming, and an extremely exciting one.

If safety were proved, moreover reciprocal safety in both directions, a corollary of primary historical ethical philosophical and metaphysical order would blast all thinking about life, origins, existence etc, and questions what is soul, what is a human and why we are alive etc etc....how man stands in evolution, how life was created - we will never know the why!