Slashdot Mirror
Doctors Transplant Same Kidney Twice In Two Weeks
kkleiner writes "Twenty-seven-year-old Ray Fearing suffered from focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), a common type of kidney disease, and needed a new kidney. His 24-year-old sister, Cera Fearing, wanted to give him hers. The transplanted kidney immediately began to grow diseased, so doctors removed it. But then something happened that, according to the doctor who performed the procedure, had never been done before. The unhealthy kidney was removed from Ray, and replanted into another patient, and the kidney became healthy and has remained in this second patient ever since."
Doctor: We don't have any kidney's available but we have this diseased and rejected kidney in the fridge. Intrested?
If you're going to receive a transplant, it's best to get an organ with broad experience.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
You know that there is a always far more demand then availability.
No matter what happens it probably saved a life.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
get one patient to reject the kidney, and then, while the it's still depressed, another patient gets the kidney on the rebound.
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?
His sister is hot.
You know that there is a always far more demand then availability.
No matter what happens it probably saved a life.
There's an adequate supply, it's just illegal to sell organs.
I think the assumption was that the brother's disease, which was genetic, was causing problems with the new kidney. But because $recipient2 did not have that disease, if transplanted to $recipient2's body, the kidney would recover and work correctly. A genetic disease not present in the kidney should not follow the kidney. The actual results would vindicate that theory.
Kidney once, shame on you. Kidney twice, shame on me.
Sorry, but gray text on gray background is making my eyes bleed.
You are correct -- the value of this is the discovery that when an organ is diseased it may be a symptom of a greater problem. It actually seems pretty obvious when you think about it.
Caveat Utilitor
I don't think that is the fear at all, I think the fear is that people will have their organs stolen while they are alive.
People get killed for their couple hundred dollar iPads, if a healthy person has dozens of saleable organs then they could be worth 10s of thousands of dollars.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Just goes to show that human-parts package management should be treated like a BSD Ports or Gentoo Portage installation; you need to take the entire system into consideration when looking at changes.
-IOVAR Web Dev Platform
Why didn't the girl get the kidney back? I can understand her willing to give it up for her brother, but not for some random person.
Just don't break any traffic laws and you'll be fine.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Because that libertarian attitude every one should be able to enter any contract he wishes without restriction doesn't account for the realities of power play in this world.
The realities of power are that really rich people, right now, can fly to countries to get organs from desperate people. So all we're really doing is exporting the problem.
The reality of medicine is that being put on a donor waiting list is a death sentence for the "99%".
And the reality of organ transplants is that most people suffer organ failure due to poor health, poor diet and smoking / drug abuse. You probably see more poor and middling people, per capita, needing organ transplants because wealthy people take better care of their bodies.
Only desperate people would sell their organs for money.
So it's better that they simply remain desperate? They don't seem to think so. Do they get a say in the matter? Freedom of choice? My body, not the government's? Does that only apply to abortion?
Allowing people to sell organs would give very rich people with organ failure an incentive to make the life of potential donors hell.
Sure, that would make perfect sense if rich people were all part of some vast conspiracy. In reality, any sane person, rich or poor, has every incentive to avoid hugely invasive surgery, and as much as people don't want to be donors, they want to be recipients even less.
Selling/buying them is illegal so there are very few buyers. Make it legal, and the demand and number of places you could offload goes through the roof.
Um, how? Is there anything that could possibly be easier to trace than human organs? I mean, they're already stamped, in every single cell, with DNA. How in God's name could you fence stolen organs?
And if there are doctors willing to do it without running the checks, what's stopping them from doing it now?