Removing Unvaccinated from Transplant List.

[Silverhair]

The restrictions have been proven to not work. Yes I would lift all restrictions. Period

Well we are lucky that you are not in charge aren't we.

 

[Silverhair]

Well goodnite I have some studies to do. Sleep tight and don't let the covid bug bite.

 

[Revmitchell]

It amazes me how willing people are to give up freedom to dictators.

we should never give up freedom. Ever

 

[JonC]

If you look at many different health issues you will find there are restrictions that come along with care. This is just one that has made the papers. I would not want to be the Dr. that has to tell someone they are off the list but if they do not meet the requirements then that is what happens.
Covid has made all of us make some hard choices, some are just easier to live with.

I agree. It would be horrible to be the one (or among the ones) who decides who is on the list and who is not. With this topic there are hard choices.

It is also not just about priority on a list. These doctors have to weigh the risks.

With kidney transplants the doner is often a relative (so the list may not be important). Still there is the concern of up to a 30+ mortality rate with covid.

Doctors have to act responsibility to mitigate these factors. They will not perform the surgery on an alcoholic even if he has his own doner. Same, in this case, with an unvaccinated woman. Ethical decisions have to be made. Should they operate knowing there was a high mortality risk that could be addressed? Probably not. There are still resources being tied up. The doctors would incur responsibility for the woman's poor choices.

 

[Wingman68]

I agree. It would be horrible to be the one (or among the ones) who decides who is on the list and who is not. With this topic there are hard choices.

It is also not just about priority on a list. These doctors have to weigh the risks.

With kidney transplants the doner is often a relative (so the list may not be important). Still there is the concern of up to a 30+ mortality rate with covid.

Doctors have to act responsibility to mitigate these factors. They will not perform the surgery on an alcoholic even if he has his own doner. Same, in this case, with an unvaccinated woman. Ethical decisions have to be made. Should they operate knowing there was a high mortality risk that could be addressed? Probably not. There are still resources being tied up. The doctors would incur responsibility for the woman's poor choices.

Still with the 30% mortality rate of fabricated #’s. The docs do not incur the responsibility anyway, there is plenty of waiver paperwork that is signed in these cases to protect the docs & of course the insurance companies. You go to great lengths to twist to the left’s agenda. It’s what you do.

 

[Reformed1689]

I agree. It would be horrible to be the one (or among the ones) who decides who is on the list and who is not. With this topic there are hard choices.

It is also not just about priority on a list. These doctors have to weigh the risks.

With kidney transplants the doner is often a relative (so the list may not be important). Still there is the concern of up to a 30+ mortality rate with covid.

Doctors have to act responsibility to mitigate these factors. They will not perform the surgery on an alcoholic even if he has his own doner. Same, in this case, with an unvaccinated woman. Ethical decisions have to be made. Should they operate knowing there was a high mortality risk that could be addressed? Probably not. There are still resources being tied up. The doctors would incur responsibility for the woman's poor choices.

Nonsense. And for the last time STOP SAYING IT IS A POOR OR FOOLISH CHOICE TO NOT GET THE VACCINE. Such arrogance!

 

[Reformed1689]

You call it giving up freedom I see it as trying to help my fellow man.

Another feel good lie you tell yourself.

 

[Reformed1689]

Well we are lucky that you are not in charge aren't we.

no

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Transplants, unfortunately, do depend on prioritizing people based on need and survivability.

It is not about "second class" citizens. There are a lot of vaccines that, if refused, would take you off the list. It is about giving the organs, which are extremely limited, to those more likely to survive.

Imagine if your lived one were second on the list. You took all the vaccines but the one in front of you refused the flu shot (this is also required). They get the heart anyway and die a month later if the flu. Your loved one dies because another was not avaliable.

The vaccines required have been proven safe. The Pfizer vaccine was studied for a year and a half "on the ground". Covid is more dangerous to transplant patients than the flu (covid has a 20% to 30+% mortality rate in post transplant). The vacvine significantly reduces the chance of getting covid, and should they get covid it decreases the mortality rate.

Think of it this way - is it really logical to trust experts to put a new heart in your body but distrust them when they tell you to take a list of vaccines first?

I disagree …these vaccines have not been proven safe. This is a supposition mouthed by fanatical Vaccine advocates and holds no water to people who have experienced otherwise

 

[Reformed1689]

I disagree …these vaccines have not been proven safe. This is a supposition mouthed by fanatical Vaccine advocates and holds no water to people who have experienced otherwise

Agreed. You cannot say it is proven safe without knowing the long-term effects.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

So does that mean that those who are addicted to cancer sticks and booze will be taken off the transplant list?
What other groups should we take off the list?

They are playing God now

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes. Smokers (tobacco and marijuana) and people with drug and alcohol issues are not on doner lists.

People have to take a lot of vaccines (including pneumovax, hepatitis A and B, influenza, and tetanus-diphtheria), so if they refuse one they are off the list.

Other factors that will get you off the list are obesity, active infection, being too unhealthy, and some serious heart conditions. Age can also get you off the list.

People wait 5+ years on these lists. So it is important to give the organ to those with the best chance to survive.

Well then, I’m taking my name off the organ donor list

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The President definitely believes this.

I personally consider Irish Roman Catholic hypocrite abortion supporters as reprobates. I was a RC myself for 34 years of my life, was born in the same town and hospital this faker was born in and was taught by the same catechism and church so you can’t BS me with this character’s act and hand wringing. He is a reprobate destined for the lake of fire and that’s his decision.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You call it giving up freedom I see it as trying to help my fellow man.

That’s just stinking thinking BS

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Well I think if you check you will find that your local or state health authority can impose controls also.

They can and we can oppose them… and they can be fired as being overtly dictatorial. This is not a socialist system like Canada.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No it is just a very bad situation that has been made worse by this virus.

It is made worse by how the fear freaks deal with it. The present totalitarian government is taking advantage of course and flexing their muscles. Note, that’s a call to arms for all the disenfranchised.

 

[Salty]

Yes. Smokers (tobacco and marijuana) and people with drug and alcohol issues are not on doner lists.

People have to take a lot of vaccines (including pneumovax, hepatitis A and B, influenza, and tetanus-diphtheria), so if they refuse one they are off the list.

Other factors that will get you off the list are obesity, active infection, being too unhealthy, and some serious heart conditions. Age can also get you off the list.

People wait 5+ years on these lists. So it is important to give the organ to those with the best chance to survive.

Jon, I think we are talking about two different things.

I think the OP stated that those who refuse to take a shot are being taking off the list as a recipient.

And my response was that those who smoke or drink should not be an organ recipient either
(I read your response as that smokers should not be a doner.)

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Agreed. You cannot say it is proven safe without knowing the long-term effects.

So how in the world can they make such claims!?!

 

[Salty]

So how in the world can they make such claims!?!

Because they are the govt!

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

They don't take people off by race. But they do for obesity.

Their decision is not impartial. They are medical experts and have to manage these limited resources as best as possible.

Obesity, unvaccinated, tobacco use, age, overall health, drug use, infections....all of these come into play.

Individually it may not be fair to tell an obese man he is ineligible, or an unvaccinated woman she is ineligible. But it would not be fair to others who could use the organ either.

In the end they are picking those who have the best chance knowing those skipped may very well die. People wait 5+ years and many die waiting. We are talking about very limited resources.

In my mind the fair thing to do would be to consider unvaccination as a FACTOR, but not as the deciding factor. This is exactly what they're doing for obesity. Obesity isn't an automatic knock off the list, but is calculate as a factor.

Example:
An 80 year old vaccinated person needs a kidney transplant. Health is poor overall.
An 18 year old unvaccinated person needs that same kidney. Health is perfect.

I think we can both agree who should get the kidney.

To automatically ban the unvaccinated doesn't take into account the entire picture, and is not fair. Unvaccination SHOULD play a part just like obesity, cancer, etc, but it should NOT be the deciding factor. Unfortunately, based on the article, it IS the deciding factor, and is unfair and likely illegal if we still had a justice system.