Organ donation.
Discussion
Cold said:
amusingduck said:
Wouldn't those smokers/obese/drinkers find themselves rather near the bottom of the transplant list if they hadn't addressed the reasons they need one?
Seems like a decent balance to me. Opt out and you can't have a transplant. Cause your own organs to fail and you can have whatever is left after the people who couldn't help needing a transplant.
Perhaps if there's anything left after that, the opt-out'ers can have those
All this does is confirm that the desire to make "donation" compulsory by default is not a philanthropic notion but simply a narcissistic one. Seems like a decent balance to me. Opt out and you can't have a transplant. Cause your own organs to fail and you can have whatever is left after the people who couldn't help needing a transplant.
Perhaps if there's anything left after that, the opt-out'ers can have those
Terminator X said:
Why stop there though? Smokers? Brought it on themselves after all so let them just go, no help at all.
Smokers are revenue positive, approx 4bn in healthcare costs vs 12bn in duty.Terminator X said:
Obese people? Same yeah; all those years of over eating is a massive strain on the NHS, no help for them.
Obese people are often required to lose weight before they undergo surgery due to risk of complications from anesthetic or weight causing issues with post surgery healing(think hips, knees, ankle surgery) . That includes gastric band surgery.Terminator X said:
Drinkers? Liver problems and all that, no help for you either.
Same story as smokers.Perhaps pick better examples next time.
HTH.
Sam.M said:
Smokers are revenue positive, approx 4bn in healthcare costs vs 12bn in duty....
I believe that is the case recently (less smokers, much higher taxes adjusts the balance), but historically I wonder...Either I'd still go the narcissistic (
) route. Donors who haven't knowingly self inflicted first, donors who have next, then non-donors if there's anything less and they then sign up Mort7 said:
Oakey said:
Mort7 said:
One for the surgeons involved in this.
My understanding, as mentioned by others previously, is that if you are dead, i.e. heart stopped, not breathing, brain not functioning, then your organs cannot be used for donation. In order to donate you would either be 'brain dead' (no brain activity), or 'brain stem dead' (body unable to sustain breathing or heart function) and therefore connected to a ventilator - hence the requirement to be in hospital for donation to take place. This raises some questions:-
1) If you are breathing independently, but there is no normal brain activity, what criteria are applied when considering organ donation? There are documented cases where such patients have eventually made a recovery, sometimes months or years later, so how is the decision made, and who makes it?
2) if an individual is on a ventilator, and would die if disconnected from it, is there any chance that such an individual would, given recovery sufficient time, be able to breath unassisted again?
3) I understand that organ removal takes place when the individual is (bodily at least) alive. Are painkillers / anaesthetics used, or would they decrease the viability of the organ to be donated?
Uncomfortable questions, but necessary to make a properly informed decision.
Have some light reading;My understanding, as mentioned by others previously, is that if you are dead, i.e. heart stopped, not breathing, brain not functioning, then your organs cannot be used for donation. In order to donate you would either be 'brain dead' (no brain activity), or 'brain stem dead' (body unable to sustain breathing or heart function) and therefore connected to a ventilator - hence the requirement to be in hospital for donation to take place. This raises some questions:-
1) If you are breathing independently, but there is no normal brain activity, what criteria are applied when considering organ donation? There are documented cases where such patients have eventually made a recovery, sometimes months or years later, so how is the decision made, and who makes it?
2) if an individual is on a ventilator, and would die if disconnected from it, is there any chance that such an individual would, given recovery sufficient time, be able to breath unassisted again?
3) I understand that organ removal takes place when the individual is (bodily at least) alive. Are painkillers / anaesthetics used, or would they decrease the viability of the organ to be donated?
Uncomfortable questions, but necessary to make a properly informed decision.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC33729...
https://jme.bmj.com/content/28/2/89
https://jme.bmj.com/content/31/7/406
An interesting read, thanks, which confirms that my reservations on the subject of brain death are valid, and in particular 'The public should also be aware that there remains uncertainty regarding the generation of consciousness in the brain, and that it is not always clear that there is no capacity for consciousness remaining in individuals declared “brain dead”'.
I hadn't realised that the concept of brain death, as opposed to circulatory death, was introduced to facilitate the availability of organs for transplantation.
It seems that my understanding of the living donation process was correct. Chilling stuff, worthy of further thought.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&a...
Murph7355 said:
Sam.M said:
Smokers are revenue positive, approx 4bn in healthcare costs vs 12bn in duty....
I believe that is the case recently (less smokers, much higher taxes adjusts the balance), but historically I wonder...Either I'd still go the narcissistic (
) route. Donors who haven't knowingly self inflicted first, donors who have next, then non-donors if there's anything less and they then sign up Current(2017/18) numbers I've found show costs of £2.5n vs duty receipts of £8bn, so still revenue positive.
As with obesity, I'm sure there are some treatments/surgeries that require someone to cease smoking/drinking before being eligible.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/alcohol-related-live...
NHS said:
A liver transplant may be required in severe cases where the liver has stopped functioning and does not improve when you stop drinking alcohol. You'll only be considered for a liver transplant if you have developed complications of cirrhosis despite having stopped drinking. All liver transplant units require a person to not drink alcohol while awaiting the transplant, and for the rest of their life.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 27th February 08:56
Sam.M said:
NHS said:
A liver transplant may be required in severe cases where the liver has stopped functioning and does not improve when you stop drinking alcohol. You'll only be considered for a liver transplant if you have developed complications of cirrhosis despite having stopped drinking. All liver transplant units require a person to not drink alcohol while awaiting the transplant, and for the rest of their life.
amusingduck said:
Sam.M said:
NHS said:
A liver transplant may be required in severe cases where the liver has stopped functioning and does not improve when you stop drinking alcohol. You'll only be considered for a liver transplant if you have developed complications of cirrhosis despite having stopped drinking. All liver transplant units require a person to not drink alcohol while awaiting the transplant, and for the rest of their life.
Agammemnon said:
Randy Winkman said:
Exactly. Agemmemnon can still either say "yes" or say "no". Since Agemmemnon would like to donate, my suggestion is that he makes use of this choice and stay opted-in. It's even easier than opting out. A win-win.
I'm totally happy to agree to donate- how do I express to the government my displeasure at their presumption?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff