Man denied lung transplant because he smoked marijuana
25 Apr 2017, 3:59 pm
I don't think that the side effects of his medicine are any worse than the side effects of yours, particularly as his can be administered in harmless ways.
If find it particularly hypocritical of big pharma to patent the plant, while saying it is harmful.
And, somehow, dangerous analogues come out of nowhere, and do real damage to street people. That can't happen without help from a formal infrastructure.
25 Apr 2017, 4:08 pm
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Before a person gets to even be considered for an organ transplant, they have to go through a lot of tests. I'm sure they didn't just make a quickie decision on this kid without any evidence.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
25 Apr 2017, 4:14 pm
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Harmful to who? Anyone who uses illegal drugs, smokes or drinks alcohol more than just "socially" has no right to receive another person's organs over someone who is taking care of themselves and will then take care of the organ they receive. Those people are making conscious decisions to abuse their bodies.
It's the same with bariatric surgery - a person has to actually lose weight and prove that they will be able to sustain a certain weight before they can receive that surgery.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
Last edited by nurseangela on 25 Apr 2017, 6:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,796
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
25 Apr 2017, 4:53 pm
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Because they're human beings.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
25 Apr 2017, 5:46 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Because they're human beings.
What does this even mean? I think it means you want to be able to have both worlds - smoking your crap and the right to someone else's organs that they had to die for in order to give to someone else - voluntarily I might add. People have to volunteer to give someone else their organs. Maybe there should be a clause on who they would prefer their organs to be donated to. That sounds like a great idea.
This subject sure has given me a reality check on whether I still want to put organ donation on my drivers license.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,470
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
25 Apr 2017, 6:05 pm
nurseangela wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Harmful to who? Anyone who uses illegal drugs, smokes or drinks alcohol more than just "socially" has no right to receive another person's organs over someone who is taking care of themselves and will then take care of the organ they receive. Those people are making conscious decisions to abuse their bodies.
It's the same with bariatric surgery - a person has to actually lose weight and prove that they will be able to sustain a certain weight before they can receive that surgery.
Where are you getting that he did it more than socially? If I read it right it said trace amounts of THC...
_________________
We won't go back.
25 Apr 2017, 6:14 pm
Sweetleaf wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Harmful to who? Anyone who uses illegal drugs, smokes or drinks alcohol more than just "socially" has no right to receive another person's organs over someone who is taking care of themselves and will then take care of the organ they receive. Those people are making conscious decisions to abuse their bodies.
It's the same with bariatric surgery - a person has to actually lose weight and prove that they will be able to sustain a certain weight before they can receive that surgery.
Where are you getting that he did it more than socially? If I read it right it said trace amounts of THC...
Dude, the guy got his lung transplant and it still didn't help. Specifically in the article it states that hospitals have different protocols for who can be an organ recipient. They got a hospital that had a different protocol and got the organs. What are you all griping about?!
Moral to the story - doing any illegal drugs, drinking or smoking may get in the way of receiving a life-saving organ - deal with it.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,470
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
25 Apr 2017, 6:24 pm
nurseangela wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Harmful to who? Anyone who uses illegal drugs, smokes or drinks alcohol more than just "socially" has no right to receive another person's organs over someone who is taking care of themselves and will then take care of the organ they receive. Those people are making conscious decisions to abuse their bodies.
It's the same with bariatric surgery - a person has to actually lose weight and prove that they will be able to sustain a certain weight before they can receive that surgery.
Where are you getting that he did it more than socially? If I read it right it said trace amounts of THC...
Dude, the guy got his lung transplant and it still didn't help. Specifically in the article it states that hospitals have different protocols for who can be an organ recipient. They got a hospital that had a different protocol and got the organs. What are you all griping about?!
Moral to the story - doing any illegal drugs, drinking or smoking may get in the way of receiving a life-saving organ - deal with it.
I thought he died before he could get to the hospital that would do it.
Also as with most things I think it should be a case by case individual basis, not if so much of a trace of any illicit substance is found with no exceptions regardless of individual circumstance and such, just my opinion.
_________________
We won't go back.
25 Apr 2017, 6:33 pm
Sweetleaf wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
androbot01 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Here's a story about one of my patients -...
Yes, I know that addicts exist and yes I agree that putting an organ into a self abuser is a bad idea. You are missing my point ... there is no evidence that the kid was an addict. The only evidence was a trace of THC in his blood stream. I don't think this is enough evidence. Surely if he's abusing the drug the people caring for him would notice. There's too much info missing to make a judgment in this case.
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! ...
These generalizations are harmful.
Harmful to who? Anyone who uses illegal drugs, smokes or drinks alcohol more than just "socially" has no right to receive another person's organs over someone who is taking care of themselves and will then take care of the organ they receive. Those people are making conscious decisions to abuse their bodies.
It's the same with bariatric surgery - a person has to actually lose weight and prove that they will be able to sustain a certain weight before they can receive that surgery.
Where are you getting that he did it more than socially? If I read it right it said trace amounts of THC...
Dude, the guy got his lung transplant and it still didn't help. Specifically in the article it states that hospitals have different protocols for who can be an organ recipient. They got a hospital that had a different protocol and got the organs. What are you all griping about?!
Moral to the story - doing any illegal drugs, drinking or smoking may get in the way of receiving a life-saving organ - deal with it.
I thought he died before he could get to the hospital that would do it.
Also as with most things I think it should be a case by case individual basis, not if so much of a trace of any illicit substance is found with no exceptions regardless of individual circumstance and such, just my opinion.
They did look at his case on an individual basis and he didn't pass the hospital's protocol. Don't forget the insurance companies are involved in the decision as well because they are paying for the surgery. Maybe he was under Obamacare.
In my opinion, stop using the illegal drugs to get high or any drug to get high. It still surprises me that some think it would be ok for someone to get a lung transplant if they had been smoking (even cigarettes) - period.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
25 Apr 2017, 6:57 pm
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
That would make more sense if the kid's lung was collapsed because of drug abuse. This wasn't the case, it collapsed because of pneumonia. Are you seriously saying that if at any point you did drugs in your life, that you don't have the right to get an organ transplant? Even if the drugs didn't cause said organ failure? Seems like you have a disturbing outlook on people who use drugs.
What do I expect, the USA practically brainwashes the general populous to think that people who use drugs are inherently terrible human beings.
_________________
ㅤ
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,796
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
25 Apr 2017, 7:21 pm
nurseangela wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Because they're human beings.
What does this even mean? I think it means you want to be able to have both worlds - smoking your crap and the right to someone else's organs that they had to die for in order to give to someone else - voluntarily I might add. People have to volunteer to give someone else their organs. Maybe there should be a clause on who they would prefer their organs to be donated to. That sounds like a great idea.
This subject sure has given me a reality check on whether I still want to put organ donation on my drivers license.
It means all human beings are of equal worth, and so should all be given the same life giving measures.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
25 Apr 2017, 7:35 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Because they're human beings.
What does this even mean? I think it means you want to be able to have both worlds - smoking your crap and the right to someone else's organs that they had to die for in order to give to someone else - voluntarily I might add. People have to volunteer to give someone else their organs. Maybe there should be a clause on who they would prefer their organs to be donated to. That sounds like a great idea.
This subject sure has given me a reality check on whether I still want to put organ donation on my drivers license.
It means all human beings are of equal worth, and so should all be given the same life giving measures.
Or they should stop doing the things that stop them from receiving the life-saving measures. How about that? Hate to break it to you, but all people are not equal especially when it comes to expensive healthcare - reality check coming from a realist.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
25 Apr 2017, 7:38 pm
yungsavage wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
I don't get any of you who think that this decision was wrong. You think you can just go through life and trash your own organs then demand to get someone else's and then be able to trash that organ too?! I'm an organ donor (against my Ma's wishes), but I may just change that after listening to all of this crap because I don't want any of my organs that I'm trying to take care of just so that I can live longer going to someone who is going to misuse them for their own satisfaction. An organ transplant is a privilege - not a right. Someone has to die just so someone else can live. Maybe you should all think about that for awhile.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
Someday they might be able to grow organs for transplants then people can go hog wild with their damn drugs.
That would make more sense if the kid's lung was collapsed because of drug abuse. This wasn't the case, it collapsed because of pneumonia. Are you seriously saying that if at any point you did drugs in your life, that you don't have the right to get an organ transplant? Even if the drugs didn't cause said organ failure? Seems like you have a disturbing outlook on people who use drugs.
What do I expect, the USA practically brainwashes the general populous to think that people who use drugs are inherently terrible human beings.
There's a protocol that a person has to be drug free, or smoke free, or alcohol free for a certain amount of time before receiving an organ. Do you honestly think a smoker is going to get a lung transplant? Seriously, do you?
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
25 Apr 2017, 7:48 pm
Here is an example of what a person must go through in order to be a lung transplant recipient:
https://www.ucsfhealth.org/conditions/l ... ptoms.html
Another site on what one needs to do to qualify for lung transplantation:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/a ... ood-health
From the article:
All transplant candidates must be non-smokers and lead a tobacco-free/nicotine-free lifestyle for at least 6 months before they are even eligible for a pre-transplant evaluation.
As you may realize, it is essential to maintain a non-smoking lifestyle after your transplant surgery, since any smoke--including second-hand smoke (from other people's cigarettes)--is extremely hazardous to a transplanted lung. The immunosuppressive medications transplant recipients take after surgery also make smoking very dangerous to their health.
_________________
Me grumpy?
I'm happiness challenged.
Your neurodiverse (Aspie) score: 83 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 153 of 200 You are very likely neurotypical
Darn, I flunked.
mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 30
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada
25 Apr 2017, 7:49 pm
nurseangela wrote:
If he did smoke marijuana, that would be a reason not to receive a lung transplant (or a heart transplant). ANY smoking of any kind would be a reason just like you cannot drink alcohol or be a drug abuser if you expect to get a liver. I do not know why this would even be questioned.
That's kinda callous. Would you deny someone a heart transplant because they ate an unhealthy diet?
_________________
Every day is exactly the same...
