Donor network has right to refuse organs from homosexuals

[muryan]

this according to a christian doctor.

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/12/72005g.asp

By Mary Rettig
December 7, 2005

(AgapePress) - Friends and family of a Tucson man are crying discrimination after the homosexual man's organs were rejected by the Donor Network of Arizona. However, a Kansas surgeon who works in organ transplantation says the decision was a good one.

Albert Soto, 51, intended to donate his eyes and other tissues after death, but a spokesman from the Network says the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta has established guidelines allowing centers to reject donations from men who have had sex with men in the last five years

[joeybee12]

1. Welcome to DU...

..and this sucks. Quite frankly, this might have been necessary prior to having tests that could detect HIV, but now it's just discrimination.

[Canuckistanian]

2. I thought gayness was a 'lifestyle choice'

Now it's a disease? I missed the memo on that one.

[mike_c]

16. that was my first thought too-- funny how the goal post keeps moving....

eom

[xchrom]

3. fuckers.

[Behind the Aegis]

4. Hmmm

Maybe they are afraid they will see the world through the eyes of a gay man? :shrug:

Considering the advancement in HIV testing, the 5 year rule seems to be nothing but discriminatory...unless there is something CDC aren't telling us.

[texastoast]

5. That is stupid

But if it makes anyone feel any better, I can no longer donate blood because my spouse HAD hepatitis C. I continue to be tested and am always negative and have been for 12 years.

Some "guidelines" do not work.

[LostinVA]

20. I can't give blood because of being exposed to Mad Cow

About a decade ago.That's understandable. But this? Indefensible. How about all of those straight guys screwing around... or "straight" guys.... Geez.

[MidwestTransplant]

6. Makes perfect sense. If you get a gay person's eyes, then

people of the same sex will be attractive to you, thereby making you gay.

Don't you guys see that :crazy:

[Jersey Ginny]

32. You might be able to decorate your home better

I could use the exceptional eyes of some gay men!

[JokingClown]

7. The article is convincing assuming its not misleading, does anyone

Have a link to a less biased news source?

[lindisfarne]

8. If they really wanted to serve those who desperately need organs, they'd

allow recipients to specify whether they were willing to receive organs from some specific group. Many recipients have very little time left by the time they get organs, and would be willing to take the risk of possible disease, if it meant the difference between living and dying, if no organ was available (assuming there is greater risk with organs from male homosexuals - I haven't seen statistics one way or the other. But if this is the case, there is also increased risk for anyone, male or female, hetero-, bi, or homosexual, who has numerous partners, especially people who have unprotected sex, and that risk would be far greater than is the case of a 2 male homosexuals in a long-term monogamous relationship.)

[Megahurtz]

9. Pretty Stupid considering that

straight people get all kinds of diseases themselves.

[JVS]

10. Isn't this because of the higher incidence of HIV/AIDS among gay men?

The article you posted says:" "Number one, HIV in early stages cannot be detected on testing; it takes a little bit there," Pauls explains. "But even if he's HIV negative, there's other infectious diseases that are fairly common within the homosexual population -- particularly hepatitis, which can be a very deadly complication in somebody who receives a transplant, and that sometimes also can be missed by screening." "

[LostinVA]

21. The number one rising AIDS demographic is black women

Who are infected by their (often closeted) partners. Most gay men are not HIV+.

[greiner3]

11. My ex remarried a service guy;

And they moved to Germany, taking my 3 children with them. They lived there for 4 years and moved back. I've since learned that they can never be blood donors because they were exposed to Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease. Apparently there is no test for the virus, yet. I can't believe that they don't have accurate tests yet for HIV and other blood borne diseases. Heck, if anything I would imagine there would be high risk patients who are looking for transplants who would fit the bill. I had an operation that had a 3% risk for fatality and/or permenant paralysis. You pay your quarter, you takes the chance.

[NNguyenMD]

26. they do have accurate testing for HIV, but the MOST accurate test takes

several days to process, that test is a PCR test that searches for presence of HIV DNA. But the most rapid method which they perform first is a serology test and protein assay for presence of the HIV virus. The serology test combined with the protein assay is very accurate in determining a person's HIV status. The problem is that new infections take time for patients to seroconvert to positive status, and can slip under the radar that is why repeat testing after 6 months is important.

HIV transmission from a woman to a man is 1/3000, from a man to a woman is 1/1000, and from a anal sex is 1/100. Get this, HIV transmission by IV drug use is 1/300. IV drug use and heterosexual transmission have the fastest growing rate of infection in this country currently. This data is from alecture from Dr. Conrad Fischer an internist who runs the residency program at Maimoides Medical Center and SUNY Downstate in Brooklyn New York.

The quickest, the easiest way to determine if someone has AIDS without an HIV test in my experience is to run a CD4 count on them while I wait for the HIV results to come back, its also a good indicator of how long someone has had the virus in them. You can't do a CD4 count in New York state at least without consent for HIV testing in case you were wondering if someone can "sneak in" an HIV test without your knowledge.

[noonwitch]

12. It's because of AIDS/HIV

My mom can't donate blood or tissue because she was jaundiced once, when she had gallstones and was pregnant (with me). She couldn't have the surgery until after I was born, so she suffered through and got slightly jaundiced.

Interestingly, I can still donate blood and tissues.

[Ian David]

14. It sounds like this MIGHT be medically necessary. However...

We have to be very careful that this doesn't slide into a case where someone can't receive an organ transplant because of their "sexual history."

The only other problem I see is if you wanted to donate an organ to a relative.

What if you were "at risk" and had a twin brother who needed a kidney, and you were the only one who could give it?

I hope there are exceptions allowing for such situations where both the donor and the recipient know one another and agree to the risks.

And for those religious fundamentalists who oppose gay people donating organs for reasons less to do with medical necessity but instead due to bigotry-- they'd better have their own donor cards filled-out.

Aside from donating to a family member or someone else you know personally, I see no infringements of one's rights by not being permitted to donate an organ for transplantation-- if it is medically necessary to place such restrictions.

One could also always donate to medical research, too.

Or to "The Body Farm."
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/10/31/body.farm/

[Ian David]

13. AIDS and organ transplants

From the TransWeb site (a clearing house about organ transplant info):


Question:

Has anyone has gotten AIDS from a transplant? I know there is a test to find out if a person has AIDS, but I was watching TV the other night and they said a person that is first infected would not show up on the test for 60 days.

Answer:

It has happened. There is a very well publicized and documented case of one donor infecting multiple recipients with the HIV virus. That said, all known precautions are taken to insure that this transmission does NOT take place!

The most effective FDA licensed test for the HIV virus (and all markers and surrogates) may only detect the virus if a patient has had it for some window period (you stated 60 days, though I believe it to be closer to six months).

There are more accurate tests such as the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test for HIV virus. These tests actually look for and detect the DNA of the virus and are highly accurate and specific. They are supposed to be able to detect the virus in an individual infected for only one week. Unfortunately, this test is not licensed by the FDA and can take 5-7 days to get results. Even so, many tissue banks including the New England Organ Bank (here), use the test to try to eliminate ANY potential for infected tissues to be used.

The amount of time required to get results using the PCR test makes it impractical for organ donation, however, as brain-dead patients can not be kept stable while waiting for those results. (Nor can many deathly ill recipients!)

In leiu of this test, and in trying to reduce the chance of transmission of the virus, all organ and tissue banks include donor social history screening as part of the donation process. Staff will ask the next of kin, or whomever is most knowledgable of a patient's social habits questions. These questions are designed to determine if the potential donor falls into any of the "high-risk" groups for AIDS as determined by the CDC.

Questions include sexual behavior (especially homosexual or promiscuous behavior), intravenous drug abuse, blood transfusion history, etc...

The questioning of the next of kin obviously is not the PERFECT history, since many do not know the more sordid details of their siblings/children/nephew's life, but it is the best information we can get...and we do decline donations of patients who test negative for HIV but have questionable social history. Maybe we have screened someone who was in the window period? We can't know, but it is better to be cautious.

In the case I referred to earlier: The patient had tested negative for HIV and associated markers, the next of kin knew of no social history that would predispose the patient to the HIV virus, and there were no visual clues (such as track marks for IVDA) to indicate a problem. This patient was in the window period.

I believe that the benefit of transplantation far outweighs the small risk that cases such as this one will be missed. But it is a reality. That is why there is a risk for blood transfusion, and why autologous transfusions have become so popular. Even though the blood is tested, there IS A RISK! But it is very small, about 1 in 400,000 if I remember correctly (I would yield to the American Red Cross for the exact risk level).

I hope that answers your question. E-mail me directly if you want more information. I am available at the e-mail address below.

Andrew H. Wheelock
New England Organ Bank
One Gateway Center
Newton, MA 02158

E-mail: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

More:
http://www.transweb.org/qa/qa_txp/faq_aids.html

[Kixel]

15. They do a pretty thorough check

On everything. A friend of mine works for a organ donation bank. They take lesbian organs. It's not intended to be discriminatory, being a gay man is a high risk lifestyle in the eyes of the organization.

[LostinVA]

22. Being a gay man in not a lifestyle, and it's not a high risk "lifestyle"q

Unsafe sex is a high risk ;lifestyle. Using dirty needles is. Being a stuntman is. Getting drunk and driving is.

[Kixel]

37. It's a generalization, to be sure

I thought it was odd that they differentiate between gay men and women. I just figured I should give the limited first hand knowledge I have on this issue, but the view point is the organizations and not mine.

[MasonJar]

17. What about the poor slob waiting to get well? Is he consulted?

[KamaAina]

18. Kansas *again*?! What's the matter with...

ah, never mind.

However, a Kansas surgeon who works in organ transplantation says the decision was a good one.

So let me see if I've got this straight, so to speak: they'd rather see people die than have a "gay" organ transplanted? Are they worried the gayness might spread to other organs or something? :sarcasm:

[justjones]

19. As a donor, can I refuse to give my organs to someone who would....

refuse them based on whether I may be gay or not?

It only seems fair to me.

According to the article, the "organ donation and transplant business is heavily reliant on trust." Funny, I thought it was supposed to be science.

[ismnotwasm]

23. How very interesting

As a transplant nurse (primarily liver, kidney, and pancreas right now) I understand the need for caution.

However, the ethics involving transplantation can be very dicey. How many (I'll use livers) livers go to people who have made "lifestyle choices" that caused Hepatitis C, Cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure? It is expected that such people have changed their behavior, and are psychosocially and financially able to handle the stresses of lifetime immunosuppression, possiblity of rejection as well as the difficulty of the waiting time, surgery and recovery. Once in a while, someone who is very ill from HVC from IV drug use, will receive a liver that is less that "perfect". CMV is a virus that is very common, in all people for example. But not everybody has it. While it can cause complications, it is not HIV. In fact, it's very difficult to find a "perfect" organ.

BTW, Currently, in America, only a medical center in California will transplant livers into HIV positive recipients.

Transplantation at it's best is a traumatic and dangerous surgery. I have seen people develop cancer in their donated organs. I don't know the statistics of developing cancer vs HIV, (maybe I'll do a little research) I have never heard of someone developing HIV, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. There are still many married, outwardly straight men who are bisexual. In the emergencies of transplantations donor lifestyle isn't always so strictly examined.

Sometimes in transplantation, walking through the grey area's of ethics is common. It's giving people a chance (at sight, life, life off dialysis etc.)Vs risks.

Given the long waiting lists, I think perhaps a better solution could be found rather than rejecting homosexual donors out of hand. (I'm not sure what the solution would be, perhaps a history of stable, long-term monogamy with both partners longstanding HIV-, why do we suppose homosexual partners are more likely to "cheat" on each other?) I understand many potential donors are rejected for a variety of reasons- and rightly so, but this particular reason paints too broad of a brush.

[Horse with no Name]

24. I have seen them reject organs

for brief elevated kidney function tests post-mortem that may or may not have been lab error. IMHO, it is a waste of a good kidney.
It's really up to the surgeon as to what HIS criteria is for what he feels will be a successful transplant.
The team of Docs that I have worked very closely with harvested a donor and transplanted last year and several patients contracted rabies.
It didn't matter that the majority of these patients who received these organs already had a foot in the grave, they all sued or settled.
So people who would have died if they didn't get an organ died when they got one that was infected with rabies. It was worth millions of dollars to their families.
Btw, there isn't a test available to detect rabies in organs that won't destroy the organs--as far as I am concerned, it is a chance you just have to take for a chance to live.
Homosexuals can't donate blood either--I am not saying it is right, it is just the way it is.
There is a window--albeit brief--that HIV is undetectable by any method so by omitting a high risk group, it narrows the possibilities of HIV being transmitted.
(Also...just some info...it is not just organs that are harvested. Other tissues are taken and used in burn patients, for grafts in heart surgery, etc...so those are also patients that are being put at risk if they receive diseased tissues.)

[NNguyenMD]

25. might as well reject them from people with history of past IV drugs use,

black people who have been the hardest hit population by HIV, immigrants who have traveled to this country in the last twenty years with increased exposure to TB, Hepatitis B, former prison inmates who have been exposed to everything, and last but not least, heterosexual men and women who have had history unprotected sex with more than one sexual partner in THEIR LIFETIME!

If they're going to dump on the reliability of serology testing for HIV or Hepatitis, and base organ rejection SOLELY on history alone, then they might as well ban organ donation altogether.

"Christian Medical Association" might as well call them the Taliban, why even have science if you're going to entertain groups like these.

[Angry Girl]

27. I'd like a redhead tranny Buddhist kidney (must like sports and music)

URGENT! Timing is critical to save freezing earthquake victims!

[UncleSepp]

30. LOL I am waiting for my type B- tranny penis transplant

Hey, if she's not gonna use it, I can give it a good home.

[superconnected]

28. This is not plausable, this is propaganda

Aids is NOT indigenous to gays.

Anyone who has had sex with someone who has it, man or woman, straight or gay, can be a carrier. Drug user and some races are at higher risks for aids also. This article is discriminating by citing gays.

I wouldn't be surprised if they try to turn it around and make it so gays cant GET organs either.

Don't accept this article as credible. It is hate propaganda.

Accepting this is acceptance of the spread of facism.

[Jersey Ginny]

33. It is one step from denying gay people organs, very scary stuff n/t

[superconnected]

29. Author Alert - check out Mary Rettigs articles

Google the authors name - "Mary Rettig" and the word contributer, you get 444 links mostly articles she wrote - many against homosexuals, abortion, and porn coverage in the media. 656 links if you do her name and the word homosexual. She's trying to fly under radar with hate propaganda she's dressing up as facts.

Typical Mary Rettig -
http://www.churchquest.com/news/story/2413

[muryan]

31. sounds about right

she came off as a moron to me. I wasnt sure of the authenticity of the article, i didnt do any fact checking. just thought it was interesting

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

34. refuse organs from homosexuals

Maby homosexual's need to start there own Donor Network and refuse heteralsexual organs!

[Ezlivin]

35. The last time I accepted an organ from a homosexual I'd had too much to

drink.

:)

[Kixel]

38. HAHAHA!

[Freddie Stubbs]

36. It is the same thing with donating blood

But it does not apply to females.