Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
i'm not clicking on another WSJ link again
#1
its not that bad (i guess) but i see little value in fueling hysteria over organ harvesting -

What You Lose When You Sign That Donor Card
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...lenews_wsj

But BHCs—who don't receive anesthetics during an organ harvest operation—react to the scalpel like inadequately anesthetized live patients, exhibiting high blood pressure and sometimes soaring heart rates. Doctors say these are simply reflexes.

---

Uppity doctors think they know best!
Reply
#2
And yet no Organ Donor has ever successfully sued the hospital that caused their body pain. Wonder why ? :confused:

My father was an organ donor. And when he died after getting struck by a minivan while walking across the road one rainy night, they put various bits and pieces from him in 24 separate people.

Our bodies *do* have autonomic reactions to stress and trauma (ever heard of 'shock' ? ) Anyone who learned first aid knows that. It's not really a big thing.
Reply
#3
I disagree when you say it is "not that bad". This is a terrible article, full of half truths and inaccuracies.

Boo Hiss for the WSJ. They have taken a good underutilized program and injected FUD.

And yes one of my jobs as anesthesiologist is to keep homeostatic mechanisms working. This often involves blunting spinal cord reflexes (which often are exaggerated after the brain dies) with narcotics and potent anesthetic gases. I am not treating the person.....he/she are already gone, I am treating their organs so that at least some parts of the deceased can help others.

dad
Reply
#4
personally, i find it frustrating that there is so much distrust of medicine in this country. i guess it comes from a "nobody can tell me what to do!" world view.

you should specifically need to opt out of organ donation. it would save so many lives.
Reply
#5
My favorite bumpersticker.

Don't take your organs to Heaven.
Heaven knows we need them here.


dad
Reply
#6
duplicate, sorry
Reply
#7
dad@home wrote:
I disagree when you say it is "not that bad". This is a terrible article, full of half truths and inaccuracies.

Boo Hiss for the WSJ. They have taken a good underutilized program and injected FUD.

dad

The WSJ today is only another arm of the sensationalist Murdoch empire. It's been coasting on it's previous reputation since and while it's not yet the NY Post it's not the old Journal either.
Reply
#8
Though it says nothing about the accuracy or inaccuracy of the article, I don't think there's much question that the timing of this article is meant to promote this book (by the author of the article) that is being released tomorrow:

Reply
#9
I think the perils of signing up for organ donation has been covered before...
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)