Should Prospective Transplant Candidates Have Information About The Deceased Oragn 'Donor' From Whom The Cadaver Organ Is Recovered From Provided To Them?


Apparently not as far as UNOS is concrned! In an artcile published in June 26, 2008 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine  are reported to have come  to the following conclusions:

The Penn researchers argue that while patients DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW EVERY DETAIL ABOUT THE SPECIFIC DONOR THEIR ORGAN WILL COME FROM, THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM DOES NOT ADEQUATELY PROTECT PATIENTS' RIGHTS TO MAKE FULLY INFORMED DECISIONS REGARDING THE RISKS THEY ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT.

Thus, Halpern and colleagues propose that the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the national clearinghouse for organ allocation, create a policy requiring transplant programs to disclose "all foreseeable risks" of the surgery to potential recipients at the time they are placed on the waiting list for an organ. They argue that all patients should be given the option of accepting or declining organs that would come from suitable but suboptimal donors - including donors with risks for infectious diseases, older donors, or donors after cardiac death whose organs might be less hardy because they were deprived of blood flow for short periods of time before transplant. Currently, UNOS requires only that kidney recipients be allowed to accept of decline organs from so-called "expanded criteria donors" - those who are older or have diseases such as hypertension - and even this narrow requirement is unevenly adhered to across the nation.

Go to www.innovativestrategies.us to read more about this issue. As a result of UNOS doing everything it can to squeeze more money from tax payers and transplant patients, the executives and board do not want transplant candidates to be told if these heretofore discarded organs my be diseased as a result of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, cancer, old age, or diminished clinical function. For UNOS and the OPO it's all about getting more money through the sale of organs they previously threw away. Now we have people dying as a result of post-transplant diseases from the transplanted organs.

I'm not sure what Newsmax.com is all about, however, it makes me a bit nervous in that it has postings by the conservative pit viper, Ann Coulter. Nevertheless, there is an interesting piece by two physicians who are referred to as, The Medicine Men. They are Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., and Robert J. Cihak, M.D. Glueck is listed as a senior fellow and board member of the Discovery Institute and past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. Glueck is listed as a visiting fellow in Economics and Citizenship at the International Trade Education Foundation of the Washington International Trade Council.

The premise of their musings is that too many organs used for transplantation are being harvested (many object to this term favoring, recovered) from donors too soon and before they are actually dead. This issue has long been the worst nightmare of people who say they haven't signed donor cards because of this fear. Of course, there are several reported cases in the US transplant system of harvesting surgeons facilitating quicker deaths so the organs can be taken sooner. The most example was that of Reuben Navarro in Ventura, California. The recovery surgeon, Roozrohk, administered huge doses of morphine and Atavan to speed Navarro's death. The surgeon is facing murder charges. The hospital was fined. The case continues today.

The piece quotes, Dr. David M. Greer, at the Massachusetts General Hospital. He and colleagues concluded in their article, Variability of brain death determination guidelines in leading US neurologic institutions,"the guidelines for determining brain death vary widely among leading neurologic hospital in the United States."

"Hospitals vary widely in determining brain death" headlined a January 25 Reuters article. Dr. James L. Berna from Dartmouth Medical School described a "disturbing pattern of non-conformity."

Lawrence Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., editor-in-chief of the journal of American Physicians and Surgeons writes, "In plain, straight talk, the survey indicates a high likelyhood that some patients and being 'harvested' in some hospitals before they are dead! In hospitals with agressive transplant programs (hospitals make a huge amount of money on transplant cases), making sure a patient is dead before going to the 'harvesting suite' may be viewed as a minor technicality" (http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/0010 "Top hospitals typically disregard brain-death guidelines")

This article goes on to quote neurologist Liz Kamenar as saying, "I made detailed outlines for Brain Death criteria available for the ICU but they weren't followed even by my own colleagues. The criteria are quite complex and sometimes difficult to do. I was pressured into not 'not going by the book' by the Organ Procurement Team. They were more concerned about procuring good organs rather than meeting the criteria for Brain Death."

I have been taken to task by many transplant surgeons when I have postulated these fears in the past. My fears grew from what I have seen in practice and learned from researching the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and its affiliates the Oragn Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) and the 58 Organ Procurement Organizations (OPO) across the country. I have reviewed and researched the tax returns for these supposed non-profits with a government granted monopoly to sell 'DONATED?' organs. The money involved in harvesting and delivering organs for transplantation is staggering. In tax year 2006 the total revenue from these activities was mor than $2 billion. For the OPO and their 'harvesting' surgeons there is just too much of a monetary incentive to get an organ or organs at all costs. Protocols, guidelines, and patients' lives be damned.

I will happily accept the the effluent put out about my constant criticism of the UNOS/OPTN/OPO lust for money rather than care and consideration especially those about to die and those about to live.

Want to know about the true character of the US transplant system and the people running it? FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!

Struggles Don't End With Transplant
From: The Orlando Sentinel - 02/16/2008

Orlando, FL. - For more than six years, Jessica Harder was a model kidney transplant patient. She surfered, competed in swim competitions, worked as a lifeguard and managed to graduate from high school before turning 16. But her donated kidney, which she recieved when she was 12, wasn't as tough as she was.

It gave out on her 16 months ago, for reasons Harder thinks are linked to a short-sighted government policy. Simply put, while Medicare - which covers most people with end stage reanl failure - pays for a kidney transplant, it limits the amount of time it pays for the drugs needed to keep the transplanted kidney functioning. For most adult kidney recipients younger than 65, Medicare pays for anti-rejection  and drugs for three years. Medicare does not have a three year limit for minors, but those who have had coverage for at least three years lose it once they turn 18. The average annual cost for anti-rejection drugs for a kidney transplant patient: about $15,000.00.

With a kidney transplant - including the surgery, which typically costs about $100,000.00 - "the break-even point for Medicare is three years. Once a (kidney) transplant lasts three years, it's a cost saver," said Troy Zimmerman, vice president for goverment relations with the National Kidney Foundation. The average kidney transplant lasts seven to eight years, zimmerman said, and many last longer. Zimmerman cited a Congressional Budget Office estimate that 3,000 transplanted kidneys fail each year - and about 12 percent of these failures are due to the high cost of anti-rejection drugs.

For Rich Salick, a one time professional surfer and now director of community relations for the National Kidney Foundation of Florida, his first two transplanted kidneys lasted 13 years each. He's now eight years into his third donated kidney.Transplants are not only less costly in the long run than dialysis, Salick said, they also offer a much higher quality of life. "I deal with 20 to 25 people a year who we have to talk off the Ledge" of suicide, he said. They can't take dialysis anymore.

He has known Harder since she was a little girl. "She's an example for so many people. I talk about her when I give seminars," said Salick, 58. He noted that Harder, s half inch shy of 5 feet, has had multiple medical problems throughout her life - involving her heart, liver and vascular system - and suffered a massive stroke last year. "I.ve never heard her complain, even when she was recovering from the stroke, " Salick said.

She did complain recently after receiving a letter from the Florida Hospital Transplant Center informing her that she was being removed from its kidney recipient waiting list. The letter stated that she did not have sufficient funds to cover the deductible and co-payments that come with a transplant.

"Transplant programs are forced to make very difficult decisions during the patient selection process," Florida Hospital officials said in a written statement to the Orlando Sentinel. Successful transplants require an ability to cover, "the costly care for the transplanted organ long term," which includes "expensive anti-rejection medications daily for the life of the transplant." Such financial criteria are typical for transplant centers, Zimmerman said.

As a transplant patient, Jessica Harder was healthy despite her various chronic conditions. Dialysis is particularly tough on her heart but she's working to get back on the hospital's list to receive another kidney. An avid video gamer, she's organizing an Xbox tournament to raise the funds she needs.

GET BUSY LIVING OR GET BUSY DYING!!!

There are a few clarifications needed in this piece. A kidney transplant can cost from $60,000.00 to $270,000.00 depending one the transplant center, insurance coverage (no insurance, you'll pay a premium price) and whether specialized perparations will be needed before the surgery. Dialysis typically costs $77,000.00 annually if the patient expeiences no complications. However, costs can quickly rise when complications set in over time. In my case, I never had a well functioning access for dialysis. Three fistulas were implanted. Two failed and one functioned marginally. Every six weeks I had to undergo radiological intervention for such procedures as balloon angioplasty to open blockages. Those procedures were charged at $12,000.00 each.

 THE  FIRST KIDNEY TRANSPLANT!

Since organ transplants began in Boston on December 23, 1954 there has been controversy. Initially, the controversies had to do with religious extremists saying that their god never intended there to be organ transplants. Never mind that God had given some special people some very special skills as surgeons to perform these miracle, life sustaining operations. Back then there were loud cries from the medical community that such surgeries were unethical and violated the Hippocratic Oath of, "Do No Harm."

The donor and the organ recipient back in 1954 were identical twin brothers, Richard Herrick, the recipient and Ronald Herrick, the donor. They were 23 years old at the time. The surgeon, Joseph E. Murray, M.D., was 35 years old. The young man who received his brothers kidney survived 8 years with the new transplant. At the time of the transplant Richard Herrick was facing imminent death. His brother, Ronald, is now 73 years old and in good health.

Since those early days of transplant medicine the list of organs which can be transplanted has grown to include lungs, heart, cornea, pancreas, bone marrow and kidney. As time passes we will see more organs added to the list. To be sure, there will be more controversy as organs and technology are added to transplant procedures. When it was discovered that related live organ donation transplants were possible there was a great negative outcry. The same occurred when it was discovered that non-related living organ transplants were viable. Now we are seeing the same outcry with live organ donations through websites such as www.matchingdonors.com.

At our sister website www.innovativestrategies.us we will discuss and respond to some of the issues raised about such organ donation websites. Most of the reasons are irrational and raised by the Uniform Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). This organization on contract with the federal department of Health and Human Services is responsible for the procurement and distribution of organs from deceased donors. In fact, UNOS collects, sells and distributes those organs. That's right UNOS sells those organs they get from people who have signed their organ donor cards and die. UNOS makes $500,000,000.00 annually selling those organs people think are going to be given to those in need. UNOS never tells prospective donors their organs will be sold when they die. Their families are never told they might be stuck with huge medical bills to keep the donor alive until the organs can be removed.

Notice, I never said surgically removed above. That's because you or your loved one may have their organs removed by someone who is not a surgeon, not even a physician. In Colorado that person is called the 'CHIEF SURGEON' and gets paid more than $200,000.00 annually. He has only an undergraduate degree.

UNOS is an unethical organization led by unethical people. UNOS is responsible for maintaining a sham organ shortage just so they can sell deceased donor organs. DON'T GET CAUGHT UP IN THE UNOS FRAUD! DON"T DONATE YOUR ORGANS TO UNOS OR THEIR Organ Procurement Treatment Network partners in each state. In Colorado they are known as The Donor Alliance. These folks are running a scam.

There are many other ethical and reputable organizations you can go to if you are interested in being a true donor. MatchingDonors at www.matchingdonors.com is one such organizations. Lifesharers at www.lifesharers.com is also another.