NZ GENERAL 3 RE KIDNEY DONORS NEED TRANPLANTS MORE
From: Larry Krzewinski (Feerless_Freep@no-spam)
Subject: Re: kidney donors need tranplants more
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 18:12:49 -0700


On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 20:25:09 -0400, "Pierre L" <pierrot51@no-spam>
wrote:

>This thread reminded me of this...
>
>While the transplant centres still encourage live donor transplants, of >course, I've talked to some doctors (usually not nephrologists) who say they >think taking a kidney out of a live donor could be considered unethical,
>despite the low risk which is claimed for this procedure, and despite the >willingness of the donor. Some say the risk to the donor is actually too >great (risk on the operating table, and future health). I would be >interested in your thoughts on this.
>
>Pierre >(on hemodialysis, 9 months)

I passed on 5 live donors and waited for a cadaveric kidney for exactly this reason.

Larry
Reply to larrykz at charter dot net.


From: REP (rep@no-spam)
Subject: Re: kidney donors need tranplants more
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 02:21:18 -0700

About living donors developing kidney disease/ESRD themselves:

I wonder if the rate of ESRD was higher in those who had a given a kidney to a close relative, and if those donors had the same gene expression that led to the kidney disease in the recipient, and the massive insult of surgical removal of one kidney somehow made the 'kidney disease trait' more assertive. I am, of course, guessing and there could be several reasons why this line of thought is horseshit, but it does seem to me as though a genetic predisposition to kidney disease may be reason behind what is now called idiopathic diseases. This is based on nothing more than the observation of a kidney disease (FSGS) in my family and a feeling that 'idiopathic' doesn't cut it.

I don't include diabetics in this theory, as it usually takes 10+ years of poorly controlled diabetes for the first symptoms to show, and I don't know if donors who later became diabetic were part of the study. I don't think the appearance of diabetes and diabetic kidney disease in donors to diabetic recipients is that big a stretch, since diabetes does seem to run in families.


From: cath@no-spam
Subject: Re: kidney donors need tranplants more
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:22:05 -0500

On 23 Jun 2003 01:14:36 GMT, Brian Sandle <bsandle@no-spam> wrote:

>The news in NZ has just had a suggestion that kidney donors could be paid >$5000 for time off work and $5000 for a bit extra.
>
> value. It also creates a shortage of organs. Each year about 8000
> kidneys, 20,000 corneas, and 1200 hearts are transplanted in the > United States, but there is considerable excess demand for these > organs, and many potential recipients must do without them. Some > potential recipients die as a result.

My oh works for the County's rual transport division here in South Texas as a driver. The majority of his work involves picking up people from their homes and taking them to dialysis. IIRC the majority are Hispanic.

There are days when the local dialysis centre is so overloaded they are forced to take patients to other centres in other towns.

It is sad whenever he tells me Mr or Mrs X died but it's a hard cold fact that most people will die due to the lack of kidneys available for transplant.

Fact is also, there have been recent warnings that the number of Hispanics who will develop diabetes will increase dramatically.
Most will die whilst still awaiting a transplant.

Cath

From: "Pierre L" (pierrot51@no-spam)
Subject: Re: kidney donors need tranplants more
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:47:18 -0400

<cath@no-spam> wrote in message news:poqgfvklbstiq2khp2itpn82mftksag3rt@no-spam > On 23 Jun 2003 01:14:36 GMT, Brian Sandle > <bsandle@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >The news in NZ has just had a suggestion that kidney donors could be paid > >$5000 for time off work and $5000 for a bit extra.
> >
> > value. It also creates a shortage of organs. Each year about 8000
> > kidneys, 20,000 corneas, and 1200 hearts are transplanted in the > > United States, but there is considerable excess demand for these > > organs, and many potential recipients must do without them. Some > > potential recipients die as a result.
>
> My oh works for the County's rual transport division here in South > Texas as a driver. The majority of his work involves picking up > people from their homes and taking them to dialysis. IIRC the > majority are Hispanic.
>
> There are days when the local dialysis centre is so overloaded they > are forced to take patients to other centres in other towns.
>
> It is sad whenever he tells me Mr or Mrs X died but it's a hard cold > fact that most people will die due to the lack of kidneys available > for transplant.
>
> Fact is also, there have been recent warnings that the number of > Hispanics who will develop diabetes will increase dramatically.
> Most will die whilst still awaiting a transplant.
>
>
> Cath >

It's not like getting a transplant is a cure. It's a treatment, but it doesn't last forever, and it brings its own set of complications. Some people do well on dialysis, some don't. Similarly, some do well with a transplant, some don't. If a person is going to die on dialysis, the complications that cause it aren't likely to make a transplant that much better. It's not the dialysis that kills you, it's either deliberate non-compliance, ignorance or more often, cardiovascular problems. These problems aren't likely to ensure a successful, long term treatment with a kidney transplant either, since adherence to prescriptions, follow-up, diet (less critical, but still important), etc. is still necessary.

It always makes me a little upset to hear about the latest celebrity (or anybody else who can attract media attention) who has kidney failure and must get a transplant like right now. The media always makes it sound like it's a matter of life and death. This is rarely the case, as most of us know.

Pierre