A Boston hospital deemed a 31-year-old ineligible for a heart transplant because he refused COVID-19 vaccination.
Because organs are scarce, hospitals choose patients who are most likely to survive a transplant. Transplant patients take immune system-suppressing medication, so vaccines are often required. A 31-year-old father lost his opportunity for a heart transplant because he refused to get vaccinated against COVID-19, according to CBS Boston.
David Ferguson told CBS that his son, DJ, whose heart is failing, has two children and a third on the way. The family said DJ was at the front of the line to receive a transplant at Brigham and Women's hospital in Boston. But he won't budge on the vaccine, which the hospital requires for transplant patients.
"It's kind of against his basic principles; he doesn't believe in it," Ferguson told CBS. "So because he won't get the shot, they took him off the list of a heart transplant."
Each transplant hospital has a selection committee that decides who is eligible for new organs. Because organs are scarce, they often choose patients who are most likely to survive a transplant.
Committees may evaluate criteria, including whether the patient takes their medication regularly, how much alcohol they drink, whether they smoke, and their vaccination records. Protection against infectious diseases can be critical for survival, since transplant patients must take immunosuppressants for the rest of their lives in order to prevent their bodies from rejecting the new organ.
"This is not a new issue," Dr. Alyssa Burgart, a transplant anesthesiologist and bioethicist at Stanford University, told Insider. "A patient's ability to fight off a lot of diseases can be compromised. And so for many transplant programs, this is seen as a way to protect the patient and the organ."
"I feel terrible for that patient, because he sounds like he is otherwise motivated for transplant," she added. "I think this really highlights how politically and societally entrenched it is for folks who are refusing vaccination, despite the overwhelming evidence of safety."
Brigham and Women's defended the decision in a statement to CBS, noting that the hospital follows similar protocols to other US transplant programs: "The COVID-19 vaccine is one of several vaccines and lifestyle behaviors required for transplant candidates in the Mass General Brigham system, in order to create both the best chance for a successful operation and also the patient's survival after transplantation."
Hospitals in Ohio and Colorado have also denied transplants to patients who refuse COVID-19 vaccination. The American Society of Transplantation strongly recommends that organ recipients and their household members be vaccinated against COVID-19. Experts at Loyola Medicine made the same recommendation in an ethics-based analysis earlier this month.
"Post any transplant — kidney, heart, whatever — your immune system is shut off," Arthur Caplan, the head of medical ethics at New York University's Grossman School of Medicine, told CBS. "The flu could kill you, a cold could kill you, COVID could kill you. The organs are scarce. We're not going to distribute them to someone who has a very poor chance of living, when others who are vaccinated have a much better chance post-surgery of surviving."
More than 106,000 people in the US are on the transplant waiting list for human organs, — waiting for the death of a registered organ donor who has a compatible kidney, lung, liver, or heart — according to the Health Resources and Services Administration. On average, 17 people die each day waiting for organs.
Transplant patients have a much higher risk of dying from COVID-19 than the average person, due to their weakened immune systems. Research has shown that kidney-transplant recipients with COVID-19 have a mortality rate between 13% and 39%. An early-2020 analysis of multiple studies found an average mortality rate of 20% among transplant patients with COVID-19. In comparison, the COVID-19 mortality rate in the general US population is around 1.2%.
All I can say is what I've said previously, decisions have consequences. In this case, it appears he'd rather die than get vaccinated. Personally, I think the patient is making a huge mistake but, it's his decision.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
Maybe this is a option... In a medical first, doctors transplanted a pig heart into a patient in a last-ditch effort to save his life and a Maryland hospital said Monday that he's doing well three days after the highly experimental surgery.
"It's kind of against his basic principles; he doesn't believe in it," Ferguson told CBS. "So because he won't get the shot, they took him off the list of a heart transplant."
So this guy has no objections to having an internal organ from a deceased person transplanted into his body... but he won't accept a vaccination? Sounds to me like this individual has more issues than just with his heart.
So this guy has no objections to having an internal organ from a deceased person transplanted into his body... but he won't accept a vaccination? Sounds to me like this individual has more issues than just with his heart.
I agree, the fact that he has two kids and one on the way makes this decision even more perplexing. I guess he doesn't care if he ever sees those kids grow up. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me. If I was his father-in-law, we'd be having a serious discussion.
This is just kind of business as usual. If you do something that is considered (by the medical community) to be detrimental to your own health, they'll send the transplant to someone who will "take better care of it".
And, somewhere in Texas, you can hear the muted sound of a head exploding.
So this guy has no objections to having an internal organ from a deceased person transplanted into his body... but he won't accept a vaccination? Sounds to me like this individual has more issues than just with his heart.
Oh, boy.
#1, its not a vaccine. It is an experimental gene therapy.
#2, it is NOT "approved". It has an emergency use authorization which some jurisdictions are pulling, as well as banning the scamcine.
#3, it does nothing to protect from or stop the spread of covid.
#4, it is provably far more lethal than the virus it was supposed to address.
#5, it has NOTHING to do with "health" or "safety" or "reducing numbers" or anything else besides forced compliance, and money. RIGHT from day one it was always about "flatten the curve" so as not to cost the health-care system cash they don't want to spend. All they want to do is prolong the scamdemic for their own pockets.
#6, the compliance part is, if they allow dissidents to go "unpunished" and get away with being refuseniks, others will follow our lead at SOME point along the never ending booster program, and thats going to cost them money. See #5. So they make some very public examples of dissadents.
#1, its not a vaccine. It is an experimental gene therapy.
#2, it is NOT "approved". It has an emergency use authorization which some jurisdictions are pulling, as well as banning the scamcine.
#3, it does nothing to protect from or stop the spread of covid.
#4, it is provably far more lethal than the virus it was supposed to address.
#5, it has NOTHING to do with "health" or "safety" or "reducing numbers" or anything else besides forced compliance, and money. RIGHT from day one it was always about "flatten the curve" so as not to cost the health-care system cash they don't want to spend. All they want to do is prolong the scamdemic for their own pockets.
#6, the compliance part is, if they allow dissidents to go "unpunished" and get away with being refuseniks, others will follow our lead at SOME point along the never ending booster program, and thats going to cost them money. See #5. So they make some very public examples of dissadents.
#1, its not a vaccine. It is an experimental gene therapy.
#2, it is NOT "approved". It has an emergency use authorization which some jurisdictions are pulling, as well as banning the scamcine.
#3, it does nothing to protect from or stop the spread of covid.
#4, it is provably far more lethal than the virus it was supposed to address.
#5, it has NOTHING to do with "health" or "safety" or "reducing numbers" or anything else besides forced compliance, and money. RIGHT from day one it was always about "flatten the curve" so as not to cost the health-care system cash they don't want to spend. All they want to do is prolong the scamdemic for their own pockets.
#6, the compliance part is, if they allow dissidents to go "unpunished" and get away with being refuseniks, others will follow our lead at SOME point along the never ending booster program, and thats going to cost them money. See #5. So they make some very public examples of dissadents.
Is it clearer now ?
Doctor MEM, Appreciate your input.
Regardless of your advice, I believe I would have chosen to see my kids grow up. But, that's just me. As I said, decisions have consequences. If you were in the same positon and somehow, they found a heart that might keep you living but, to get that heart you need to be vaccinated to get that heart, a decision to not get vaccinated seems pretty silly to me. You do realize that getting a new heart is hard to do. And, those committees don't just approve heart transplants for those not desperately needing them. Finding another match before he gets beyond recommended status may not happen.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
It's been clear to me for a long time that there's an element of society who see themselves as some sort of pseudo Marlboro Man rebel, constantly whining about whomever they perceive as giving the orders and/or running the show. The rest of us have grown up.
It's clear to me that there are rules associated with this transplant just as there are rules to post on this forum.
Don't want to follow them then you can expect to get banned. In this guy's case, refusing to follow the rules for a transplant will eventually result in his kids growing up without their biological dad. Pretty simple if you ask me. I know, no one asked me.
All I can say is what I've said previously, decisions have consequences. In this case, it appears he'd rather die than get vaccinated. Personally, I think the patient is making a huge mistake but, it's his decision.
Just as it is the hospital's decision to deny the man lifesaving medical treatment because he doesn't wish to acquiesce to their demand that he accept what should be a voluntary prophylaxis.
That will doubtless have consequences for them as well.
It sure would be interesting to see the relative weighted risk factor number that the transplant committee put on just his vaccination status vs. all the myriad of other, and potentially more important, risk factors that go into making a transplant committee decision. How did this particular vaccination now become the most important / highest weighted factor to be decided?
Did they also assign a risk number to his chance of myocarditis in his transplanted heart from the vaccination?
I well remember when people warned about "Death Committees" that would deny people required treatment under Obamacare.
Well, Here we are.
Is ventilation for a patient in acute respiratory distress now going to be denied if the patient isn’t vaccinated and refuses to be? Do hospitals just say, “Nope, You have to die. We looked at your recovery risk factors and you don't qualify”?
How many other lifesaving medical treatments and interventions will now be denied to the "unvaccinated"?
Let’s supposed for the sake of discussion that a patient requires surgical intervention for acute cholecystitis or a benign brain tumor. Should hospitals now start condemning those like them to death in the hundreds of thousands each year because they won't accept a vaccination that is nearly the functional equivalent of an annual flu shot? What if a patient has previously recovered from covid and has natural antibody immunity?
This is absolutely the nastiest and greasiest of medical ethics “slippery slopes” and it has every potential now to end very badly for our society.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-25-2022).]
(and THERE is the problem in a nutshell. The left just CANT seem to comprehend the only "show" they are running is their own, and nobody elses.)
I can see his headstone in my mind now. It reads something like He pickrd his path. So, I have to assume that if it was you laying in that bed needing a heart, knowing without the vaccination you won't get the new heart, you gonna keep blowing that horn?
All I can say is pick your path. It really doesn't matter to me, I'm not the one who will be raising those kids.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
So when some guy dies in combat fighting for freedom and his kids grow up without a father, its sad but the cost of freedom
But it's somehow different when a guy fighting for freedom make a choice with the same potential outcome ?
Aint that a double standard ?
Tyranny is tyranny, freedom is freedom.....and the more and more of this CoviCrap that goes on, the more I am convinced it's nothing more than China's "social credit" system disguised as a scamdemic.
The freaken FLU kills more than covid, but we dont see this crap over flu vaccines every year.
So when some guy dies in combat fighting for freedom and his kids grow up without a father, its sad but the cost of freedom
But it's somehow different when a guy fighting for freedom make a choice with the same potential outcome ?
Aint that a double standard ?
Tyranny is tyranny, freedom is freedom.....and the more and more of this CoviCrap that goes on, the more I am convinced it's nothing more than China's "social credit" system disguised as a scamdemic.
The freaken FLU kills more than covid, but we dont see this crap over flu vaccines every year.
Actually, that's a pretty silly comparison. That guy going off to war doesn't know he's going to not come home. This guy is going to die without a new heart. A heart he won't get without being vaccinated. IOWs, he's signing his own death sentence. He has the freedom to make that decision and just like all decisions, they have consequences. He has chosen his path.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
Originally posted by randye: Just as it is the hospital's decision to deny the man lifesaving medical treatment because he doesn't wish to acquiesce to their demand that he accept what should be a voluntary prophylaxis.
That will doubtless have consequences for them as well.
It sure would interesting to see the relative risk factor number that the transplant committee put on just his vaccination status vs. all the myriad of other, and potentially more important, risk factors that go into making a transplant committee decision. How did this particular vaccination now become the most important / highest weighted factor to be decided?
Did they also assign a risk number to his chance of myocarditis in his transplanted heart from the vaccination?
I well remember when people warned about "Death Committees" that would deny people required treatment under Obamacare.
Well, Here we are.
Is ventilation for a patient in acute respiratory distress now going to be denied if the patient isn’t vaccinated and refuses to be? Do hospitals just say, “Nope, You have to die. We looked at your recovery risk factors and you don't qualify”?
How many other lifesaving medical treatments and interventions will now be denied to the "unvaccinated"?
Let’s supposed for the sake of discussion that a patient requires surgical intervention for acute cholecystitis or a benign brain tumor. Should hospitals now start condemning those like them to death in the hundreds of thousands each year because they won't accept a vaccination that is nearly the functional equivalent of an annual flu shot? What if a patient has previously recovered from covid and has natural antibody immunity?
This is absolutely the nastiest and greasiest of medical ethics “slippery slopes” and it has every potential now to end very badly for our society.
All I can say is, that board has access to all the medical data they want to make such decisions. That greasy slope is part of that freedom to make decisions. He's picked his path.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
IOWs, he's signing his own death sentence. He has the freedom to make that decision and just like all decisions, they have consequences. He has chosen his path.
And he obviously doesn't give a chit about his wife and kids. But yeah, to some he's still some sort of hero "fighting for freedom". It's more like he's given up.
Take the shot, get the heart... live to fight another day. Seems simple enough.
[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 01-26-2022).]
All I can say is, that board has access to all the medical data they want to make such decisions. That greasy slope is part of that freedom to make decisions. He's picked his path.
Rams
I'd say that his path was picked for him by that particular hospital corporation who made their decision.
I have yet to see anything, anywhere, that suggests that something like this is in any way "standard" in hospitals across the country and, as always, patients are free to "shop around".
Which brings up another point; If you want to help encourage a black market in transplant organs and what is known as "medical tourism" that is how you do it.
I'd say that his path was picked for him by that particular hospital corporation who made their decision.
I have yet to see anything, anywhere, that suggests that something like this is in any way "standard" in hospitals across the country and, as always, patients are free to "shop around".
Which brings up another point; If you want to help encourage a black market in transplant organs and what is known as "medical tourism" that is how you do it.
I guess he needs to shop hospitals. Sure hope he makes it long enough to do that. I asked my doc about this standard you speak of. She stated that she was not aware of a national standard but, every hospital doing such transplants she knew of required the COVID vaccination. It just so happens that her husband is, a kidney transplant recipient also. I tend to believe what she says.
In the unofficial "Battle of Bad Analogies" it looks like the two of you are running neck & neck.
Well, that's a cute response, I'll give you that.
Would you prefer breaking traffic laws and the consequences of doing that? I mean really, if you knowingly don't follow the rules, does it matter what they are? How about defying the laws of gravity?
Ron, you really need to stop seeing a veterinarian.
I know she's a lot cheaper and she probably keeps you up to date with your deworming medication and mange treatments, but still.....
Another cute response, you can do better than that...............
Same situation to you that I asked MEM.
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:
If you were in the same positon and somehow, they found a heart that might keep you living but, to get that heart you need to be vaccinated to get that heart, a decision to not get vaccinated seems pretty silly to me. You do realize that getting a new heart is hard to do. And, those committees don't just approve heart transplants for those not desperately needing them. Finding another match before he gets beyond recommended status may not happen.
Rams
Are you going to go hospital shopping or get the heart that requires the vaccination? Edited: And, please don't tell me you're worried about long term effects of the vaccination...........
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
Would you prefer breaking traffic laws and the consequences of doing that? I mean really, if you knowingly don't follow the rules, does it matter what they are? How about defying the laws of gravity?
Rams
I happen to know as an absolute fact that in the past you have actually "beaten the laws of gravity into submission"
Not only that but you did it intentionally.
Quite obviously you believe that some rules are meant to be broken.
I happen to know as an absolute fact that in the past you have actually "beaten the laws of gravity into submission"
Not only that but you did it intentionally.
Quite obviously you believe that some rules are meant to be broken.
So, you're avoiding answering with cute responses. Come on Randye, answer the question. Hospital shopping hoping you can find another matching heart or new matching heart with vaccination. You're in that bed dying, decisions have consequences.........
Edited: That's OK, don't bother. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of us, that includes you, me, MEM and others would take the new heart along with the required vaccination, rear those kids and live for a while longer.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
Are you going to go hospital shopping or get the heart that requires the vaccination? Edited: And, please don't tell me you're worried about long term effects of the vaccination...........
Rams
quote
Originally posted by blackrams:
So, you're avoiding answering with cute responses. Come on Randye, answer the question. Hospital shopping hoping you can find another matching heart or new matching heart with vaccination. You're in that bed dying, decisions have consequences.........
Edited: That's OK, don't bother. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of us, that includes you, me, MEM and others would take the new heart along with the required vaccination, rear those kids and live for a while longer.
Rams
NOPE
Knowing what I know personally and professionally about organ transplants, and heart transplants in particular, I would probably NOT opt for the transplant.
Survival rates 1, 5, and 10 years after transplantation are 87%, 77%, and 57%, respectively, and the average life expectancy is 9.16 years.
The mental QOL (Quality Of Life) of patients 10 years after heart transplantation is similar to that among the general population, HOWEVER....
....the physical QOL is worse among patients when compared with the QOL of the general population, which includes predictors such as older age, being married, the presence of complications, and impaired renal function.
Simply put, I would never want to cling to such a handicapped life for only approx. 9 years or so, and in doing so become a financial or physical burden to my family.
But that's just me.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-25-2022).]
Knowing what I know personally and professionally about organ transplants, and heart transplants in particular, I would probably NOT opt for the transplant.
Survival rates 1, 5, and 10 years after transplantation are 87%, 77%, and 57%, respectively, and the average life expectancy is 9.16 years.
The mental QOL (Quality Of Life) of patients 10 years after heart transplantation was similar to that among the general population, HOWEVER....
....the physical QOL was worse among patients when compared with the QOL of the general population, which includes predictors such as older age, being married, the presence of complications, and impaired renal function.
Simply put, I would never want to cling to such a handicapped life for only approx. 9 years or so, and in doing so become a financial or physical burden to my family.
But that's just me.
OK, knowing what little I do know about you, I believe you. But, I don't believe you represent the majority of the population.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-25-2022).]
"A 31-year-old father lost his opportunity for a heart transplant because he refused to get vaccinated against COVID-19..."
quote
Originally posted by randye:
Survival rates 1, 5, and 10 years after transplantation are 87%, 77%, and 57%, respectively, and the average life expectancy is 9.16 years.
Being able to extend one's life by a third seems pretty good to me. And the fact that this fella is still relatively young at 31, I would think that he'd have a very good chance of surviving even longer than the 9.16 year average.
But no, apparently it's more important for this guy to make a point. Ummm... what was it again?
#1, its not a vaccine. It is an experimental gene therapy.
#2, it is NOT "approved". It has an emergency use authorization which some jurisdictions are pulling, as well as banning the scamcine.
#3, it does nothing to protect from or stop the spread of covid.
#4, it is provably far more lethal than the virus it was supposed to address.
#5, it has NOTHING to do with "health" or "safety" or "reducing numbers" or anything else besides forced compliance, and money. RIGHT from day one it was always about "flatten the curve" so as not to cost the health-care system cash they don't want to spend. All they want to do is prolong the scamdemic for their own pockets.
#6, the compliance part is, if they allow dissidents to go "unpunished" and get away with being refuseniks, others will follow our lead at SOME point along the never ending booster program, and thats going to cost them money. See #5. So they make some very public examples of dissadents.
Is it clearer now ?
Don't waste your time man. There's no help for those brainwashed by the government
Don't waste your time man. There's no help for those brainwashed by the government
So, you'd also choose to not get the new heart?
What some don't seem to grasp here is, I'm not trying to convince anyone to get vaccinated. The transplant team determined that without being vaccinated, this dude is not as good recipient as someone who has been vaccinated. It's simply a choice, the medical team says you'll only get the new heart if you are vaccinated, it's your choice from that point on. If, you chose not to, you're going to die, not at some point, in the very near future. (They don't approve heart transplants unless you're on death's door.) So, say goodbye to the wife, kids, dad and mom and everyone else.
Or, you can get the vaccination and get a new heart and probably live to see your children grow up (no one knows how long for sure),
It also makes a difference in where you're at in life, I'm older than most here. But, I'm not through living but that is a big consideration. This dude is 31 with two kids and one in the oven. Sorry guys, I think MEM and friends are full of it.
The transplant patient obviously, and in a broader sense anybody who has been denied medical treatment because of their stance on the clot-shot.
So you are saying the person that went to war for his country and it's broader freedoms and died is the same as someone that dies because he makes a personal choice regarding his own health?
There are thousands of small and large memorials across Canada and the US paying homage to fallen service members. We will never see any statues or highways paying respects to stupid people.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-26-2022).]
Sounds to me like this individual has more issues than just with his heart.
It's more like he's given up.
