Unable to load image

Redditors reach new righteous heights as they cheer killing little girls as long as they are related to republicans. :vegetakneel:

https://old.reddit.com/r/skeptic/comments/1iola4t/jd_vances_12yearold_relative_denied_heart/

								

								

Why is this in the politics hole?

Because vaccines are political chud.

Suddenly all redditors become experts in the field of organ transplantation and realize that giving a heart to a dying child is ethically wrong even if there is nobody else on the list and the child is unvaccinated.

The medical field says vaccines must be given as the child is at risk of getting diseases without the vaccines that make the heart transplant useless, conspiracytards respond that the covid vaccine has already been proven to cause heart issues in the first place as a side effect so makes no sense to require covid vaxx to get a heart transplant, my personal non expert opinion says that not having a vaccine increases your chances of getting a disease, but it does not guarantee it, and if the heart is the difference between life or death, then the child has every right to it as long as there is no else on the list before her who needs it more.

Interesting observations:

Hospital admits that vaccines increase the likelihood of a successful organ transplant. Which I believe should lead to the child still getting the transplant if nobody else needs the heart more at the moment.

https://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/news/release/2025/transplant-statement

Because children who receive a transplant will be immunosuppressed for the rest of their life, vaccines play a critical role in preventing or reducing the risk of life-threatening infections, especially in the first year. These decisions involve discussion between our providers and the patient's family.

Organs can stay alive for a few weeks after a person is dead, which means if the girl is the only person around who needs a heart in that time frame, then it makes sense to give it to her even if she is unvaccinated. Not a single redditor appears to have noticed this or mentioned it and all have decided the child is meant to die now.

A deceased organ donor is kept on a ventilator after she/he has been declared brain-dead. They will remain on the ventilator until necessary approvals are taken and the organs can be retrieved. A Brain stem Dead person's organs may stay alive for a period of time that may range from a few days to a few weeks.

As far as I can tell ( I might be completely wrong somebody confirm for me ) if you refuse the covid vaccine, you will not be allowed to get an organ transplant, even if nobody else needs that organ at the moment. So they would rather throw an organ in the trash rather than allow it access to an unvaccinated person.

> Transplant recipients must follow a very strict regimen and if they are unwilling to get vaccinated despite repeated recommendations, they should be excluded.

In adult recipients, the median survival time is 9.4 years, in comparison with 2.4 years among patients awaiting a heart. In pediatric recipients, the median survival time is 12.8 years. Overall, heart transplantation has added approximately 270,000 life-years (mean, 4.9 yr/recipient)

This above statement is the only thing that to me somewhat explains why doctors are not willing to expend much time trying to save unvaccinated organ transplant patients. The survival years are already so low and organs available for donation are so low in number, but I still cannot ascertain why not just put the unvaccinated at the very back of the list and technically only able to get an organ after everybody vaccinated has gotten an organ. Even if the unvaccinated never receive an organ, it would show that there is no active discrimination or attempt to exclude people from the medical system altogether, simply a limitation of resources and focus on using them where they are most viable to work.

Interesting comments:

Not letting people with authority do whatever with your children because they know better makes you evil.

Letting your 12 year old die to own the libs. Classic MAGA

They killed their daughter. Not the hospital by rejecting the transplantation request no matter if the organ is going to rot instead. The parents of the child are evil. Not the system that won't even make them eligible to be on the very back of the list if they don't get the vaccines.

So they're collecting money on GoFundMe despite not even being eligible for the operation? They will not be getting an exemption

One redditor gets the reasoning right but still doesn't question why non-vaccinated cannot be at minimum at the very back of the list for transplants.

I'm assuming it's because getting the body to accept an implant requires a lot of antibiotics and the patient would be weak and thus at much higher risk of death - potentially wasting the transplant when other people who will get the jab are just as in need.

One great mind of reddit theorizes that this is a 4D chess move by the parents to get rid of an adopted child.

They can either cause a massive fuss about their child being killed by vaccine mandates or the government taking their child away because of vaccine mandates.

The parents turn out to be r-slurred. Nobody really surprised.

Janeen claims that vaccines are unsafe, and also said they came to their decision after "the Holy Spirit put it on our hearts".

But what about just putting them at the very back of the transplant list? What's wrong with that.

Fair. If you're not going to take care of your body you don't deserve new organs. They are in short supply. Sorry not sorry.

A "doctor of reddit" Chimes in.

Doctor here. Pretty straightforward regarding transplants. One of the most scarce resources we have in medicine, so to be eligible, you HAVE to show you are willing to follow medical advice and protocols to maximize chances of success, because even then there is a good percentage that fail. You are on immunosuppressants for life, and any infection can be fatal. So yeah, vaccination has always been prerequisite

That makes sense, but factoring in that organs are so rare for transplantation and vaccinated people have a far higher likelihood of success, why don't we at least allow the unvaccinated to be at the very back of the list, as having an organ transplant with a 5% chance of success is still higher than the 0% chance of success when their organ fails?

Conclusion:

Redditors went insane in their echo chambers and will never be able to leave them. They are all brain wormed now and they will either be able to function in a Kamala world, or go insane and die out in a any other world.

An evil Republican may own a dozen s*x slaves to satisfy himself, but a good redditor will let an entire nation of women be r*ped as long as it is done in the name of "being on the right side of history and not letting white people harm (punish) minorities (male feminists from minority groups)".

!mottezans moral quandary for you. Should American medical system allow unvaccinated people on organ donation lists at the very back in case they ever run out of vaccinated people but there is still an organ around, or is it more ethical to perma ban all unvaccinated from the organ transplant list altogether and force them to get vaccinated to be on the list in any capacity? Note that organs are rare to acquire for transplantation, last only a few years, a decade if the person who received them is lucky, and being unvaccinated raises the chances of getting an infection and the transplant failing far faster than in the case of vaccinated individuals. The mortality rate may be 5X higher for unvaccinated patients who get an organ transplant compared to vaccinated individuals.

81
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

She IS banned from it though and just saying "weeeelllll technically" doesn't change that fact and creates second hand citizens on an ideological basis irrespective of medical legitimacy.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

She's not eligible if she gets vaccinated?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

She is currently not eligible for being unvaccinated.

So She IS banned and you saying b-b-but if she did what we want her to do she won't be doesn't change the fact that she IS currently banned.

It is like saying I am not banned from a place because the owner will only allow me in if I apologize. I am still banned from there though as long as I don't apologize. Saying I am not banned is a straight up lie or misunderstanding of the English language.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Holy shit you're beyond r-slurred bb.

This is such a non issue. The reasons for it are clear and she could be on the list tomorrow if she wanted. Her not getting vaccinated is her choice.

I legitimately don't understand what the issue is here. Can some !commenters explain?

Also wtf religious belief makes it so she can't get vaccinated but it's totally okay for her to get a heart transplant with the drugs and injections obviously involved with that?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You are shifting goalposts. First admit you were wrong and only then will I further continue this conversation. We can converse in good faith or not at all with me doing everything I intend to do without your voice being involved.

Her not getting vaccinated is her choice.

You don't even know what you are arguing about. 12 year olds don't get to decide their parents do as per law.

Also wtf religious belief makes it so she can't get vaccinated but it's totally okay for her to get a heart transplant with the drugs and injections obviously involved with that?

Different religions can have different values because it is all based on faith. People believing dinosaurs existed 5,000 years ago is as valid as people believing vaccine injections bad but transplant injections good based on faith alone.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

First admit you were wrong

Nothing I've said in this entire thread is wrong. I'm not apologizing for you having an r-slured notion of what "banned" means.

Different religions can have different values because it is all based on faith.

Uh huh. And which one bans vaccines but not transplants?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

whitoid literally forgot what the word banned actually means even though he was born in an English speaking nation.

:marseyxd:

Ban - to officially say that something is not allowed, often by law

The child IS banned from getting an organ transplant by the hospital. So you were wrong when you said she isn't banned because she can get a vaccine and be allowed later.

Uh huh. And which one bans vaccines but not transplants?

Whichever one the parents of that child are in because they are obviously against the vaccine and for the transplant. Or is that also a lie and you know how to practice their religion for them better than they do?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

they are obviously against the vaccine and for the transplant

Yeah almost like their reasoning isn't religious and they're just r-slurred.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The reasoning is obviously religious because they have stated it is on religious grounds. You cannot tell somebody else how their religion is to be practiced. It is their religion to practice.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Also wtf religious belief makes it so she can't get vaccinated but it's totally okay for her to get a heart transplant with the drugs and injections obviously involved with that?

I belive that covid vaccines have nanobots that make you gay and r-slurred.

:marseybottom:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

U r negro

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.



Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.