Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Woman Dies After Receiving Smoker's Lungs in Transplant
GMA news ^ | 12/19/12 | LIZ NEPORENT |

Posted on 12/19/2012 9:23:13 AM PST by Baynative

Jennifer Wederell, a 27-year-old British woman with cystic fibrosis, died of lung cancer after she received the lungs of a heavy smoker in an organ transplant.

(Excerpt) Read more at gma.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: heaalthcare; lungs; medicine; organdonor; pufflist
Coming soon to government healthcare facilities across the land.
1 posted on 12/19/2012 9:23:17 AM PST by Baynative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Baynative

WOW


2 posted on 12/19/2012 9:24:30 AM PST by bmwcyle (We have gone over the cliff and we are about to hit the bottom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Appalling case, but dont tell me it hasnt happened in the US.


3 posted on 12/19/2012 9:24:37 AM PST by the scotsman (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Donor screening nonexistent?


4 posted on 12/19/2012 9:24:47 AM PST by NonValueAdded (If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, you've likely misread the situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Never by lungs at a yard sale.


5 posted on 12/19/2012 9:26:04 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Baynative
The important thing is that the organ donor organization got paid.
6 posted on 12/19/2012 9:26:08 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the state." - Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

No surprise. When a smoker quits, the cardiovascular mortality decreases very soon. The lung cancer risk is never eliminated.


7 posted on 12/19/2012 9:30:26 AM PST by Sooth2222 ("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman
"Appalling case, but don't tell me it hasn't happened in the US."

Can't say it hasn't. But, I'm willing to wager it will when the gov't takes over.

8 posted on 12/19/2012 9:31:32 AM PST by Baynative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

A college classmate of mine got a heart-lung transplant at about the same age. I did not hear that the donor was a smoker. He too died shortly after. These operations are not trivial, and a life with CF leaves a weakened body, transplant or no transplant.


9 posted on 12/19/2012 9:34:34 AM PST by Dr. Sivana (There is no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

10 posted on 12/19/2012 9:37:43 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (I'll raise $2million for Sarah Palin's presidential run. What'll you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

The UK NHS is rapidly becoming a disaster.

This is probably a situation in which they used the smokere’s lungs on somebody whom they did not expect to survive and gave better ones to those whom were expected to survive.


11 posted on 12/19/2012 9:38:19 AM PST by buffaloguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

Oopsie.


12 posted on 12/19/2012 9:41:09 AM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Brittish (Government) Healthcare at it finest!

Boy, I can’t wait for Obamacare!!!


13 posted on 12/19/2012 9:42:36 AM PST by CPT Clay (Follow me on Twitter @Clay N TX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

“The Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust said: “It is very rare for patients to specify that they do not wish to be considered for clinically healthy lungs from smokers.”

“This is because the risks are much higher if patients decline donor lungs from a former smoker, and decide to wait for another set of organs which are both a match for them and from a non-smoker, to become available.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-20762437

They still should have let her know, though.


14 posted on 12/19/2012 9:44:22 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222
"When a smoker quits, the cardiovascular mortality decreases very soon. The lung cancer risk is never eliminated."

That's correct. Plus, the immunosuppressive therapy that all transplant patients receives enhances the likelihood that any cancer cells already present can grow unimpeded.

15 posted on 12/19/2012 9:45:54 AM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

The Over/Under of posters who comment after only reading the headline and fail to read the rest which says she had to take the lungs because she had no choice and would have died waiting for the “perfect” lungs to come along

80%


16 posted on 12/19/2012 9:49:46 AM PST by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222

Tell me about it. I knew 2 women who died of lung cancer 10 and 15 years after they quit smoking. The 15 year one was my neighbor who died within a month after being diagnosed and she was only in her 50s. I felt really bad because trying to cheer her up I was telling her getting cancer isn’t the same as it was 20 years ago and that she would pull through it which was total BS on my part.


17 posted on 12/19/2012 9:55:32 AM PST by GrandJediMasterYoda (Someday our schools we will teach the difference between "lose" and "loose")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CPT Clay
"Boy, I can’t wait for Obamacare!!!"

You won't be waiting long Jack.
Say, you're not using both those kidneys are you?

18 posted on 12/19/2012 9:59:39 AM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Poor young lady. RIP.


19 posted on 12/19/2012 10:01:31 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

You’re exactly correct.

I also know that in many hospitals here in the US, the lungs of smokers or former smokers are NEVER accepted for transplant, no matter what condition they may be in.


20 posted on 12/19/2012 10:03:25 AM PST by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Second hand smoke kills...


21 posted on 12/19/2012 10:10:56 AM PST by null and void (Going Galt: The won't of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222
No surprise. When a smoker quits, the cardiovascular mortality decreases very soon. The lung cancer risk is never eliminated.

And that doesn't take into account the high probability that the woman was on immune suppressing drugs to minimize the likelihood of organ rejection.

22 posted on 12/19/2012 10:22:55 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Donor screening nonexistent?

Read the article, it says it is believed that most people dying of a lung disease would be satisfied to take their chances with the lungs of a smoker. So screening is performed but apparently the screen is not very selective.

23 posted on 12/19/2012 10:27:31 AM PST by pepsi_junkie (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana
IIRC, the life expectancy of CF patients used to be quite low....the fact that she lived into her 20's says something good compared to many years ago....

If one is on a waiting list, for 18months, I don't think you get to be too picky.....

she might have died from her CF complications alone within a few months....

so taking some lungs, even though from a smoker, is a no brainer...no one could predict that the lungs would be cancerous....

not everything works out, but the intentions and reasoning probably were correct...

24 posted on 12/19/2012 10:35:48 AM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

“most people dying of a lung disease would be satisfied to take their chances with the lungs of a smoker”

Reminds me of the days when ardent anti-smokers would accept tables in the smoking area of a busy restaurant instead of waiting for one in the non-smoking area.


25 posted on 12/19/2012 10:47:11 AM PST by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
I felt really bad because trying to cheer her up I was telling her getting cancer isn’t the same as it was 20 years ago and that she would pull through it which was total BS on my part.

If you were genuinely trying to cheer her up, I don't think you had anything to feel bad about. Getting cancer now IS different than getting it 20 years ago in terms of treatment options. That's no BS.

Unfortunately with lung cancer, it is often diagnosed too late to do much with it. By the time it's detected, it's often Stage 3 or 4, and has metastasized in other places throughout the body.

26 posted on 12/19/2012 10:52:22 AM PST by Lou L (Health "insurance" is NOT the same as health "care")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

I’m not impressed with the dog whistle. She may have died anyway.


27 posted on 12/19/2012 11:03:32 AM PST by newzjunkey (bah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
getting cancer isn’t the same as it was 20 years ago and that she would pull through it which was total BS on my part.

It wasn't BS because it's very true but it's also true some are diagnosed too late or still beyond the reach even modern treatment. Too often there are terminal cases can only be delayed.

28 posted on 12/19/2012 11:10:13 AM PST by newzjunkey (bah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cherry
Well put. Yes the immunosuppressive therapy probably let the new lungs be more vulnerable to cancer, but it was still a gamble worth taking. No lungs at all, and a certain death within a short time, or at least a "chance" with smoker's lungs.

I'd take the chance.

29 posted on 12/19/2012 11:17:55 AM PST by boop ("I need another Cutty Sark"-LBJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: boop
Yeah well the British NHS didn't give this guy an arm cast because they said he was smoking...his appointment was postponed three more time...he ended up like this...

And to add injury to insult...they denied him medical benefits as they told him that as his occupation was plumber....he could still use his twisted arm to unblock toilets.

30 posted on 12/19/2012 11:27:30 AM PST by spokeshave (The only people better off today than 4 years ago are the Prisoners at Guantanamo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Amazing bad luck.


31 posted on 12/19/2012 11:34:23 AM PST by Migraine (Diversity is great; until it happens to YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave
more info from the Daily Mail here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1218927/Plumber-shattered-arm-left-horrifically-bent-shape-operation-cancelled-times.html

and this: Two patients died after being left waiting in ambulances outside an over-stretched hospital.

The patients, believed to have been in their 80s, couldn’t get into the Royal Oldham Hospital for seven and 20 minutes respectively.

here: http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/health/s/1421402_two-patients-died-after-waiting-in-ambulance-outside-full-oldham-hospital-unit

also:....UK Doctors are starting to prescribe WATER to prevent patients from dying from forced dehydration.

32 posted on 12/19/2012 11:37:04 AM PST by spokeshave (The only people better off today than 4 years ago are the Prisoners at Guantanamo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

Its the patients not selective, not the screen. They pass up and then have further wait which could be fatal as well.


33 posted on 12/19/2012 12:07:21 PM PST by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Interestingly, upon evaluation of lung viability for transplant, the smoker's lungs end up selected as viable more than twice as often as lungs of a non-smoker. For example, in UK (wich has ~20% of smokers):

Chris Watson, vice president of the British Transplantation Society, told CNN that 49 percent of last year's lung donors in the UK were smokers.

34 posted on 12/19/2012 12:32:21 PM PST by nightlight7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222
"When a smoker quits, the cardiovascular mortality decreases very soon. The lung cancer risk is never eliminated."

True. My sister stopped smoking back in 2005 when she had to undergo surgery for brain aneurisms. In February of 2010, she was diagnosed with lung cancer, underwent chemo and radiation treatments, and died in September 2011. Both my parents died of lung cancer, and my brother died of a massive heart attack at age 51. I have one sister left, age 72, who lives in an adult-assisted living home. She still smokes. I'm 65, have never smoked, but know that I am still in jeopardy of contracting lung cancer.

35 posted on 12/19/2012 12:40:45 PM PST by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pepsi_junkie

But it was more than that. For her to die from cancer that quickly, it had to already be active in the donor’s lungs. Taking your chances with a smoker’s lungs is one thing; bringing in an active tumor is quite another.


36 posted on 12/19/2012 1:47:02 PM PST by NonValueAdded (If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, you've likely misread the situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Someone on here noted that the anti-immune drugs they use to prevent rejection would enhance the ability of a tumor to spread rapidly. They say the lung was clinically healthy so I believe if the tumor was there, it was very small, probably too small to be readily found. The lungs appeared healthy but there was some risk due to the prior "owner" of them being a smoker.

So you have a risk / reward choice here. Do you take the lungs now, knwing they come from a smoker and could possibly lead to cancer down the road, or do you pass and possibly die waiting for a better set later? The problem here is that the medical team took it on themselves to make the choice, they never informed the patient of the history of those lungs. I guess they figured these are clinically healthy lungs, the risk of cancer is there but small and most likely years away and this was her best chance to survive in the near term so no need to even discuss it. Probably they also know that organs don't last long outside the body and if you tell patients "look, this guy smoked" many will say no thanks, and the organs might be lost. So they kept that info to themselves.

Sadly, the cancer did come and it came right away. Really bad luck, statistically speaking but if the patient had been informed and decided to risk it, she took her best chance knowing the risks. But in this case she didn't know the risks, she was denied the ability to make an informed decision and that is wrong.

37 posted on 12/19/2012 2:03:53 PM PST by pepsi_junkie (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: billorites

That’s correct. Plus, the immunosuppressive therapy that all transplant patients receives enhances the likelihood that any cancer cells already present can grow unimpeded.

That’s what I was thinking. OTOH, if it was a choice between no lungs and death OR this, then I suppose that taking a chance was worth it.


38 posted on 12/19/2012 2:57:25 PM PST by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson