While a dying girl is photogenic, there’s logic in this. The dying adult who won’t get the lungs hacked to fit into her body doesn’t get the press, but would get the adult lungs and live - and has a greater likelihood of a successful transplant because the organs aren’t “shaved” to fit in her growing body. And, because she’s growing, there is a chance that she’d need another set of lungs as an adult because the mutilated organs don’t grow with her.
If she dies without a transplant, the lungs she didn’t get DO save another life. And if she gets the transplant, there is a chance she needs a second one - so now two people die extending her life.
While I hate saying it, this denial is actually logical and correct by the HHS.
NO IT IS NOT!!!
The very idea that the federal government has the right to make this decision is obscene! This is NOT HHS’s decision to make, this is a decision to be made by the doctor and the girl and her parents.
I didn’t read the article - if they are taking gubmint handouts, then they have participated in the obscenity and given the feds the power to make decisions for them.
“While a dying girl is photogenic, there’s logic in this. The dying adult who won’t get the lungs hacked to fit into her body doesn’t get the press, but would get the adult lungs and live - and has a greater likelihood of a successful transplant because the organs aren’t “shaved” to fit in her growing body. And, because she’s growing, there is a chance that she’d need another set of lungs as an adult because the mutilated organs don’t grow with her.
If she dies without a transplant, the lungs she didn’t get DO save another life. And if she gets the transplant, there is a chance she needs a second one - so now two people die extending her life.
While I hate saying it, this denial is actually logical and correct by the HHS.”
BULL SHIT.
Stop with the “photogenic” language crap, which is only used to impinge upon the objectivity of my argument. Interestingly, it is your position that is completely arbitrary. How can the HHS become slave to a bureaucratic, FIXED AGE age cut off over an individual, qualitative assessment of each case?
Using language such as “hacked” to describe the necessity of personalizing the lung to its individual recipient exposes the bias in your position and ignores the advances in medical science which now make the likelihood of success equal to that of an adult transplant.
If you truly are conservative, you are completely missing the canary in the coal mine here.
“...this denial is actually logical and correct...”
Wanna bet who’d get the lung if it was a senator’s kid or the child of some other political bigwig?