Donating Blood

[Walter]

Telling people they can't do what they want with their own organs is no different than telling them what ELSE they can't do with their own bodies, telling them what they can or cannot read on the internet (or elsewhere), who they can marry, have sex with, how many kids they can have and other areas that amount to "you can't be trusted to determine your own needs, therefore, government will determine them for you."

I actually agree with you. Everyone, rich or poor, infected with a horrible disease or not has the right to put their organs up for sale. Such disease should be disclosed up front. I believe it to be a very, very bad policy to actually purchase any organs, but I support any one's right to do so. I wouldn't want any one I care about to receive blood or organs that had been purchased. The chances of getting HIV or another infection are way too high.

 

[Sas]

That's great - but I wasn't talking about the 3rd world. I'm talking about the good old USA, and other "civilized" lands.

If people are not being coerced into donating organs by poverty, then sure, they should be able to donate. I said this before. I doubt you will get many well off people donating organs for cash though. This is why the third world is exploited in this manner and I don't think this is good. It has been abused, you can see this in China and India. I am picking the lesser of what I see as two evils - banning paid donations, so there is less chance to exploit and coerce people into organ donation. As opposed to the evil of stopping people doing what they want with their bodies.

Yes - much better to exploit them by having them destroy their bodies by digging ditches and doing other hard physical labour, cleaning out nasty smelly crap from toilets, or spending 8+ hours a day inside cubicles looking a glowing screens - something their bodies are ill-designed to do.

That can be exploitation too. Depends on the circumstances. I disagree with some of the labour policies of certain companies in the third world too, for similar reasons to why I mostly oppose paid organ donations.

I mean, really, what is the difference between paying someone $1M for a kidney, or paying someone $1M to come and work for your crappy corporation for 40 hours/week, for 30 years? How is one any less "exploitative" than the other? The only real difference is the ease (or time) with which the money can be obtained and the "moral comfort level" with what constitutes fair compensation for goods and/or services rendered.

They are not the same at all. One involves severe immediate health risks for one thing. Also I really doubt people donating kidneys in India and China are paid anywhere close to what those in the West are paid for working 30 years, even when taking into account average incomes. Perhaps if there were better guidelines and it was not so open to abuse, I would agree with your point However I don't see this as realistic in current society.

Telling people they can't do what they want with their own organs is no different than telling them what ELSE they can't do with their own bodies, telling them what they can or cannot read on the internet (or elsewhere), who they can marry, have sex with, how many kids they can have and other areas that amount to "you can't be trusted to determine your own needs, therefore, government will determine them for you."

I can see your point and agree somewhat. However, I think that regulation should be imposed in areas where there are high levels of human rights abuses. Organ harvesting is one of those areas in my mind.

 

[sibermike7]

Do you have anything to add with respect to blood or organ donation?

Sure! It is "Hijack!"

The thread was NOT about organ donation but rather the effect of donating blood on the diver!

Although admittedly, you were so good at hijacking the post that you even wondered if I had more to add to the hijack!

My posts contained the "smiley" for "hijack' but evidently it didn't make it through for you. It shows up on my posts on this end.

 

[Jersey]

You CAN sell blood or component products. I was watching the local CBS affiliate news Monday night, here in Southeastern PA, when a story came on about a college student selling her blood to cover expenses. They stated you could sell plasma twice weekly. The Red Cross allows for this process every 14 days. Not sure about copyright infringements so I wo't post the content here, but if you want to read the article, go to cbs3.com, search selling blood, "Your Money Team: Creative Ways To Make Cash".

What next? ...Selling organs?...troll!!

 

[lowviz]

Sure! It is "Hijack!"

The thread was NOT about organ donation but rather the effect of donating blood on the diver!

Although admittedly, you were so good at hijacking the post that you even wondered if I had more to add to the hijack!

My posts contained the "smiley" for "hijack' but evidently it didn't make it through for you. It shows up on my posts on this end.

They're gettin' through.
-Thanks for trying sibermike7

I got my answer, maybe even better than I expected. I'll take off 3-7 days depending on how strenuous (including cold) the dive may become. I might even go for a stress test. Or maybe just keep reading this thread.

 

[sibermike7]

They're gettin' through.
-Thanks for trying sibermike7

I got my answer, maybe even better than I expected.

You're welcome and glad you got such good info. BTW, am I the only one that can see my "hijack" smileys?

 

[NudeDiver]

BTW, am I the only one that can see my "hijack" smileys?

I saw them. I didn't consider them particular interesting or insightful comments. I may disagree with Walter most of the time, and generally not like his on-line persona very much, but at least when he posts he actually has something to say. Usually.

If people are not being coerced into donating organs by poverty, then sure, they should be able to donate. I said this before. I doubt you will get many well off people donating organs for cash though. This is why the third world is exploited in this manner and I don't think this is good. It has been abused, you can see this in China and India. I am picking the lesser of what I see as two evils - banning paid donations, so there is less chance to exploit and coerce people into organ donation. As opposed to the evil of stopping people doing what they want with their bodies.

What it amounts to is government control over your body. Plain and simple. In the case of "the poor", your policy is to prevent them from using one of the few resources they have available to get ahead in life. Uncool. You can use your same argument to make abortion illegal. Since poor women can be pressured to have abortions of children that they can't afford to properly take care of (or simply by a potential father who doesn't want a baby to be born), then no one should be allowed to have one - again - preventing these people from having control over their own bodies.

They are not the same at all. One involves severe immediate health risks for one thing.

Again, you keep bringing up these poor countries. I'm talking about the "civilized lands" ya know. The rich world. Abortions, pregnancy, and birthing all have plenty of health risks too. If organ donation is too risky to allow for profit, then it certainly doesn't make sense to allow it for donors who receive NO tangible benefit! On that note, maybe the medical personnel involved shouldn't be permitted to be paid either - since that provides a possibility for them to abuse people by pushing unneeded or unwated donations. "Come on Mr. Smith! Give up a kidney for your wife! It's the right thing to do!!" (and by the way, I need a new BMW, so the money for my services will be greatly appreciated).

BESIDES all of that:

- you can sell blood
- you can sell your eggs
- you can sell your sperm
- you can rent out your womb (surrogate mothers)

All of these things could potentially be "abused" to "exploit" the poor. If you want to ban the selling of organs, you'd have to ban all of these other things too, to be consistent. Practically ANYTHING could be used to "abuse" the "poor". Look at fast food. It's commonly believed that "the poor" eat more fast food for various reasons. So, since fast food is so unhealthy, we should ban it, so that the poor no longer have access to this unhealthy food, so they will eat better. Where does it end?

In the meantime, your policy prohibits a private commercial transaction between two individuals that can enrich one, save the life of the other, and benefit many of the associated peripheral individuals surrounding the situation. And for what benefit? To supposedly save people from themselves? "The government" knows, somehow, better than you do, what you should do with your body? Please.

The bottom line is this: I want to maximize freedom. Allow you to use your body in any way you wish, that does not infringe on someone else's freedom. Your policy wants to minimize freedom. Dictate and control what you can do with your own body, in the name of saving you from yourself. I think that is just about the biggest evil around.

I actually agree with you. Everyone, rich or poor, infected with a horrible disease or not has the right to put their organs up for sale. Such disease should be disclosed up front.

I agree entirely. Wow.

Where I making the rules:
-You could make any physical change to your body that you wish
-You could sell any and all of your body parts
-You could rent out your body by the hour, for any otherwise lawful purpose
-You could injest, inject or insert any substance you desire into your body
-You could terminate your life at any time of you choosing, and get assistance in doing so if desired

I think you get the idea. Maximum freedom. Allow you to do what you want with you body, however you want to do it - and permit you the freedom to experience the consequences of your actions as appropriate.

If you can't exercise even basic control over your own body, you can't be said to have freedom, in any real sense of the word.

But for the sake of all humankind, or at least the fraction that reads this thread, I'll refrain from any further comments that may be perceived by some as a "hijack" of this thread (mind reader mode: engaged!). Please continue talking about blood. My apologies.

 

[sibermike7]

I saw them. I didn't consider them particular interesting or insightful comments.

That is because you haven't figured out yet that it's not about YOU!
It is a polite reminder that you have gotten the thread totally off-topic; which in this case, THE OP AGREED WITH ME!

A moderator should have moved this thread a long time ago OUT of the advanced diving discussions OR have simply taken the posts that were clearly off topic out of the thread and put them into another thread located in the PUB!

But for the sake of all humankind, or at least the fraction that reads this thread, I'll refrain from any further comments that may be perceived by some as a "hijack" of this thread (mind reader mode: engaged!). Please continue talking about blood. My apologies.

THANK YOU for permission YOUR to continue the thread that YOU hijacked! Man are you THAT hung up on yourself!?
Sarcasm does NOT an apology make.

 

[shoredivr]

Yes, mods, please split out the non-blood donation posts to the Pub. I am interested in blood donation as it affects divers. The rest can move elsewhere.

 

[lowviz]

My personal thanks shoredivr, sibermike7 for trying to keep this thread on track. My view on this is that the trolling/general goofing is unwelcome, but not enough to act on. Had it been censored, I wouldn't have had the pleasure of watching several divers, such as yourselves, rise to the occasion. Sibermike7 is a diver sweating HIV+ and he's more concerned about how others feel. -completely awesome- This is probably my last post on this stale thread, thanks all. And sincere thanks for all the answers.

good diving all, stay safe.