AIDS Spread With Transplanted Kidney

13 years ago

This stuff happens. A former neighbor of mine had a liver transplant only to find out later that the liver was cancerous. I don't know if the cancer spread or what, but I do know that he received quite a settlement.

Thanks

Signature

:)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549082].message }}

KimW

13 years ago

I think no matter how hard we try,things are always going to slip through the screening process. And I am no expert on aids, but I seem to remember that they said it could lie dormant for years before an infected person would test positive for it.
But the article you posted a link to and an article I read,which has basically the same information in it said:
"In this case, the male donor was tested for HIV about 10 weeks before he donated a kidney and the results were negative. Health officials believe he was infected between that test and the 2009 surgery; he reported having unprotected sex with another man during that time."
In my opinion that was an extremely stupid action to participate in.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549151].message }}

thunderbird 13 years ago

Originally Posted by KimW

<sni>
In my opinion that was an extremely stupid action to participate in.

Stupid and criminally irresponsible.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Project HERE.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549163].message }}
- KimW 13 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by thunderbird
  
  Stupid and criminally irresponsible.
  
  I'm in agreement with you on this.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Read A Post.
  Subscribe to a Newsletter
  KimWinfrey.Com
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549181].message }}
  
  QuickSurf 13 years ago
  
  I know someone that had a kidney transplant, there's a ton of stuff now she can't eat or have b/c apparently the donor was allergic to everything and it's mother and the doctors didn't realize till after she had peanuts one day and almost died from the reaction she had.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549785].message }}

KimW

13 years ago

As noted in another thread a while back, I had a couple of warriors offer me a kidney. Foar various reasons it did not work out,but a kidney from a live donor has double the life expectancy of a donor fram someone deceased.
Currently the first week of every month they take and test my blood for problems.

Thanks

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3549172].message }}

seasoned

13 years ago

Well, last I heard, they STILL didn't have a test for HIV! And HIV can hide, etc... They test for ANTIBODIES. So if someone doesn't have antibodies(some don't at all, and others can take MONTHS to get them), they will come up as NEGATIVE, even though they have the disease.

And HOW do they know it is from the kidney transplant? Blood has LIKEWISE been infected! And some hospitals and nurses and doctors are CARELESS!

They should test donors the moment of the operation, in ADDITION to earlier testing! Also, there are a LOT of things that prohibit donating BLOOD, and tissue, such as kidneys, should be held to a HIGHER standard. As I recall, one thing is that you aren't homosexual. If not, it SHOULD be. Male homosexual acts spread it faster than others. Heck, last I knew, they even had restrictions over visiting parts of europe, because of BSE. They won't even let ME donate MERELY because I take BLOOD THINNERS! That is especially odd because if my blood represented say 20% of the whole, it would be like a blip on the scale. And unless they gave it to a baby or very small kid, it would likely not be noticable.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3550187].message }}

Kay King

13 years ago

Totally irresponsible on the part of the donor - clearly they know how the problem was created.

It's hard to understand with all we do know about AIDS transmission - that anyone has unprotected sex unless they are in a monogamous relationship. It's just stupid and this time it hurt two people instead of just the one who took the risk.

kay

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

It actually doesn't take much to be considered a 'difficult woman' -

that's why there are so many of us.

...jane goodall

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3550271].message }}

seasoned

13 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Totally irresponsible on the part of the donor - clearly they know how the problem was created.

It's hard to understand with all we do know about AIDS transmission - that anyone has unprotected sex unless they are in a monogamous relationship. It's just stupid and this time it hurt two people instead of just the one who took the risk.

kay

Well, HOW can you have really protected sex? Latex condoms, over all, on average, are 97% effective at preventing pregnancy! Unprotected sex is about 84% effective at preventing pregnancy(Women are only fertile about 16% of the time!)! And it is HARDER to prevent spread of HIV! OH, and a lot of people seem to think that if it prevents pregnancy it prevents HIV, so a person may take the pill, which is like 99% effective at preventing pregnancy and figure it protects against HIV, when it doesn't! Have you noticed all the female contraceptives, IUDs, SCDs, and pills, that have a disclaimer in small print that they don't prevent STDs or HIV? And the HPV vaccine says that it only works on one HPV strain, and doesn't prevent other STDs or HIV!

And people keep saying CONDOMS! Lambskin condoms, in theory, and apparently in practice, DON'T prevent the spread of HIV, though they do help against pregnancy.

Protected or not, there is a risk. And with a 16% risk to start, how do they figure that a condom works 97% of the time? I mean it can fail TOTALLY, and there is STILL a good chance there won't be a pregnancy. and I don't know if anyone even TRIED to figure what the chances are of having a kid if the male is healthy, hasn't had sex in over 2 days, and they copulate at EXACTLY the right time!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3550459].message }}

Patrician

13 years ago

A doctor, who is a medico-legal expert told me HIV can hide for 2 years. He said if you have done nothing where you could have gotten it within 2 years of the test you can be sure you don't have it.

This was back in the 1980s though and I hope they have better tests now.

As for condoms they are never fool-proof - that is why AIDS experts have long recommended spermicidal jelly to be used with them - but even then - there is a chance it can spread.

I guess abstinence is the best bet unless you can trust your partner with your life - but who can...

and especially not if they are 'lovers', or even 'significant others' and all that BS and not married and legally responsible for you.

Better Prude than Rude.