posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 03:51 PM
The first thing many newly HIV diagnosed people hear is that they should destroy any blood or organ donor cards.
However, in South Africa, which has 5.7 million estimated cases of HIV/Aids, doctors have just performed a kidney transplant between an HIV positive
donor and recipient. Kidney disease seems partly genetic in SA's population segments, and dialysis is costly and in high demand.
Anti-retrovirals can prolong lives, perhaps even to normal lifespans. So if an HIV positive person needs an organ, why not have it donated by another
HIV positive person? Yet, the proceedure seems banned in the US?
I wonder why?
In fact, if an HIV negative person really needs an organ fast, they should have a choice to rather get HIV, rather than an immediate, assured
I would gladly donate blood for other positive people, or my organs, and in an emergency I'd be grateful to get theirs. There may be risks of
co-infection with new strains, but it's a chance I'm willing to take.
I'm sure most HIV negative people would also take HIV positive organs, if nothing else was available - or am I wrong in that assumption?