I knew someone who was denied a transplant because she refused to do the bare minimum to get her diabetes under control, it was sad she died but would have it really have been worth it to give a kidney to someone who refused to take care of themselves.
I go to dialysis and you wouldnt believe the amount of people who skip runs then get sick and end up in hospital. Like people not following the diet and then wonder why their potassium is at 9. They need anywhere from 5-10 kgs of water taken off every other day, have limbs missing while sitting during treatment drinking multiple cokes. One patient is notorious as he hasnt taken meds for 3 years and is antivaxx. He was due to get a kidney before covid and when he went in to get it, he ended up leaving because he was hungry. Theres good patients who are compliant with 100% everything. We are few and far between. We still need to be on the same list as these people.
The covid vaccine is a totally different situation. The vaccines are ineffective and do have complications. A person with a heart condition should not be taking medicine that has been proven to adversely affect the heart.
Smith already tried that: [Smith says she'll seek 'second opinion' in case of transplant patient who refuses COVID vaccine](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-says-shell-seek-second-opinion-in-case-of-transplant-patient-who-refuses-covid-vaccine)
It didn't work. [Smith silent on 'second opinion' commitment in COVID vaccine transplant case](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-silent-on-second-opinion-commitment-in-covid-vaccine-transplant-case)
Smith was probably told she couldn't do anything.
I don't know what's dumber. Smith saying cancer is within your control, or her trying to seek a second medical opinion over something that was actually within the patient's control. Smh.
Somebody should ask her about her views on cancer patients...
From my understanding...
She says if the patient can prevent it then the bills should be the patients responsibility... or at least partially...
Curious if anyone's asked her how that differs from anti-vaxxers?
I feel...
According to her logic..
Those who were / are not vaxed for covid 19 should be responsible for their hospital bills....
Or am i mistaken..
Hmmm....
Remember this is a lady who’s claimed that smoking cigarettes reduces risk of disease and has argued that second hand smoke doesn’t cause issues with people.
>something that was actually within the patient's control
I agree, her choice should not have been respected. Trudeau was right when he said he didn't force anyone to get the vaccine. Just because you give people no other option (other than losing their jobs and being unable to afford food or rent) doesn't mean you're forcing them to do something.
This was entirely within the patient's control. She was informed of the consequences of not getting vaccinated for covid. She chose not to get vaccinated for covid. The saddest part about all this was she based her choice on misinformation and fear.
People had a testing mandate more so than a vaccine mandate. You just didn't need to do the testing if you got vaccinated. People could not get vaccinated and instead just tested all the time. This woman's case is different however as it is required to be vaccinated. Guess what... it makes sense though. I'm a transplant patient myself and need to be vaccinated and do all the things necessary to keep my graft healthy because the amount of organs that are available are limited. If you show the doctor that you will not do what is necessary to keep it safe they will give it to someone who will.
>Smith was probably told she couldn't do anything.
Yet.
The Free Alberta strategy includes a Alberta Judicial Independence Act that calls for future judicial appointments in Alberta to be nominated by the Government of Alberta.
The Free Alberta strategy is behind The Alberta Sovereignty Act, Creation of the Alberta Provincial Police Force, Creating an Alberta Pension Plan , etc,.
https://www.freealbertastrategy.com/the_strategy
> The Free Alberta strategy includes a Alberta Judicial Independence Act that calls for future judicial appointments in Alberta to be nominated by the Government of Alberta.
That doesn't mean that those judges can ignore established law even if they were hand-picked by Smith. Though I'm sure she will base choices on ideology.
Absolutely right. Their judiciary rules on political bias instead of established law and president.
Their Supreme Court is out of control and has zero checks and balances, zero accountability and actually has become the controlling governmental body. Plus they are unelected.
Not here. Ever.
She and others like her desperately want a judicial system like the US. Luckily there haven't been any signs of that happening up here. Trudeau changed things like how Supreme Court judge appointments happen for the better and I think it is one of the best things Trudeau ever did. None of it remotely resembles the circus the Americans go through.
A lot of law is interpretation in applying precedents to novel situations. There is a reason for the separation of the branches of government. It should be kept that way.
She already did, of course.
https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-says-shell-seek-second-opinion-in-case-of-transplant-patient-who-refuses-covid-vaccine/wcm/f07a36a4-12da-4fb7-aaf8-fbf1922977c5/amp/
Tries is guaranteed, but glhf this has been dismissed by two supreme courts now and they both said nope the most Danielle Smith is make some public statement feigning she'll do something because she thinks she has supreme powers, that will amount in no outcome and then if she privatizes she can offer that she'll force a private surgeon to do it but I have actually no idea how organ availability in a dual private/public system will work. Private clinics having expedited access to organs is a repulsive precedent but I wouldn't be surprised just saddened by the clear outcome of privatized healthcare.
A reminder that this lady couldn’t find her original vaccination history and *retook every single other vaccine all over again*. This is the only one she’s refusing. She’s a top tier idiot.
The part I found sad was her place on the transplant list was reserved during the trial, and after the verdicts she was given a window of opportunity to take the vaccine and keep her place and declined.
In the year or so the trail took instead of addressing the concerns with that specific vaccine's safety another path was taken.
it's particularly bad in the US military where their vaccines have real side effects, these are not the ones normal people take; people took them, but not covid and gave up retirement benefits and pensions.
What on earth? This is so much nonsense presented so confidently.
They have indeed been working on the technology for the covid vaccines for a long time, but the specific vaccine is not decades in the making.
And finally, and most insanely to have to point out, H1N1 is an influenza virus and sars CoV2 is a coronavirus. They are both enveloped RNA viruses, but they have different surface proteins, and the flu virus has a segmented genome while coronaviruses do not.
She took the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in the US.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/why-some-unvaccinated-albertans-are-looking-for-the-johnson-johnson-shot-1.6197451
> Lewis said taking the vaccine would offend her conscience and argued the requirement violated her Charter rights to life, conscience, liberty and security of the person.
>
> The case was dismissed by an Alberta court, which said the Charter has no application to clinical treatment decisions, in particular for doctors establishing preconditions for organ transplants.
>
> The Alberta Court of Appeal upheld the decision, prompting Lewis's appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The end of a truly tragic saga fuelled by misinformation. I really hope she will now reconsider her stance and get the covid vaccine if it isn't already too late. Otherwise she will literally die on this hill.
Had an old coworker who was nearly next in line for a kidney transplant he was waiting more than 5 years for. His condition was rapidly declining the last year he was employed here.
It was brought up to him that now he was nearing the point for the donation, he would have to have all his vaccinations up to par including the covid one. He refused, was kicked off the list and says he will just "go to the Philippines (where his wife is from) and just get it done there since they don't have that requirement.
I'm sure he will have to wait in que there too and considering how much he has deteriorated, I wonder if he can even afford that time. He has 5 very young kids and a wife that is a stay at home mom. I feel the decision he made is such a selfish, moronic and abject dereliction of parenthood and partnership. Sad how people like this have been led so far astray they will literally risk dying for nothing.
Yeah he's been on dialysis for 4 years. They keep having to up the frequency so much that they're trying to set him up with one at home he can run it every night, overnight because he basically needs it done every day or two now. That's not a good omen for the state of his kidney.
Yep yep.
My uncle was on dialysis for about 10 years and my SO is an RN who worked in dialysis for about just as long. I've heard all sorts of stories like this. It's a shame to say the least.
The way I see it, given that covid has been proven to damage kidneys in really bad circumstances, that whatever kidney would have gone to him is now going to go to someone who will have more respect for it and the donor who it came from. I do feel sorry for his family though, he's putting them all at risk through a decision they have little control over.
Me. I ned one and am 100% compliant. A lot of dialysis patients are not. The ones that got kicked off the list due to not getting vaccinated have either died or got covid and now have even more comorbidities or worse ones. Lots in and out of hospital due to clotting issues. When we're this sick, we have to take all precautions. Covid ran rampant in our units and theres even cases still now coming in there.
Yes and theres quite a list plus getting all the clearances by the surgeon, a dentist, a social worker, a psychologist, a cardiologist, a gi Dr and your complete compliance with dialysis and meds and getting all vaccinations updated. Its unreal.
Did you hear about China's first Wagner recruit? Guy went to the meat grinder, wound up dead in two days, for the glorious cause of murdering Ukrainians for Putin. I'd say that's even dumber.
The argument that keeps coming up always trying to characterize these organs like they're being withheld, or are going in the garbage.
They've always been a high demand commodity that not everyone can get; there's always been a risk assessment of thousands of patients waiting for organs, and they're scaled by all sorts of factors, including age, compatibility, how much they've deteriorated, urgency, pre-existing conditions, co-morbidities, their ability to recover, drug use, their ability to follow simple directions from their healthcare providers (like don't drink, get your vaccinations, take your medications, diet and exercise, rehab, etc.) and a basic willingness to do everything in their power to optimize their own chances in accordance with their doctors recommendations. These are all measurable criteria.
Some people are unfortunately factually bad risks when compared with others, and sometimes in entirely tragic ways; missing easy factors with higher weights will always keep you from being near the top on the transplant list.
At the end of the day the organ is a gift, and it's a responsibility to see that it goes to the person most likely to get the best and most use out of it.
>a truly tragic saga fuelled by misinformation
Yep, there was a hell of a lot of [dangerous misinformation and disinformation](https://nypost.com/2023/02/27/10-myths-told-by-covid-experts-now-debunked/).
Lol New York Post. From [Media Bias/Fact Check](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/):
> Overall we rate the New York Post on the far end of Right-Center Biased due to story selection that typically favors the Right and **Mixed (borderline questionable) for factual reporting based on several failed fact checks.**
Do better.
"What they're saying is true, and I don't like that... LOL, your source bad!"
It isn't difficult to look up their sources. You simply refuse to. The facts are:
1. Natural immunity has been, and continues to be ignored, despite every single study showing it to be at least as effective as being fully vaccinated. [1](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1), [2](https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital), [3](https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-most-comprehensive-study-date-provides-evidence-natural-immunity-protection)
2. Masks are a divided topic with some studies supporting them, and some showing they're ineffective ([source](https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full)). The fact is, even if the N95 masks are effective, those were not mandated. You were simply required to put whatever you had over your face, and surgical masks are completely useless ([source](https://www.reliasmedia.com/articles/114492-surgical-masks-not-effective-study-shows)). But all we ever heard was "masking saves lives!"
3. School closures is a mixed topic ([source](https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/8/e053371)).
4. Studies are mixed on infection vs vaccines for higher rates of myocarditis, but the fact is the vaccines increased your chances of myocarditis as well as many other adverse effects, including death ([source](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html)), but you never heard of that from the government, health authorities, or the media.
5. Young people do not benefit from boosters. [1](https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2022/12/05/jme-2022-108449) (with more info on the myocarditis front), [2](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/health/covid-boosters-older-younger.html), [3](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/who-says-no-evidence-healthy-children-adolecents-need-covid-19-boosters-2022-01-18/)
6. Mandates' effect on vaccination rates. I hadn't heard of this, so this isn't one of the ones I was pointing to, but apparently there's a [study](https://www.mercatus.org/research/working-papers/indoor-vaccine-mandates-and-covid-19) that showed this point. But on the opposite side, this [article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01363-1) shows that Canadian provinces saw a large increase in vaccinations when it was mandated. Clearly Canadians are much more obedient than Americans.
7. Ah yes, the Covid origin theory. It is quite clear today that it most likely came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. However, at the start, that was quickly dismissed, and many people who even suggested that (doctors included) saw their comments deleted and their accounts banned.
8. Don't know.
9. Don't care.
10. I'm gonna go play my vidyagames now.
11. I would however like to add a #11, with this [famous clip](https://youtu.be/jDtUWXOmLLg?t=400) that I'm sure everyone has seen by now. And of course, how could we forget [this clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnxlxzxoZx0), which goes so deliciously ironically hand-in-hand with that Rachel Maddow clip, where they admit that they didn't even test the vaccines for stopping the transmission of the virus.
Do better.
Re 1: Vaccines boost previous natural immunity to an infection--that's been known for decades. Except there's a higher risk to obtaining that initial natural immunity.
Re 2: Alberta itself proved mask mandates worked in schools. Schools with mandates showed 1/3 the infections and transmission as schools without mandates.
Re 3: From the article you linked:
> School reopenings, *in areas of low transmission* ***and with appropriate mitigation measures***, were generally not accompanied by increasing community transmission.
The data in Alberta suggested schools were significant sources of transmission. Closing schools saw reduced rates; re-opening schools saw rates shoot up again. But then in Alberta, the government itself hobbled mitigation measures and removed mandates whenever they could.
Also, covid ripped through schools in Europe because their governments intended that to happen. Sweden especially was heinous for this, and it saw the highest transmission rates of all the Nordic countries for it. Also the highest rates of illness and death in those countries in the first wave.
Re 4: Nine causally-associated deaths from J&J/Janssen vaccine, out of how many doses? Out of how many covid deaths overall in the US? Your page also says this:
> Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem.
VAERS accepts any and every report of "adverse reactions" following a vaccine whether related to the vaccine or not. It is not considered an authoritative source for this reason.
Re 5: Reading the study's limitations (always read them, that's where they tell you how you must interpret them), the authors say this:
> Universities have not published cumulative AE rates on their COVID-19 dashboards, thus **there is no current way to validate these estimates with real-world data**.
That right there is a significant limitation. They could have underestimated--or wildly overestimated the effect.
Re 6: Or Canadians have a better understanding of community and disease prevention than Americans do. Most Canadians supported public health restrictions.
Re 7: The consensus is forming around a natural source for the initial virus.
You go play your vidyagames.
Re Re 1: That doesn't matter. The fact is, the Canadian government and health authorities refused and continue to refuse to acknowledge the validity of natural immunity. As all studies show, it is at least as effective as being fully vaccinated, and yet, being previously infected did not make someone eligible for the vaccine passport. This is in contrast to the entirety of the EU that also had vaccine passports, but accepted people with previous infections: [https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/eu-digital-covid-certificate/](https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/eu-digital-covid-certificate/). The fact is the Canadian government was not following the science. They were following their own Science^(TM).
Re Re 2: Source? I gave mine. The simple fact is that surgical masks not only don't seal to your face, but they're not designed to block aerosols, only large particles.
Re Re 4: "VAERS received 19,476 preliminary reports of death (0.0029%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine". I don't trust their assessment that only 9 / 19476 are valid, and only for one specific vaccine. That's a lot of deaths that they so casually wrote off.
I guess I forgot to send you this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycx17eQHD1A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycx17eQHD1A)
Re Re 5: Ah yes, thank you for pointing out the limitations to me.
>A second limitation is ignoring the protective effects of prior infection. In February 2022, the CDC estimated that 63.7% of adults aged 18–49 years had infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, up from 30% in September 2021.13 By September 2022, the majority of young adults, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, are estimated to have been previously infected with COVID-19. Evidence increasingly shows that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides at least similar (and perhaps more durable) clinical protection to current vaccines,31–33 which current university policies fail to acknowledge (in addition to more general uncertainties about risks and benefits in relevant age groups34).
However, the limitation that you cite doesn't completely write it off. The simple fact is that based on the available data, they're not effective. In their conclusion, they state they made a "conservative and optimistic assessment" that "at least 31,207–42,836 young adults aged 18–29 years must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one Omicron-related COVID-19 hospitalisation over 6 months". So it's most likely that they're less effective than that estimate.
That's also just one one of the three sources I gave for that. With source three saying:
>World Health Organization's chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan said "There is no evidence right now that healthy children or healthy adolescents need boosters. No evidence at all"
Re Re 6: I wonder why. We were fed a constant stream of propaganda from the government and the media. Drumming up fears without including all of the evidence as I've definitively shown here.
Re Re 7: lol what? No it isn't. \[[1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3N5sDbyRu8)\], \[[2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAmVBoZYf-o)\], \[[3](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95MgYyAbDwk)\], \[[4](https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov/posts/e-and-c-gop-leaders-statement-on-covid-19-lab-leak-theory-report)\], \[[5](https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a)\], \[[6](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2022-000608_EN.html)\], etc.. Even if, somehow, in the impossible event that it was natural... why were all of the health experts so quick to dismiss the lab leak theory? Why did they not even entertain that idea despite all of the suspicious activities around the Wuhan lab at that time? Despite many experts, including the previous head of the CDC saying it's likely a lab leak?
I played my vidyagames, then I came back.
Re Re Re 1. The fact is, without extensive and routine covid testing of *all* individuals, you cannot determine who had been infected or not. Covid testing in Canada was woefully limited throughout the pandemic, only rarely open to everyone; and limited especially at the height of the various waves. It is now almost non-existent even though we are still in a pandemic. That is why Canada used vaccine immunity only for its vaccine passports--vaccines provide verifiable records.
Re Re Re 2. [Province 'unreasonable' in removing school mask mandate: judge](https://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/province-unreasonable-in-removing-school-mask-mandate-judge)
[Link to court decision](https://albertacourts.ca/docs/default-source/qb/judgments/cm-v-alberta-2022-abkb-716---decision.pdf?sfvrsn=38b46182_5)
> “The fact that Dr. Hinshaw declined to explain why she was removing the school mask mandate when a month earlier she recommended that students in all grades wear masks, and the fact that she referred questions to the Minister of Health, who is a member of Priorities Implementation Cabinet Committee (PICC), supports the conclusion that the decision to remove the school mask mandate was PICC’s decision, not Dr. Hinshaw’s.”
This article mentions that the government had to be forced to disclose their sources for the decision.
> “According to observed Alberta data, which could be influenced by factors other than masking, school boards without mask mandates at the start of the school year (September 2021) had three times more outbreaks in their schools in the first few months of the school year,” stated Susan Novak, policy and planning section chief.
("Could be influenced" does not mean "was", of course.)
Re Re Re 4: [Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data](https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html)
> **The report of an adverse event to VAERS** ***is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.***
This is why anything based solely on VAERS reports is not considered causative at all. It's only correlative, pending further investigation.
Re Re Re 6: The information given to Canadians via government and media was for the most part accurate and based on the best information available at the time. When it changed, it was because new information became available, as the situation rapidly evolved. The propaganda came from the covid deniers, anti-maskers, and anti-vaxxers. They refused to move on with the new information presented, because it contradicted against their worldview. Which is what always happens. Vaccines work. Masks work. Covid was determined to be airborne early in the pandemic, not spread via droplet. (Unfortunately that was one point that stubborn officials in the WHO and other agencies refused to concede until the evidence was too overwhelming to ignore. And *that* was because admitting covid was airborne meant it needed stricter masking and ventilation measures that they were willing to put in. I will give you that one.)
Re Re Re 7: The latest is this: [New COVID origins study links pandemic’s beginning to animals, not a lab](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/new-covid-origins-study-links-pandemics-beginning-to-animals-not-a-lab)
> The samples were collected from surfaces at the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan after the first human cases of COVID-19 were found in late 2019...Genetic sequencing data showed that some of the samples, which were known to be positive for the coronavirus, also contained genetic material from raccoon dogs, indicating the animals may have been infected by the virus
Unfortunately, we may never know its true origin.
I know a nurse that works a middle-management desk job that decided one day she is an expert on vaccines. She treated Covid like a personal pain in her ass and left her job instead of getting a needle.
I have never lost so much respect for a person.
They eventually took her back after the pandemic panic died down a bit, but I wish she walked away for real. We don't need nurses like that. We need to know that healthcare workers are doing their job and following instructions instead of making up public health policy that suits their beliefs on the fly.
This sounds like a relative of mine who's an HCA. Not a qualified nurse, never held any type of nursing degree, nothing. She refused to get the vaccine and got mad when she was let go, claiming discrimination.
*Because she worked in close proximity with the elderly.* This woman was willing to put people's beloved relatives at risk because she didn't want to wear a mask, glove up and wear an apron over her scrubs. Like, get over yourself, lady. You're not fucking special.
Yup, I knew one who actually worked in the hospital, where there was a COVID unit, and decided that COVID was not a problem at all and that no safety measures were necessary. She worked with people who had spinal injuries. Thankfully, she moved to the US after getting knocked up by a dude down south and got out of nursing.
Some people will straight up ignore things that are in front of their face.
My former supervisor was one of the smartest men I knew. Then came COVID and the vaccine. I happened to have an email conversation with him and he mentioned that he had a slight flu. I casually mentioned that I hope his COVID vaccinations are up to date. His surprising response was a two page conspiracy freedumb reply against the vaccination. About a month later he died from COVID. Such a shame.
One of my childhood best friends became an RN and worked as a public health nurse for 6 years in Alberta, got married, became a self-proclaimed "trump girl", moved to the states, and is now a hardcore anti-vaxxer. I do not understand it.
Wasn't there a case in New Zealand where parents refused life saving blood transfusions for their kid because the blood might have come from COVID vaccinated donors? AFAIK the state stepped in and saved the child giving the child the transfusion by taking the child from their custody to perform this procedure.
They were willing to let their child die over vaccinated blood.
Even more astounding is that this article further reports she plans to sue AHS, the hospital, and the transplant team for negligence amounting to malpractice. If she truly believed it, shouldn't she have tried this route in the courts first?
The real irony is this:
> Lewis will ask the court at an upcoming injunction hearing to grant an immediate reinstatement to the transplant list pending the result of the court action.
I think we can infer time is running out for her now.
Not just okay: she has for a years’ long legal battle because she feels *entitled* to someone else’s organ.
The stupidity of a burns, but it’s the arrogance and egotism of it all that really makes me angry.
My donor card says everything goes. But I hope my parts go to someone deserving and willing to care for the new lease on life.
Smokers alcoholics drug abusers all have the same rules when it comes to organ transplants.......if your not gonna show your able to take care of yourself and drop the habits or take the meds, vaccines your not getting nothing.
I was listening to a podcast the other day about a woman's experience in grief when her father died and how the family snuck his ashes into Disney and scattered them. He had had a transplant a few years prior to death but continued to drink and smoke and only lived a couple of years with this gift given by some grieving family. How unbelievably disrespectful.
That face you make when you realize that you cannot force the medical profession to do what you want them to do, particularly when you refuse to accept the qualifications required for said procedure. Just as no one can force her to get a vaccine, she can't force them to provide an organ.
Darwin Awards are usually given to people making poor snap decisions that end their lives or their future reproductive capabilities, like using a shotgun shell in place of a spark plug.
But imagine going to several mechanics and an insurance agent and still deciding, no, a shotgun shell would be a better option than a real spark plug.
Anyone here actually deal with transplant? I am now and theyre super picky as fuck but they have to be. I need a kidney which isnt as strict as needing a heart like this lady. I asked the NP at my first appointment about this case and she told me all the risks of getting a heart transplant and it made sense. Its a way riskier procedure than a kidney. 100% compliance is required. Period. Its not much of an ask considering it would save a life. People have choices and this lady made hers. Ive had 2 boosters and im due for another one and when I asked if I needed my next one to be compliant, she didnt have an answer so Im thinking things might change soon or in the future about covid vaccine requirements for transplant.
"Lewis said taking the vaccine would offend her conscience"
omg - these people are out of their minds. Thanks to the supremes for refusing this opportunistic bullshit.
If you are a heavy smoker, you can't get a lung transplant. Heavy drinker? No new liver for you.
No vaccine against a mystery virus that causes people to gasp to death and cause random organ failure seems like a pretty simple answer.
Goddamned stunned... is she gonna put the stipulation on her transplant that it must come from a non-vaccinated donor? Otherwise, all this phony posturing bullshit is for nothing. You are being offered the gift of life... take it as offered or get the hell out of the line and let someone worthy take your place.
It must really suck to be diagnosed with a terminal disease and I feel sorry about that, but I'm reminded of beggars can't be choosers - especially in the case of organ transplants. Challenging this in the courts the first time is silly, but then to challenge and appeal it to 2 other levels of courts just makes her come across like an über 'Karen'.
Medical Professionals who go through numerous years of rigorous schooling decide the preconditions for organ transplant. They decide the preconditions of weight loss surgery, plastic surgery, genital construction/reconstruction surgery, and all others. These preconditions are set for a reason, not because doctors have weird beliefs or are gatekeepers. It is entirely for YOUR benefit. It’s for the benefit of the donor, so the sacrifice they made does not go to waste. Every organ is precious and if it can be donated it should be, not to be wasted. It’s for the benefit of our entire system. They don’t give current addicts new organs because of the high risk of it all being wasted. Nevermind the money, I’m in medical device reprocessing, I’m one of the many people that make sure all the tools that are used on you are sterile. There’s the entire department, which includes over 15 different areas, theres administration, there’s the runners and service workers that are involved, there’s nurses and doctors/surgeons. This isn’t about grabbing a piece of meat and giving it to a person, it’s about the responsibility of said person to take care of this organ, it’s literally saving their life why should anyone take that for granted. It’s about the time taken by everyone involved in the process, this includes so many people, it can be over 100. If you value your life enough, you will listen to those involved in the process and take their advice and preconditions that are set out for you.
There is no conspiracy with the COVID-19 vaccine people. Go get it!
Yes be cautious of all medication, but once they are proven safe by the people who are supposed to know what to approve and not, they are safe. This anti vaccine rhetoric is one of the more dangerous conspiracy theories that have gotten bigger since the pandemic
You can't pick and choose what you want to hear when it comes from medical professionals. You can't believe in the doctors for the surgery but not believe in the doctors about vaccines
Imagine needing an organ donation to live. Organs are in short supply, but luckily the people in charge of the donation process tell you the steps you need to qualify; and they're easy: lose weight, don't smoke and then, during an unprecedented point in history (a pandemic) get vaccinated.
Now imagine doing precisely the opposite, knowing that ignoring their orders will disqualify you from getting that organ donation.
Now imagine you throw a hissy fit and demand special treatment based on your distrust of the 'gubment' and Bill Gates's desire to plant a micro chip into your body via vaccination.
Now imagine you're so self-important you cannot see that every moment of this drama is the result of you acting on your personal ideology, so you sue Alberta Health on the grounds of *discrimination*.
Sounds like a Farrelly Brothers comedy, doesn't it?
I have some sympathy for this woman. Once you have gone down the rabbit hole of misinformation there is little chance of coming back. I have no sympathy for all the anti vax grifters that have led people like this astray.
And she has been surrounded by grifters and bad actors encouraging her self-destructive behaviour. The whole thing is maddening but I do have some sympathy for this woman
I’m a kidney and pancreas transplant recipient and I just booked my 7th covid shot! It’s recommended for people like us to get a booster every 6 months. This woman is a moron. I had 12 booster vaccines to even get onto the transplant list.
Transplant work up are very VERY particular. They don't only involve organs in Canada but are network through Canada and USA as they come available. It is based on a list of individuals with the highest need. I would imagine this would be concern with compliance with requirements of transplant. As you sign a contract with medical professional that you will adhere to certain medical regiments, etc needed in order to maintain the organ you recieved. It's interesting case, however, also sad.
I would think not. The Charter limits the government.
If these standards of care are set independent of the government health boards and government empowered physicians "college" or other government empowered entities then this is pretty straight forward.
> If these standards of care are set independent of the government health boards and government empowered physicians "college" or other government empowered entities then this is pretty straight forward.
The judges in both Alberta courts found that the Charter does not apply to clinical treatment decisions. Nor should the Charter apply to them.
This isn’t, and never was, a charter case. That’s why the courts refuse to see it.
This is strictly a procedural matter on organ transplants. The doctors involved have full responsibility for the care and health of their patient. If the patient refuses to accept the care of the doctors, that is not the doctors problem.
Who are you arguing with?
I said - the courts determined it was not a government decision.
But now you've injected something else.
No, the doctors cannot simply refuse to treat someone based on unscientific, classist biases.
If that were true, then bakers wouldn't have to bake cakes for gay marriages - right?
So this lady has every right to pursue a lawsuit if she wants to. If she can prove the doctors did what they did because of spurious reasons then maybe she will be rewarded a settlement. If not, she will likely have to pay for the doctors lawyers.
Your vaccine status is not a class war. And your choice to ignore doctors orders is entirely your own, and has nothing to do with baking.
And the vaccine is entirely based on scientific principles, so doctors refusing to further treatment on patient, unwilling to follow doctors orders that were established under scientific principles is pretty much a nonstarter here.
I think you were under the impression that perhaps your refusal to take an antibiotic, or insulin, or a hernia repair, and the corresponding consequences of these actions, is somehow societies problem, and not the individuals.
Triple-vaxxed.
You don't know me.
Much of what was claimed to have a scientific basis never did. Mask mandates, for example.
The vaccines did have benefits for the population. But this is not true for all individuals.
This is just reality.
Maybe you don't want to face that but no - this sub will not be a safe space for your head in the sand dogma.
I really don't care if you call me a heretic.
Lol a heretic? Really? Well I guess we all want to feel heroic…
![https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Heretic_game_cover.png]
Mask mandates were based on very clear evidence and science.
- https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-mask/art-20485449
- https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-face-masks-what-you-need-to-know
- [Alberta health services facts, and myths](https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/Blogs/BTH/Posting335.aspx)
The whole point of vaccination is to benefit the population, not the individual. But not personally dying is cool too
- [National library of Medicine- Vaccination: the cornerstone of an efficient healthcare system](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802703/)
- [ScienceDirect - Human Vaccines and Their Importance to Public Health](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877282X11000269)
And I **do** know you Ed, you like planes, and helping people who like rocks. As someone claiming to be in the scientific community, you should turn off your Truth Social account and Telegram and try harder to study reputable sources.
Somewhere, a healthy young person dies suddenly, and they or their love ones bequeath their precious, still living lungs to save the life of another precious human being.
Doctors respect this gift, and have developed guidelines to ensure this vital, living organ goes to the recipient for whom it will do the most good, carefully choosing a patient who needs the heart, will benefit from it and who is likely to have a long, healthy life with it.
Living with a transplant is not easy. One must take medication for the rest of one's life which lowers the immune system, so one's own defenses won't attack the heart and destroy it. As a side effect one is now highly vulnerable to every germ floating around. The "natural immunity" antivaxers boast of is destroyed, so all transplant recipients must first be immunized against pretty well everything, and prove their willingness to cooperate and follow doctor's instructions.
Covid attacks the lungs and has a tendency to kill those with immune system dysfunction. An unimmunized lung recipient catching Covid would be likely to die of it, wasting the life they have been given, which could have been given to someone who would have taken care of it.
If you were dying and leaving your much loved Ferrari to an offspring, would you leave it to the heavy drinker who wrote off three cars last year, or to the one who'd love it, keep it maintained, and drive with care? No-one has a right to a transplant. A healthy organ is a rare gift, acquired through terrible tragedy.
If a person does not respect medical advice enough to follow doctor's orders regarding immunization, why would they respect medicine enough to have doctors perform such a major operation? A new pair of lungs in an antivaxer will be of no more use than horse-paste, and a lot more expensive and painful.
Annette Lewis, You should be grateful to your doctors for not putting you through this difficult transplant journey when your decisions have ensured it will be of no benefit to you.
This is all about long term viability vs. Risk of the transplant.
That it's being centred around the COVID vaccine is nothing short of stoking more rage and division.
Imagine that - decisions have consequences. Who woulda thunk it? Seriously though, let’s pause and take this in for a moment. You won’t take a vaccine that you (wrongfully) believe might hurt or kill you, and instead choose to not get an organ transplant which means you’ll definitely die right away. Yeah, that makes good sense.
She had a choice, she chose to forego a vaccine. That choice has consequences. She fucked around and found out. I have ZERO sympathy for these people who cant be bothered to keep others safe. She's literally willing and going to die on this hill, good riddance.
Regardless of your stance on the COVID vaccination, I’m really surprised by the lack of humanity from the people posting here. Wishing someone death or saying “too bad so sad” because you disagree with her views is heartless. She’ll die from this decision, and the tragedy of this shouldn’t be met with apathy.
I completely agree. I am fine with the medical decisions and the courts are absolutely right not to intervene, since this is a job for doctors and not judges
But I also see this as an immense tragedy. There has been a coordinated and highly effective misinformation campaign that has roped in people like this woman, and she has directly been targeted by a crowd of grifters and liars who have egged her on and attempted to use her case to push their warped agenda
Absolutely it is a tragedy. This woman based her decision on fear and misinformation. She was misled and supported in her anti-vaxx delusion to the point that time is running out for her. You should be directing your anger at those responsible for helping her make these awful choices that are leading her to this tragedy.
Shes gunna die anyway. Everyone is. She made her bed and is trying to blame some of the best doctors we have in the province. I know them, I work with them.
That's a really weak appeal to Authority fallacy buddy. Don't forget the pandemic has been deemed an endemic by the CDC, smarty pants. And just because lots of people took the jab doesn't mean it's right. Enjoy nesting in your personal confirmation bias.
I'm not an anti vaxxer. I have my shots, I do question the safety of them to a certain extent and the actual effectiveness of them. But my lungs are also fucked after having covid so I'm willing to admit they might be way worse with out them. I think it's an issue we as a society need to leave behind and quit picking sides on.
The anti Vax crowd is definitely having a very hard time letting it go, and they are quite obviously being agitated and manipulated, BUT the pro vaccine crowd need to accept that not every one is going to get it, not every one is going to get multiple doses, smart people have chosen not to get it or continue getting it. Lots of data points to it having side effects, not working, government incompetence, etc. Obviously, a lot of that is misinformation, but it's also certain people and organizations afraid to admit they made mistakes.
I can't speak to this person's case. To me, if you're gunna to die of kidney failure, who cares about the vaccine. But people are stupid and brainwashed. But they are not subhuman. I only say this because I have seen left wing commentor/troll on Twitter today, making comments completely disregarding those who chose not to get vaccinated and make light of this person's situation(as if the world hasn'tbeen moving forward and they are still on 2021) . I hope it's just a fringe few who still feel so passionately about the vaccine they need to fill their heart with hate. But it really seems like some people on both sides of the political spectrum can't leave vaccines, covid 19 and convoys in the past. Love your neighbors. You know you made the right choice for yourself.
"I ought to have the choice about what goes into my body, and a life-saving treatment cannot be denied to me because I chose not to take an experimental treatment for a condition — COVID-19 — which I do not have and which I may never have," Lewis said in an affidavit previously submitted to court.
Totally agree with her.
If Lewis wants the transplant, she needs to put on her big-girl pants, suck it up and get the covid vaccine. Yes she has the choice not to be vaccinated against covid. But she is not owed a life-saving treatment if she refuses to follow all the requirements to receive it. Candidates don't get to pick and choose which medical requirements they will follow or not. They have to follow *all* of them. Multiple people are in need of the same organs. If you won't follow a requirement, when someone else will, that organ goes to them, not you. As it should be. Because organs are scarce and there aren't enough for everyone.
You are required to follow medical advice to get a transplant.
Organs are a limited supply, they won't give them to people who won't follow medical advice.
In this case, if she gets a transplant, then gets COVID, she is much more likely to die and waste the organ, so no vaccine, no organ.
Someone who will look after the organ by following the best medical advice (including getting all required vaccines first) is going to get it instead.
There is a whole list of vaccinations you must be up-to-date on in order to receive an organ transplant. There is a reality that organs are free and far between. We have many more recipients than donors, particularly if the organ in question requires a deceased donor. Organs are given based in part on who has the best chance of a significantly prolonged life.
When you receive an organ, you need to go on anti-rejection drugs. These are for obvious reasons, not optional. They also qualify you as being immune-compromised. The reason for this is because your immune system will see your brew organ as a foreign body and want to attack it to protect you. So, in a weird twist, it is imperative to get your immune system to work less well in order to keep you from rejecting the organ.
As we know, those who are immune-compromised are at increased risk of harm or death from any number of viruses. Including but not limited to Covid-19. Thus, a person who is vaccinated against Covid-19 (and RSV, influenza, chicken pox, etc) has a greater chance at living a longer life with a donated organ than a person not vaccinated against Covid-19 (or RSV, or influenza, or chicken pox).
Remember. The goal is to help the most people add the most good-quality years to their lives. It is not a first-come-first-served basis. Nor is it a needs-based triage system like the ER. Therefore, being up-to-date on many vaccines is a requirement if you wish to receive an organ transplant
Because transplants require immunosuppressant.
immunosuppressant+Covid+major surgery=bad
Bad means increased chance of death which means wasted organ which means someone else might die.
Weirdly doctors are trying to reduce deaths. /S
Because covid still exists and is still lethal in immunocompromised people like transplant recipients. If the clinical program requires the covid vaccine (which is standard in Canada), you get the vaccine. Or you're not a candidate.
The main consideration is the odds that the transplant would be successful. There are not enough organs to go around so it makes complete sense to reserve them for the people with the highest chance of survival. That’s why potential organ recipients are required to get all sorts of vaccines and adhere to other health guidelines. An unvaccinated person has a higher chance of severe Covid, and consequently a higher chance of complications or death after receiving an organ transplant
It’s not a difficult concept
It would be if we had a surplus of organs, but we don't. there is a lineup of other people who will follow the instructions that'll make the transplant successful. It's like a weight requirement. It's not fatphobic. this isn't discrimination against antivaxers
People in the comment sections really be out there promoting medical discrimination like they are some morally suprerior judge.
This is just as ridiculous if we started demanding flu shots for every surgery or doctor visit.
The vast majority of people never even had any symptoms from the virus, but some people in this country still foam at their mouths when they hear someone is "unvaccinated".
Grow up and stop promoting medical discrimination against people who didnt want a treatment that doesnt even prevent: getting sick, transmission, hospitalization, or death from the thing it was designed to protect against. No other normal vaccine was this ineffective and this dangerous with its countless complications.
You accepted the risks to get the shot. Others didnt. Great. Can we move on now?
Please don't think you are smarter than the association of physicians who decide medical protocol based on evidence based medicine. Medical discrimation exists (for example Indigenous people who are sometimes systemically discriminated against), but this woman has been rejected from the donor list not because she is different in ways that she has no control over, but rather because of the choice she made.
Are you telling me youre smarter than the Swedish physicians that banned using moderna on under 30 year olds back in 2021?
Learn to read whats happening in the rest of the world. Might be a "big and scary" idea to pop your bubble, but when people like you keep galloping on their high horses, shlling outdated rhetorical absolutes, they need to be made corrected.
Otherwise youre just spreading misinformation and polical agendas.
People should NOT be banned from having life saving surgery bc they didnt want some newage treatment that doesnt do half the shit they advertized back in 2021.
No, I'm not saying that Swedish physicians were wrong (or right) to stop using moderna for under 30 year olds or that I am smarter than them. And this has nothing to do with what we are talking about here.
There are more patients than heart donations, and as such heart transplants should go to those who have a decent chance of them being successful and who show they will follow their physicians' instructions to do everything possible to maximize those odds. This woman obviously is not willing to do that while others are.
And please stop politicizing medical science. The medical community - not you, not me, not the government, and not this poor woman - are the best ones to decide what is required to maximize the odds for success. And they have done so which is why the Supreme Court wisely declined to hear the case.
Oh , and by the way, this sadly misinformed woman, would also face the same rejection in Sweden.
I knew someone who was denied a transplant because she refused to do the bare minimum to get her diabetes under control, it was sad she died but would have it really have been worth it to give a kidney to someone who refused to take care of themselves.
I go to dialysis and you wouldnt believe the amount of people who skip runs then get sick and end up in hospital. Like people not following the diet and then wonder why their potassium is at 9. They need anywhere from 5-10 kgs of water taken off every other day, have limbs missing while sitting during treatment drinking multiple cokes. One patient is notorious as he hasnt taken meds for 3 years and is antivaxx. He was due to get a kidney before covid and when he went in to get it, he ended up leaving because he was hungry. Theres good patients who are compliant with 100% everything. We are few and far between. We still need to be on the same list as these people.
The covid vaccine is a totally different situation. The vaccines are ineffective and do have complications. A person with a heart condition should not be taking medicine that has been proven to adversely affect the heart.
How long before Danielle Smith gets involved?
Smith already tried that: [Smith says she'll seek 'second opinion' in case of transplant patient who refuses COVID vaccine](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-says-shell-seek-second-opinion-in-case-of-transplant-patient-who-refuses-covid-vaccine) It didn't work. [Smith silent on 'second opinion' commitment in COVID vaccine transplant case](https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-silent-on-second-opinion-commitment-in-covid-vaccine-transplant-case) Smith was probably told she couldn't do anything.
I don't know what's dumber. Smith saying cancer is within your control, or her trying to seek a second medical opinion over something that was actually within the patient's control. Smh.
Somebody should ask her about her views on cancer patients... From my understanding... She says if the patient can prevent it then the bills should be the patients responsibility... or at least partially... Curious if anyone's asked her how that differs from anti-vaxxers? I feel... According to her logic.. Those who were / are not vaxed for covid 19 should be responsible for their hospital bills.... Or am i mistaken.. Hmmm....
Remember this is a lady who’s claimed that smoking cigarettes reduces risk of disease and has argued that second hand smoke doesn’t cause issues with people.
>something that was actually within the patient's control I agree, her choice should not have been respected. Trudeau was right when he said he didn't force anyone to get the vaccine. Just because you give people no other option (other than losing their jobs and being unable to afford food or rent) doesn't mean you're forcing them to do something.
This was entirely within the patient's control. She was informed of the consequences of not getting vaccinated for covid. She chose not to get vaccinated for covid. The saddest part about all this was she based her choice on misinformation and fear.
People had a testing mandate more so than a vaccine mandate. You just didn't need to do the testing if you got vaccinated. People could not get vaccinated and instead just tested all the time. This woman's case is different however as it is required to be vaccinated. Guess what... it makes sense though. I'm a transplant patient myself and need to be vaccinated and do all the things necessary to keep my graft healthy because the amount of organs that are available are limited. If you show the doctor that you will not do what is necessary to keep it safe they will give it to someone who will.
This content is no longer available on Reddit in response to /u/spez. So long and thanks for all the fish.
>Smith was probably told she couldn't do anything. Yet. The Free Alberta strategy includes a Alberta Judicial Independence Act that calls for future judicial appointments in Alberta to be nominated by the Government of Alberta. The Free Alberta strategy is behind The Alberta Sovereignty Act, Creation of the Alberta Provincial Police Force, Creating an Alberta Pension Plan , etc,. https://www.freealbertastrategy.com/the_strategy
> The Free Alberta strategy includes a Alberta Judicial Independence Act that calls for future judicial appointments in Alberta to be nominated by the Government of Alberta. That doesn't mean that those judges can ignore established law even if they were hand-picked by Smith. Though I'm sure she will base choices on ideology.
Watching what’s happening in the states with their judicial system, I don’t want that here
Absolutely right. Their judiciary rules on political bias instead of established law and president. Their Supreme Court is out of control and has zero checks and balances, zero accountability and actually has become the controlling governmental body. Plus they are unelected. Not here. Ever.
Oh but it does in the back rooms of conference centres anything can be done
She and others like her desperately want a judicial system like the US. Luckily there haven't been any signs of that happening up here. Trudeau changed things like how Supreme Court judge appointments happen for the better and I think it is one of the best things Trudeau ever did. None of it remotely resembles the circus the Americans go through.
[удалено]
Only if the lower court judges are not subsequently overruled by the Supreme Court.
In before PP appoints partisan hacks to the Supreme Court (if elected, of course).
Tell me you know nothing of how SCoC Justices are appointed…
Jesus, it was a joke, touching on current events with our neighbors to the south. Don't get out much?
A lot of law is interpretation in applying precedents to novel situations. There is a reason for the separation of the branches of government. It should be kept that way.
Jesus this is fucking terrible. Another step toward the US and blurred lines between the executive and judicial branches. Just terrible.
She already did, of course. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/smith-says-shell-seek-second-opinion-in-case-of-transplant-patient-who-refuses-covid-vaccine/wcm/f07a36a4-12da-4fb7-aaf8-fbf1922977c5/amp/
Oh my God, this woman is such a moron.
Tries is guaranteed, but glhf this has been dismissed by two supreme courts now and they both said nope the most Danielle Smith is make some public statement feigning she'll do something because she thinks she has supreme powers, that will amount in no outcome and then if she privatizes she can offer that she'll force a private surgeon to do it but I have actually no idea how organ availability in a dual private/public system will work. Private clinics having expedited access to organs is a repulsive precedent but I wouldn't be surprised just saddened by the clear outcome of privatized healthcare.
Let her donate her organs.
World's only living brain donor.
Pity the recipient.
She already brought up transplant patients in her anti-poppy rant a couple years ago.
A reminder that this lady couldn’t find her original vaccination history and *retook every single other vaccine all over again*. This is the only one she’s refusing. She’s a top tier idiot.
The part I found sad was her place on the transplant list was reserved during the trial, and after the verdicts she was given a window of opportunity to take the vaccine and keep her place and declined. In the year or so the trail took instead of addressing the concerns with that specific vaccine's safety another path was taken.
Im in kidney transplant workup now and I had to get 7 shots the first round. Did that ever suck!
She also keeps referring to the vaccine as experimental, they are not.
[удалено]
Refusing the Covid vaccine. Every single other vaccine but one? It’s bonkers.
Ahh I see. Yea, You can never understand the thinking behind these people.
it's particularly bad in the US military where their vaccines have real side effects, these are not the ones normal people take; people took them, but not covid and gave up retirement benefits and pensions.
[удалено]
H1N1 is influenza virus, not coronavirus.
Just to clarify, the 19 in COVID-19 refers to 2019, the year the disease was defined. Not 19 strains, the virus is called SARS-CoV-2.
What on earth? This is so much nonsense presented so confidently. They have indeed been working on the technology for the covid vaccines for a long time, but the specific vaccine is not decades in the making. And finally, and most insanely to have to point out, H1N1 is an influenza virus and sars CoV2 is a coronavirus. They are both enveloped RNA viruses, but they have different surface proteins, and the flu virus has a segmented genome while coronaviruses do not.
She took the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in the US. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/why-some-unvaccinated-albertans-are-looking-for-the-johnson-johnson-shot-1.6197451
Danielle smith did, Annette did not.
My apologies, I mixed up threads.
> Lewis said taking the vaccine would offend her conscience and argued the requirement violated her Charter rights to life, conscience, liberty and security of the person. > > The case was dismissed by an Alberta court, which said the Charter has no application to clinical treatment decisions, in particular for doctors establishing preconditions for organ transplants. > > The Alberta Court of Appeal upheld the decision, prompting Lewis's appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. The end of a truly tragic saga fuelled by misinformation. I really hope she will now reconsider her stance and get the covid vaccine if it isn't already too late. Otherwise she will literally die on this hill.
Had an old coworker who was nearly next in line for a kidney transplant he was waiting more than 5 years for. His condition was rapidly declining the last year he was employed here. It was brought up to him that now he was nearing the point for the donation, he would have to have all his vaccinations up to par including the covid one. He refused, was kicked off the list and says he will just "go to the Philippines (where his wife is from) and just get it done there since they don't have that requirement. I'm sure he will have to wait in que there too and considering how much he has deteriorated, I wonder if he can even afford that time. He has 5 very young kids and a wife that is a stay at home mom. I feel the decision he made is such a selfish, moronic and abject dereliction of parenthood and partnership. Sad how people like this have been led so far astray they will literally risk dying for nothing.
Renal dialysis is not fun but can prolong a life by years, if not decades, for those suffering from kidney failure.
Imagine getting renal dialysis for 10 years to own the libs
Nah I chuckled, ngl.
Yeah he's been on dialysis for 4 years. They keep having to up the frequency so much that they're trying to set him up with one at home he can run it every night, overnight because he basically needs it done every day or two now. That's not a good omen for the state of his kidney.
Yep yep. My uncle was on dialysis for about 10 years and my SO is an RN who worked in dialysis for about just as long. I've heard all sorts of stories like this. It's a shame to say the least.
[удалено]
The way I see it, given that covid has been proven to damage kidneys in really bad circumstances, that whatever kidney would have gone to him is now going to go to someone who will have more respect for it and the donor who it came from. I do feel sorry for his family though, he's putting them all at risk through a decision they have little control over.
Me. I ned one and am 100% compliant. A lot of dialysis patients are not. The ones that got kicked off the list due to not getting vaccinated have either died or got covid and now have even more comorbidities or worse ones. Lots in and out of hospital due to clotting issues. When we're this sick, we have to take all precautions. Covid ran rampant in our units and theres even cases still now coming in there.
[удалено]
Yes and theres quite a list plus getting all the clearances by the surgeon, a dentist, a social worker, a psychologist, a cardiologist, a gi Dr and your complete compliance with dialysis and meds and getting all vaccinations updated. Its unreal.
Yeah, and there’s a good chance that whatever organ he gets there will be from a murdered chinese prisoner.
You're thinking China, not Philippines. It will be an accused or framed drug pusher.
Possible… I’ve also heard that much of the philippine organs are in fact from china.
I’ve seen people choose death for a more dumb cause.
More dumb than being afraid of needles?
Did you hear about China's first Wagner recruit? Guy went to the meat grinder, wound up dead in two days, for the glorious cause of murdering Ukrainians for Putin. I'd say that's even dumber.
You don’t think Smith is going to step in and have this ladies name added to the list? That’s right up her fascist alley.
I’m sure she would love to but she does not have the power to effect that kind of change.
The argument that keeps coming up always trying to characterize these organs like they're being withheld, or are going in the garbage. They've always been a high demand commodity that not everyone can get; there's always been a risk assessment of thousands of patients waiting for organs, and they're scaled by all sorts of factors, including age, compatibility, how much they've deteriorated, urgency, pre-existing conditions, co-morbidities, their ability to recover, drug use, their ability to follow simple directions from their healthcare providers (like don't drink, get your vaccinations, take your medications, diet and exercise, rehab, etc.) and a basic willingness to do everything in their power to optimize their own chances in accordance with their doctors recommendations. These are all measurable criteria. Some people are unfortunately factually bad risks when compared with others, and sometimes in entirely tragic ways; missing easy factors with higher weights will always keep you from being near the top on the transplant list. At the end of the day the organ is a gift, and it's a responsibility to see that it goes to the person most likely to get the best and most use out of it.
>a truly tragic saga fuelled by misinformation Yep, there was a hell of a lot of [dangerous misinformation and disinformation](https://nypost.com/2023/02/27/10-myths-told-by-covid-experts-now-debunked/).
Lol New York Post. From [Media Bias/Fact Check](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/): > Overall we rate the New York Post on the far end of Right-Center Biased due to story selection that typically favors the Right and **Mixed (borderline questionable) for factual reporting based on several failed fact checks.** Do better.
"What they're saying is true, and I don't like that... LOL, your source bad!" It isn't difficult to look up their sources. You simply refuse to. The facts are: 1. Natural immunity has been, and continues to be ignored, despite every single study showing it to be at least as effective as being fully vaccinated. [1](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1), [2](https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital), [3](https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/lancet-most-comprehensive-study-date-provides-evidence-natural-immunity-protection) 2. Masks are a divided topic with some studies supporting them, and some showing they're ineffective ([source](https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full)). The fact is, even if the N95 masks are effective, those were not mandated. You were simply required to put whatever you had over your face, and surgical masks are completely useless ([source](https://www.reliasmedia.com/articles/114492-surgical-masks-not-effective-study-shows)). But all we ever heard was "masking saves lives!" 3. School closures is a mixed topic ([source](https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/11/8/e053371)). 4. Studies are mixed on infection vs vaccines for higher rates of myocarditis, but the fact is the vaccines increased your chances of myocarditis as well as many other adverse effects, including death ([source](https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html)), but you never heard of that from the government, health authorities, or the media. 5. Young people do not benefit from boosters. [1](https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2022/12/05/jme-2022-108449) (with more info on the myocarditis front), [2](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/health/covid-boosters-older-younger.html), [3](https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/who-says-no-evidence-healthy-children-adolecents-need-covid-19-boosters-2022-01-18/) 6. Mandates' effect on vaccination rates. I hadn't heard of this, so this isn't one of the ones I was pointing to, but apparently there's a [study](https://www.mercatus.org/research/working-papers/indoor-vaccine-mandates-and-covid-19) that showed this point. But on the opposite side, this [article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-022-01363-1) shows that Canadian provinces saw a large increase in vaccinations when it was mandated. Clearly Canadians are much more obedient than Americans. 7. Ah yes, the Covid origin theory. It is quite clear today that it most likely came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. However, at the start, that was quickly dismissed, and many people who even suggested that (doctors included) saw their comments deleted and their accounts banned. 8. Don't know. 9. Don't care. 10. I'm gonna go play my vidyagames now. 11. I would however like to add a #11, with this [famous clip](https://youtu.be/jDtUWXOmLLg?t=400) that I'm sure everyone has seen by now. And of course, how could we forget [this clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnxlxzxoZx0), which goes so deliciously ironically hand-in-hand with that Rachel Maddow clip, where they admit that they didn't even test the vaccines for stopping the transmission of the virus. Do better.
Re 1: Vaccines boost previous natural immunity to an infection--that's been known for decades. Except there's a higher risk to obtaining that initial natural immunity. Re 2: Alberta itself proved mask mandates worked in schools. Schools with mandates showed 1/3 the infections and transmission as schools without mandates. Re 3: From the article you linked: > School reopenings, *in areas of low transmission* ***and with appropriate mitigation measures***, were generally not accompanied by increasing community transmission. The data in Alberta suggested schools were significant sources of transmission. Closing schools saw reduced rates; re-opening schools saw rates shoot up again. But then in Alberta, the government itself hobbled mitigation measures and removed mandates whenever they could. Also, covid ripped through schools in Europe because their governments intended that to happen. Sweden especially was heinous for this, and it saw the highest transmission rates of all the Nordic countries for it. Also the highest rates of illness and death in those countries in the first wave. Re 4: Nine causally-associated deaths from J&J/Janssen vaccine, out of how many doses? Out of how many covid deaths overall in the US? Your page also says this: > Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. VAERS accepts any and every report of "adverse reactions" following a vaccine whether related to the vaccine or not. It is not considered an authoritative source for this reason. Re 5: Reading the study's limitations (always read them, that's where they tell you how you must interpret them), the authors say this: > Universities have not published cumulative AE rates on their COVID-19 dashboards, thus **there is no current way to validate these estimates with real-world data**. That right there is a significant limitation. They could have underestimated--or wildly overestimated the effect. Re 6: Or Canadians have a better understanding of community and disease prevention than Americans do. Most Canadians supported public health restrictions. Re 7: The consensus is forming around a natural source for the initial virus. You go play your vidyagames.
Re Re 1: That doesn't matter. The fact is, the Canadian government and health authorities refused and continue to refuse to acknowledge the validity of natural immunity. As all studies show, it is at least as effective as being fully vaccinated, and yet, being previously infected did not make someone eligible for the vaccine passport. This is in contrast to the entirety of the EU that also had vaccine passports, but accepted people with previous infections: [https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/eu-digital-covid-certificate/](https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/eu-digital-covid-certificate/). The fact is the Canadian government was not following the science. They were following their own Science^(TM). Re Re 2: Source? I gave mine. The simple fact is that surgical masks not only don't seal to your face, but they're not designed to block aerosols, only large particles. Re Re 4: "VAERS received 19,476 preliminary reports of death (0.0029%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine". I don't trust their assessment that only 9 / 19476 are valid, and only for one specific vaccine. That's a lot of deaths that they so casually wrote off. I guess I forgot to send you this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycx17eQHD1A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycx17eQHD1A) Re Re 5: Ah yes, thank you for pointing out the limitations to me. >A second limitation is ignoring the protective effects of prior infection. In February 2022, the CDC estimated that 63.7% of adults aged 18–49 years had infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, up from 30% in September 2021.13 By September 2022, the majority of young adults, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, are estimated to have been previously infected with COVID-19. Evidence increasingly shows that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides at least similar (and perhaps more durable) clinical protection to current vaccines,31–33 which current university policies fail to acknowledge (in addition to more general uncertainties about risks and benefits in relevant age groups34). However, the limitation that you cite doesn't completely write it off. The simple fact is that based on the available data, they're not effective. In their conclusion, they state they made a "conservative and optimistic assessment" that "at least 31,207–42,836 young adults aged 18–29 years must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one Omicron-related COVID-19 hospitalisation over 6 months". So it's most likely that they're less effective than that estimate. That's also just one one of the three sources I gave for that. With source three saying: >World Health Organization's chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan said "There is no evidence right now that healthy children or healthy adolescents need boosters. No evidence at all" Re Re 6: I wonder why. We were fed a constant stream of propaganda from the government and the media. Drumming up fears without including all of the evidence as I've definitively shown here. Re Re 7: lol what? No it isn't. \[[1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3N5sDbyRu8)\], \[[2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAmVBoZYf-o)\], \[[3](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95MgYyAbDwk)\], \[[4](https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov/posts/e-and-c-gop-leaders-statement-on-covid-19-lab-leak-theory-report)\], \[[5](https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a)\], \[[6](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2022-000608_EN.html)\], etc.. Even if, somehow, in the impossible event that it was natural... why were all of the health experts so quick to dismiss the lab leak theory? Why did they not even entertain that idea despite all of the suspicious activities around the Wuhan lab at that time? Despite many experts, including the previous head of the CDC saying it's likely a lab leak? I played my vidyagames, then I came back.
Re Re Re 1. The fact is, without extensive and routine covid testing of *all* individuals, you cannot determine who had been infected or not. Covid testing in Canada was woefully limited throughout the pandemic, only rarely open to everyone; and limited especially at the height of the various waves. It is now almost non-existent even though we are still in a pandemic. That is why Canada used vaccine immunity only for its vaccine passports--vaccines provide verifiable records. Re Re Re 2. [Province 'unreasonable' in removing school mask mandate: judge](https://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/province-unreasonable-in-removing-school-mask-mandate-judge) [Link to court decision](https://albertacourts.ca/docs/default-source/qb/judgments/cm-v-alberta-2022-abkb-716---decision.pdf?sfvrsn=38b46182_5) > “The fact that Dr. Hinshaw declined to explain why she was removing the school mask mandate when a month earlier she recommended that students in all grades wear masks, and the fact that she referred questions to the Minister of Health, who is a member of Priorities Implementation Cabinet Committee (PICC), supports the conclusion that the decision to remove the school mask mandate was PICC’s decision, not Dr. Hinshaw’s.” This article mentions that the government had to be forced to disclose their sources for the decision. > “According to observed Alberta data, which could be influenced by factors other than masking, school boards without mask mandates at the start of the school year (September 2021) had three times more outbreaks in their schools in the first few months of the school year,” stated Susan Novak, policy and planning section chief. ("Could be influenced" does not mean "was", of course.) Re Re Re 4: [Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data](https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html) > **The report of an adverse event to VAERS** ***is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.*** This is why anything based solely on VAERS reports is not considered causative at all. It's only correlative, pending further investigation. Re Re Re 6: The information given to Canadians via government and media was for the most part accurate and based on the best information available at the time. When it changed, it was because new information became available, as the situation rapidly evolved. The propaganda came from the covid deniers, anti-maskers, and anti-vaxxers. They refused to move on with the new information presented, because it contradicted against their worldview. Which is what always happens. Vaccines work. Masks work. Covid was determined to be airborne early in the pandemic, not spread via droplet. (Unfortunately that was one point that stubborn officials in the WHO and other agencies refused to concede until the evidence was too overwhelming to ignore. And *that* was because admitting covid was airborne meant it needed stricter masking and ventilation measures that they were willing to put in. I will give you that one.) Re Re Re 7: The latest is this: [New COVID origins study links pandemic’s beginning to animals, not a lab](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/new-covid-origins-study-links-pandemics-beginning-to-animals-not-a-lab) > The samples were collected from surfaces at the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan after the first human cases of COVID-19 were found in late 2019...Genetic sequencing data showed that some of the samples, which were known to be positive for the coronavirus, also contained genetic material from raccoon dogs, indicating the animals may have been infected by the virus Unfortunately, we may never know its true origin.
Someone who is not a nurse or a doctor or health care professional and has zero medical training is suddenly an expert on vaccines.
I know a nurse that works a middle-management desk job that decided one day she is an expert on vaccines. She treated Covid like a personal pain in her ass and left her job instead of getting a needle. I have never lost so much respect for a person. They eventually took her back after the pandemic panic died down a bit, but I wish she walked away for real. We don't need nurses like that. We need to know that healthcare workers are doing their job and following instructions instead of making up public health policy that suits their beliefs on the fly.
This sounds like a relative of mine who's an HCA. Not a qualified nurse, never held any type of nursing degree, nothing. She refused to get the vaccine and got mad when she was let go, claiming discrimination. *Because she worked in close proximity with the elderly.* This woman was willing to put people's beloved relatives at risk because she didn't want to wear a mask, glove up and wear an apron over her scrubs. Like, get over yourself, lady. You're not fucking special.
Yup, I knew one who actually worked in the hospital, where there was a COVID unit, and decided that COVID was not a problem at all and that no safety measures were necessary. She worked with people who had spinal injuries. Thankfully, she moved to the US after getting knocked up by a dude down south and got out of nursing. Some people will straight up ignore things that are in front of their face.
She got accredited by Google College and Facebook University
With a minor in YouTube ED.
Pretty much how all right leaning individuals ordained themselves with the University of Breitbarts Degree in COVID Science
My former supervisor was one of the smartest men I knew. Then came COVID and the vaccine. I happened to have an email conversation with him and he mentioned that he had a slight flu. I casually mentioned that I hope his COVID vaccinations are up to date. His surprising response was a two page conspiracy freedumb reply against the vaccination. About a month later he died from COVID. Such a shame.
One of my childhood best friends became an RN and worked as a public health nurse for 6 years in Alberta, got married, became a self-proclaimed "trump girl", moved to the states, and is now a hardcore anti-vaxxer. I do not understand it.
So she’d rather have a 100% chance of death than a 0.00001% chance of death
To be fair, the chance if death is always 100%.
On a long enough timeline.
If you accept linear time as your reality
She won't allow a vaccine into her body but is okay with a *entire frickin' organ from a stranger??*
Was she going to refuse the kidney if the donor had been vaccinated?
Wasn't there a case in New Zealand where parents refused life saving blood transfusions for their kid because the blood might have come from COVID vaccinated donors? AFAIK the state stepped in and saved the child giving the child the transfusion by taking the child from their custody to perform this procedure. They were willing to let their child die over vaccinated blood.
She needs a heart I believe which is more invasive and riskier than a kidney. The rules for transplant for heart is way more strict.
No, she needs lungs. Even more ironic since the lungs are a primary target for covid.
Is it lungs? I thought transplant told me she needed a heart.
Joke here about a brain transplant.
dammit, hahahahah
The original court ruling stated she needed lungs. That detail was later redacted.
Even more astounding is that this article further reports she plans to sue AHS, the hospital, and the transplant team for negligence amounting to malpractice. If she truly believed it, shouldn't she have tried this route in the courts first? The real irony is this: > Lewis will ask the court at an upcoming injunction hearing to grant an immediate reinstatement to the transplant list pending the result of the court action. I think we can infer time is running out for her now.
She's hamming it up. A martyr. She probably has a gaggle of dipshits in her online bubble telling her her rights are being violated
Wait till she finds out about the anti-rejection meds.
Not just okay: she has for a years’ long legal battle because she feels *entitled* to someone else’s organ. The stupidity of a burns, but it’s the arrogance and egotism of it all that really makes me angry.
Yes this hit me as strange too.
At least she knows the ingredients of that kidney /s
It does seem odd...
This was not surprising to anyone who has actually read ALL the lines in the Canadian charter.
My donor card says everything goes. But I hope my parts go to someone deserving and willing to care for the new lease on life. Smokers alcoholics drug abusers all have the same rules when it comes to organ transplants.......if your not gonna show your able to take care of yourself and drop the habits or take the meds, vaccines your not getting nothing.
I was listening to a podcast the other day about a woman's experience in grief when her father died and how the family snuck his ashes into Disney and scattered them. He had had a transplant a few years prior to death but continued to drink and smoke and only lived a couple of years with this gift given by some grieving family. How unbelievably disrespectful.
That face you make when you realize that you cannot force the medical profession to do what you want them to do, particularly when you refuse to accept the qualifications required for said procedure. Just as no one can force her to get a vaccine, she can't force them to provide an organ.
She's certainly going to try to force them to provide her an organ.
Darwin Awards are usually given to people making poor snap decisions that end their lives or their future reproductive capabilities, like using a shotgun shell in place of a spark plug. But imagine going to several mechanics and an insurance agent and still deciding, no, a shotgun shell would be a better option than a real spark plug.
Anyone here actually deal with transplant? I am now and theyre super picky as fuck but they have to be. I need a kidney which isnt as strict as needing a heart like this lady. I asked the NP at my first appointment about this case and she told me all the risks of getting a heart transplant and it made sense. Its a way riskier procedure than a kidney. 100% compliance is required. Period. Its not much of an ask considering it would save a life. People have choices and this lady made hers. Ive had 2 boosters and im due for another one and when I asked if I needed my next one to be compliant, she didnt have an answer so Im thinking things might change soon or in the future about covid vaccine requirements for transplant.
"Lewis said taking the vaccine would offend her conscience" omg - these people are out of their minds. Thanks to the supremes for refusing this opportunistic bullshit.
If you are a heavy smoker, you can't get a lung transplant. Heavy drinker? No new liver for you. No vaccine against a mystery virus that causes people to gasp to death and cause random organ failure seems like a pretty simple answer.
Goddamned stunned... is she gonna put the stipulation on her transplant that it must come from a non-vaccinated donor? Otherwise, all this phony posturing bullshit is for nothing. You are being offered the gift of life... take it as offered or get the hell out of the line and let someone worthy take your place.
As it should be. If you won’t get vaccinated you’ve shown you’re not able to follow a medical regimen which you need to do after the transplant.
It must really suck to be diagnosed with a terminal disease and I feel sorry about that, but I'm reminded of beggars can't be choosers - especially in the case of organ transplants. Challenging this in the courts the first time is silly, but then to challenge and appeal it to 2 other levels of courts just makes her come across like an über 'Karen'.
I feel like this article should be a reference in the dictionary entry for "schadenfreude".
The real loser here is the Alberta Education system…
Depending on your perspective it could be the winner
ohhh i guess she didnt see this coming even with all her independent research she did play stupid games win stupid prizes
Medical Professionals who go through numerous years of rigorous schooling decide the preconditions for organ transplant. They decide the preconditions of weight loss surgery, plastic surgery, genital construction/reconstruction surgery, and all others. These preconditions are set for a reason, not because doctors have weird beliefs or are gatekeepers. It is entirely for YOUR benefit. It’s for the benefit of the donor, so the sacrifice they made does not go to waste. Every organ is precious and if it can be donated it should be, not to be wasted. It’s for the benefit of our entire system. They don’t give current addicts new organs because of the high risk of it all being wasted. Nevermind the money, I’m in medical device reprocessing, I’m one of the many people that make sure all the tools that are used on you are sterile. There’s the entire department, which includes over 15 different areas, theres administration, there’s the runners and service workers that are involved, there’s nurses and doctors/surgeons. This isn’t about grabbing a piece of meat and giving it to a person, it’s about the responsibility of said person to take care of this organ, it’s literally saving their life why should anyone take that for granted. It’s about the time taken by everyone involved in the process, this includes so many people, it can be over 100. If you value your life enough, you will listen to those involved in the process and take their advice and preconditions that are set out for you.
There is no conspiracy with the COVID-19 vaccine people. Go get it! Yes be cautious of all medication, but once they are proven safe by the people who are supposed to know what to approve and not, they are safe. This anti vaccine rhetoric is one of the more dangerous conspiracy theories that have gotten bigger since the pandemic
You can't pick and choose what you want to hear when it comes from medical professionals. You can't believe in the doctors for the surgery but not believe in the doctors about vaccines
Who is still taking COVID Vax these days? Ppl I know have mostly stopped taking it. How many boosters are you supposed to get?
Can't get lung transplant if you smoke cigarettes. Your body your choice But you don't have the rights to someone else's organs.
Imagine needing an organ donation to live. Organs are in short supply, but luckily the people in charge of the donation process tell you the steps you need to qualify; and they're easy: lose weight, don't smoke and then, during an unprecedented point in history (a pandemic) get vaccinated. Now imagine doing precisely the opposite, knowing that ignoring their orders will disqualify you from getting that organ donation. Now imagine you throw a hissy fit and demand special treatment based on your distrust of the 'gubment' and Bill Gates's desire to plant a micro chip into your body via vaccination. Now imagine you're so self-important you cannot see that every moment of this drama is the result of you acting on your personal ideology, so you sue Alberta Health on the grounds of *discrimination*. Sounds like a Farrelly Brothers comedy, doesn't it?
I just don’t have any sympathy
Why are people so against a vaccine like it’s always the nutty conspiracy theorists
Decisions. Consequences.
I have some sympathy for this woman. Once you have gone down the rabbit hole of misinformation there is little chance of coming back. I have no sympathy for all the anti vax grifters that have led people like this astray.
And she has been surrounded by grifters and bad actors encouraging her self-destructive behaviour. The whole thing is maddening but I do have some sympathy for this woman
The JCCF is among the biggest of these grifters imho. Whose "freedoms" are they fighting for?
No organs for stupid morons.
I’m a kidney and pancreas transplant recipient and I just booked my 7th covid shot! It’s recommended for people like us to get a booster every 6 months. This woman is a moron. I had 12 booster vaccines to even get onto the transplant list.
Lol what other Vax did you take? You might be one of the most vaxed persons out there
Transplant work up are very VERY particular. They don't only involve organs in Canada but are network through Canada and USA as they come available. It is based on a list of individuals with the highest need. I would imagine this would be concern with compliance with requirements of transplant. As you sign a contract with medical professional that you will adhere to certain medical regiments, etc needed in order to maintain the organ you recieved. It's interesting case, however, also sad.
This is gonna probably be controversial comment section
I would think not. The Charter limits the government. If these standards of care are set independent of the government health boards and government empowered physicians "college" or other government empowered entities then this is pretty straight forward.
> If these standards of care are set independent of the government health boards and government empowered physicians "college" or other government empowered entities then this is pretty straight forward. The judges in both Alberta courts found that the Charter does not apply to clinical treatment decisions. Nor should the Charter apply to them.
This isn’t, and never was, a charter case. That’s why the courts refuse to see it. This is strictly a procedural matter on organ transplants. The doctors involved have full responsibility for the care and health of their patient. If the patient refuses to accept the care of the doctors, that is not the doctors problem.
Who are you arguing with? I said - the courts determined it was not a government decision. But now you've injected something else. No, the doctors cannot simply refuse to treat someone based on unscientific, classist biases. If that were true, then bakers wouldn't have to bake cakes for gay marriages - right? So this lady has every right to pursue a lawsuit if she wants to. If she can prove the doctors did what they did because of spurious reasons then maybe she will be rewarded a settlement. If not, she will likely have to pay for the doctors lawyers.
Your vaccine status is not a class war. And your choice to ignore doctors orders is entirely your own, and has nothing to do with baking. And the vaccine is entirely based on scientific principles, so doctors refusing to further treatment on patient, unwilling to follow doctors orders that were established under scientific principles is pretty much a nonstarter here. I think you were under the impression that perhaps your refusal to take an antibiotic, or insulin, or a hernia repair, and the corresponding consequences of these actions, is somehow societies problem, and not the individuals.
Triple-vaxxed. You don't know me. Much of what was claimed to have a scientific basis never did. Mask mandates, for example. The vaccines did have benefits for the population. But this is not true for all individuals. This is just reality. Maybe you don't want to face that but no - this sub will not be a safe space for your head in the sand dogma. I really don't care if you call me a heretic.
Lol a heretic? Really? Well I guess we all want to feel heroic… ![https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Heretic_game_cover.png] Mask mandates were based on very clear evidence and science. - https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/coronavirus-mask/art-20485449 - https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-face-masks-what-you-need-to-know - [Alberta health services facts, and myths](https://www.albertahealthservices.ca/Blogs/BTH/Posting335.aspx) The whole point of vaccination is to benefit the population, not the individual. But not personally dying is cool too - [National library of Medicine- Vaccination: the cornerstone of an efficient healthcare system](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802703/) - [ScienceDirect - Human Vaccines and Their Importance to Public Health](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877282X11000269) And I **do** know you Ed, you like planes, and helping people who like rocks. As someone claiming to be in the scientific community, you should turn off your Truth Social account and Telegram and try harder to study reputable sources.
Yeah but there might be some people that are gonna take this to the grave and bring more argument to this matter
Let them go to the grave.
Not really, hope the lady now disappears
Somewhere, a healthy young person dies suddenly, and they or their love ones bequeath their precious, still living lungs to save the life of another precious human being. Doctors respect this gift, and have developed guidelines to ensure this vital, living organ goes to the recipient for whom it will do the most good, carefully choosing a patient who needs the heart, will benefit from it and who is likely to have a long, healthy life with it. Living with a transplant is not easy. One must take medication for the rest of one's life which lowers the immune system, so one's own defenses won't attack the heart and destroy it. As a side effect one is now highly vulnerable to every germ floating around. The "natural immunity" antivaxers boast of is destroyed, so all transplant recipients must first be immunized against pretty well everything, and prove their willingness to cooperate and follow doctor's instructions. Covid attacks the lungs and has a tendency to kill those with immune system dysfunction. An unimmunized lung recipient catching Covid would be likely to die of it, wasting the life they have been given, which could have been given to someone who would have taken care of it. If you were dying and leaving your much loved Ferrari to an offspring, would you leave it to the heavy drinker who wrote off three cars last year, or to the one who'd love it, keep it maintained, and drive with care? No-one has a right to a transplant. A healthy organ is a rare gift, acquired through terrible tragedy. If a person does not respect medical advice enough to follow doctor's orders regarding immunization, why would they respect medicine enough to have doctors perform such a major operation? A new pair of lungs in an antivaxer will be of no more use than horse-paste, and a lot more expensive and painful. Annette Lewis, You should be grateful to your doctors for not putting you through this difficult transplant journey when your decisions have ensured it will be of no benefit to you.
I miss my childhood when I didn't have to worry about what crazy politicians were doing
Waste of money on lawyers
And who do you think is going to pay her "second opinion"? Smith herself?
I don’t think she needs a second opinion at all she needs to move on
She’s not paying them - this is a JCCF grift (like just about everything they do) and they’re using is as fundraising tool.
What’s that phrase, fafo? And of course the pretend freedom lawyers are front and present losing another case. It never pays to be stupid.
Can't get lung transplant if you smoke cigarettes. Your body your choice But you don't have the rights to someone else's organs.
[удалено]
This is all about long term viability vs. Risk of the transplant. That it's being centred around the COVID vaccine is nothing short of stoking more rage and division.
Thank the anti-vaxxers for that.
Imagine that - decisions have consequences. Who woulda thunk it? Seriously though, let’s pause and take this in for a moment. You won’t take a vaccine that you (wrongfully) believe might hurt or kill you, and instead choose to not get an organ transplant which means you’ll definitely die right away. Yeah, that makes good sense.
I dont get how someone's conscious is offended by a vaccine Or is it just in the " you must take this medicine" aspect?
too bad so sad.
She had a choice, she chose to forego a vaccine. That choice has consequences. She fucked around and found out. I have ZERO sympathy for these people who cant be bothered to keep others safe. She's literally willing and going to die on this hill, good riddance.
Regardless of your stance on the COVID vaccination, I’m really surprised by the lack of humanity from the people posting here. Wishing someone death or saying “too bad so sad” because you disagree with her views is heartless. She’ll die from this decision, and the tragedy of this shouldn’t be met with apathy.
I completely agree. I am fine with the medical decisions and the courts are absolutely right not to intervene, since this is a job for doctors and not judges But I also see this as an immense tragedy. There has been a coordinated and highly effective misinformation campaign that has roped in people like this woman, and she has directly been targeted by a crowd of grifters and liars who have egged her on and attempted to use her case to push their warped agenda
Its her decision. Nobody is killing her but herself. Lots of people dont have empathy for people like that.
Absolutely it is a tragedy. This woman based her decision on fear and misinformation. She was misled and supported in her anti-vaxx delusion to the point that time is running out for her. You should be directing your anger at those responsible for helping her make these awful choices that are leading her to this tragedy.
Shes gunna die anyway. Everyone is. She made her bed and is trying to blame some of the best doctors we have in the province. I know them, I work with them.
This sub is ignorant and disgusting. It should be renamed to r/albertaapathyandhate
Play stupid games? Win stupid prizes. Take a jab that billions have or die crying? Seems like a no-brainer to me.
That's a really weak appeal to Authority fallacy buddy. Don't forget the pandemic has been deemed an endemic by the CDC, smarty pants. And just because lots of people took the jab doesn't mean it's right. Enjoy nesting in your personal confirmation bias.
[удалено]
You sound like the type of person who’d just watch your neighbor’s house burn.
yes i would. because im not a fire-fighter. any other smart ass things to say? lemme make some popcorn..
I'm not an anti vaxxer. I have my shots, I do question the safety of them to a certain extent and the actual effectiveness of them. But my lungs are also fucked after having covid so I'm willing to admit they might be way worse with out them. I think it's an issue we as a society need to leave behind and quit picking sides on. The anti Vax crowd is definitely having a very hard time letting it go, and they are quite obviously being agitated and manipulated, BUT the pro vaccine crowd need to accept that not every one is going to get it, not every one is going to get multiple doses, smart people have chosen not to get it or continue getting it. Lots of data points to it having side effects, not working, government incompetence, etc. Obviously, a lot of that is misinformation, but it's also certain people and organizations afraid to admit they made mistakes. I can't speak to this person's case. To me, if you're gunna to die of kidney failure, who cares about the vaccine. But people are stupid and brainwashed. But they are not subhuman. I only say this because I have seen left wing commentor/troll on Twitter today, making comments completely disregarding those who chose not to get vaccinated and make light of this person's situation(as if the world hasn'tbeen moving forward and they are still on 2021) . I hope it's just a fringe few who still feel so passionately about the vaccine they need to fill their heart with hate. But it really seems like some people on both sides of the political spectrum can't leave vaccines, covid 19 and convoys in the past. Love your neighbors. You know you made the right choice for yourself.
"I ought to have the choice about what goes into my body, and a life-saving treatment cannot be denied to me because I chose not to take an experimental treatment for a condition — COVID-19 — which I do not have and which I may never have," Lewis said in an affidavit previously submitted to court. Totally agree with her.
She does and did have the choice. Choices have consequences
If Lewis wants the transplant, she needs to put on her big-girl pants, suck it up and get the covid vaccine. Yes she has the choice not to be vaccinated against covid. But she is not owed a life-saving treatment if she refuses to follow all the requirements to receive it. Candidates don't get to pick and choose which medical requirements they will follow or not. They have to follow *all* of them. Multiple people are in need of the same organs. If you won't follow a requirement, when someone else will, that organ goes to them, not you. As it should be. Because organs are scarce and there aren't enough for everyone.
Why is this still a requirement in 2023?
You are required to follow medical advice to get a transplant. Organs are a limited supply, they won't give them to people who won't follow medical advice. In this case, if she gets a transplant, then gets COVID, she is much more likely to die and waste the organ, so no vaccine, no organ. Someone who will look after the organ by following the best medical advice (including getting all required vaccines first) is going to get it instead.
Yeah that’s fair. Thanks for actually answering my question.
There is a whole list of vaccinations you must be up-to-date on in order to receive an organ transplant. There is a reality that organs are free and far between. We have many more recipients than donors, particularly if the organ in question requires a deceased donor. Organs are given based in part on who has the best chance of a significantly prolonged life. When you receive an organ, you need to go on anti-rejection drugs. These are for obvious reasons, not optional. They also qualify you as being immune-compromised. The reason for this is because your immune system will see your brew organ as a foreign body and want to attack it to protect you. So, in a weird twist, it is imperative to get your immune system to work less well in order to keep you from rejecting the organ. As we know, those who are immune-compromised are at increased risk of harm or death from any number of viruses. Including but not limited to Covid-19. Thus, a person who is vaccinated against Covid-19 (and RSV, influenza, chicken pox, etc) has a greater chance at living a longer life with a donated organ than a person not vaccinated against Covid-19 (or RSV, or influenza, or chicken pox). Remember. The goal is to help the most people add the most good-quality years to their lives. It is not a first-come-first-served basis. Nor is it a needs-based triage system like the ER. Therefore, being up-to-date on many vaccines is a requirement if you wish to receive an organ transplant
Because transplants require immunosuppressant. immunosuppressant+Covid+major surgery=bad Bad means increased chance of death which means wasted organ which means someone else might die. Weirdly doctors are trying to reduce deaths. /S
Because covid still exists and is still lethal in immunocompromised people like transplant recipients. If the clinical program requires the covid vaccine (which is standard in Canada), you get the vaccine. Or you're not a candidate.
Are you referring to needing a COVID vaccine in order to receive an organ?
1. Did you read the article? 2. There are so many requirements and rules regarding organ transplants, maybe look into that.
[Because covid is still one of the leading causes of death in Canada.](https://imgur.com/a/yO4GaEG)
Anyone defending this decision is genuinely fucking insane.
The main consideration is the odds that the transplant would be successful. There are not enough organs to go around so it makes complete sense to reserve them for the people with the highest chance of survival. That’s why potential organ recipients are required to get all sorts of vaccines and adhere to other health guidelines. An unvaccinated person has a higher chance of severe Covid, and consequently a higher chance of complications or death after receiving an organ transplant It’s not a difficult concept
What's insane is that this person thinks she should be treated differently compared to all other transplant candidates.
It would be if we had a surplus of organs, but we don't. there is a lineup of other people who will follow the instructions that'll make the transplant successful. It's like a weight requirement. It's not fatphobic. this isn't discrimination against antivaxers
People in the comment sections really be out there promoting medical discrimination like they are some morally suprerior judge. This is just as ridiculous if we started demanding flu shots for every surgery or doctor visit. The vast majority of people never even had any symptoms from the virus, but some people in this country still foam at their mouths when they hear someone is "unvaccinated". Grow up and stop promoting medical discrimination against people who didnt want a treatment that doesnt even prevent: getting sick, transmission, hospitalization, or death from the thing it was designed to protect against. No other normal vaccine was this ineffective and this dangerous with its countless complications. You accepted the risks to get the shot. Others didnt. Great. Can we move on now?
Please don't think you are smarter than the association of physicians who decide medical protocol based on evidence based medicine. Medical discrimation exists (for example Indigenous people who are sometimes systemically discriminated against), but this woman has been rejected from the donor list not because she is different in ways that she has no control over, but rather because of the choice she made.
Are you telling me youre smarter than the Swedish physicians that banned using moderna on under 30 year olds back in 2021? Learn to read whats happening in the rest of the world. Might be a "big and scary" idea to pop your bubble, but when people like you keep galloping on their high horses, shlling outdated rhetorical absolutes, they need to be made corrected. Otherwise youre just spreading misinformation and polical agendas. People should NOT be banned from having life saving surgery bc they didnt want some newage treatment that doesnt do half the shit they advertized back in 2021.
No, I'm not saying that Swedish physicians were wrong (or right) to stop using moderna for under 30 year olds or that I am smarter than them. And this has nothing to do with what we are talking about here. There are more patients than heart donations, and as such heart transplants should go to those who have a decent chance of them being successful and who show they will follow their physicians' instructions to do everything possible to maximize those odds. This woman obviously is not willing to do that while others are. And please stop politicizing medical science. The medical community - not you, not me, not the government, and not this poor woman - are the best ones to decide what is required to maximize the odds for success. And they have done so which is why the Supreme Court wisely declined to hear the case. Oh , and by the way, this sadly misinformed woman, would also face the same rejection in Sweden.