I hope this doesn’t lead to a frivolous lawsuit. There is a limit to how much a physician can test transplant organs before the organs become unusable due to age and the cost becomes prohibitive. A lawsuit will simply make transplants harder to get and more expensive.
yes but with rabies they could have done the transplant before getting the test results, and treated them afterwards successfully if the tests came back positive.
I have an even dumber question...
Why are we using organs from people who died of “unknown causes?”
I agree with all that you said, but I am left wondering why they would even use organs from a person who had died of rabies.
Perhaps it would not be so confusing if such articles were not so poorly written.
They knew the donor was being treated for rabies and they still used his organs? The morbidity/mortality committee must have been on vacation. It is insane to consider to use organs from someone who has been bitten by a rabid coon, is being treated for prevention. Res ipsi locitur.