this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
314 points (93.4% liked)

Canada

7204 readers
371 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca/


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 months ago (2 children)

There are more people who need transplants than there are organs, so the medical profession has to make decisions about who to deny. This was a reasonable decision, in my opinion.

[–] Ava@beehaw.org 22 points 2 months ago

I'd be inclined to agree, except that her partner wanted to donate HIS liver and was prohibited from doing so as a living donation due to the alcohol use determination.

[–] i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 months ago (4 children)

In Canada, drinking more than 3 drinks per week is medically considered "high alcohol use" for a woman... (6 for a man). This limit keeps getting lower year after year

If this can prevent you from getting organ transplants, then it encourages lying to your medical doctor about your current habits... That lady was not considered alcoholic, she just used alcohol in greater amount than the limit considered acceptable by doctors.

Latest stats show that almost 4 out of 5 people has exceeds that limit at some point in their life. This woman died only because she was honest with her doctor about her alcohol use. (Note that the article says her partner was a compatible donor but the system refused to accept him because she used alcohol. It's not about lacking donors.)

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This woman died only because she was honest with her doctor about her alcohol use

No, and it even says so in the article

She quit about 5 months before her death when transplants require 6-12 months of sobriety. She was drinking regularly with the fucked up liver before that diagnosis, and liver damage isn't something that just suddenly appears.

She kept drinking despite what would have been intense cramping pain and a slow death, thats why she was denied (addiction) and ultimately died

Note that the article says her partner was a compatible donor but the system refused to accept him because she used alcohol

And as the article also says it's incredibly dangerous for someone to get a live-donor transplant when they're in bad shape like she was, as failure of that means they'll need to let her die on-table or transplant a good dead one into her (which she was denied for, due to her drinking)

It's sad, but this woman died to alcohol abuse, pure and simple

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 months ago

That's a lot of vague statements you've repeated from the article. What's drinking "regularly" (this was before the diagnosis as you've stated)? "She kept drinking", what does that mean? How much alcohol was she consuming? Did she have a sip of her friends wine and was honest about it so was rejected?

as the article also says it’s incredibly dangerous for someone to get a live-donor transplant when they’re in bad shape like she was, as failure of that means they’ll need to let her die on-table or transplant a good dead one into her

Where does it say that? You've completely twisted the statements.

"On the off chance their (living) liver doesn't work, they urgently get listed for a deceased donor," said Jayakumar. "We need to make sure that everyone who is a candidate for a living donor is also a candidate for a donor graft as well, " she added.

Huska’s time at the Oakville hospital likely cost over $450,000 - ($3,592 per day for ICU care) with an additional 61 days in a ward bed which likely cost about $1,200 a day, A liver transplant in Ontario is pegged at about $71,000 to $100,000 in Ontario based on data from 2019.

In 2021, 15.6 per cent of Canadians over 12 engaged in heavy drinking – a term defined as five or more drinks for males, or over four for females, on one occasion at least once per month in the past year.

Heavy drinking is drinking ONCE per month in the past year. If this is based off of before her diagnosis, you're gonna exclude like 80% of the working population who actually does go out for drinks or private occasions (unless they just lie which I guess they should've in this situation). Between the price of keeping them alive but not fixing the problem and there being no "review" process for decisions, I would categorize this as a bad system that allowed a preventable death from an alcohol related disease to continue.

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

That's total bullshit. As a IT professional I have a nightly drink after work for self medication. Never two. Just one.

[–] kofe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm guessing you can stop at any time if you want to? I've known older healthcare professionals that have approved and even encouraged one drink a night, but our understanding of the effects of drinking has evolved. I doubt doctors keeping up with the science would encourage it at this point. It would be like having someone come in that's overweight. It doesn't mean you're unhealthy now, but it may be a factor that needs to be kept in check and working on it could prevent issues in the future.

[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yes I can and have stopped. I drink 2-5 times a week and it's one 40 proof 1oz (not a shot 1.5oz) over rocks with a bit of soda. Same or less than a beer.

This isn't two shots neat daily or a six pack of beer. Sometimes I go a week without. Other times it's 5 times a week.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 5 points 2 months ago

Just do what I do and put it in that deep cupboard above the fridge. Then forget about it for literal years by mistake. It's doing wonders for my health. Just wish I could do a version of that for my bad sleep schedule.

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Just remember if a doctor ever asks then lie and say only on friday, there's a few things in life you absolutely have to lie about because the system is not designed to care about people.

Here in the uk never admit to smoking weed to a medical professional, never admit to even so much as thinking about any form of self harm, delusions, emotional regulation issues... it can come back decades later and fuck you over.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is generally pretty bad advice.

I mean I get where you're coming from, and I cannot speak to what it is like in the UK (I can only speak as a man in the US), but you should not lie to your doctor.

If you see a doctor, and they start treating you differently after finding out that you smoke weed, then you find another doctor.

[–] BreathingUnderWater@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Unless you're in Canada and there's a doctor shortage and you can't just shop around for a different family doctor if you don't like your current one. If you're lucky enough to even have a doctor here..

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago

Wait what happens if you admit to smoking weed? I thought we had doctor patient confidentiality. I've had some mental issues in the past, though not to the point of self harm. What happens if I admit these? I also live in the UK and this is concerning.

[–] z00s@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The only genuine hint to the real reason of the refusal was "minimal abstinence outside of hospital".

Let me ask you bud, if you needed a liver transplant to continue living, would you have even one drink per week, or would you just quit completely?

Very biased article.

Plus, regardless of her husband being compatible, it still costs the state tens of thousands for the operation. In no way would it be ethical to put a new liver in someone who refuses to completely abstain from alcohol.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

That's absurd. Refusing someone a transplant because they used to drink more than 3 drinks a week before they knew they even had liver problems is completely absurd. Calling her an alcoholic for that is even more absurd. What in the world are these people or you thinking?

[–] racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are you on purpose missing the point?

The point the person you replied to made is that she didn't completely stop drinking alcohol once she was diagnosed to have a terminal liver disease due to alcohol use.

So first of all, she must have drank a lot more than 3 drinks a week to have terminal liver disease in her 30s that's due to alcohol (yes, all of that is in the article)

But the issue is she didn't stop drinking after being diagnosed, she reduced her consumption but didn't stop it.

If any of the above is incorrect, feel free to correct us, but making a point that's completely missing the facts that are being talked about here doesn't add anything to the discussion.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

The first point is correct. The second one is shown to be wrong in the second paragraph.

The issue here is you need to have stopped 6 months or more before, and she was only diagnosed 5 months before she died.

[–] z00s@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"minimal abstinence outside of hospital". That means she was still drinking.

[–] areyouevenreal@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Given her condition it's possible she never left hospital after her diagnosis