Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

REP

(21,691 posts)

13. The article you posted had a lot of inaccuracies

Reply to doxydad (Reply #3)

Mon Aug 18, 2014, 04:49 PM

Aug 2014

There is no "instant" test and the current tests are not 100% reliable. They're good enough when the other option is death, but not nearly good enough for non-life-sustaining transplants.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Mother of gay teen who committed suicide outraged at FDA ban on gay organ donation [View all] Playinghardball Aug 2014 OP

I didn't know there was such a ban????? FarPoint Aug 2014 #1

Eyes are not life-critical organs; the test they use is only 97% accurate REP Aug 2014 #2

This is absolutely discriminatory MNBrewer Aug 2014 #4

I am a 27-year cancer survivor YarnAddict Aug 2014 #5

Are you equating being gay to having cancer? It sure sounds as if you are. Bluenorthwest Aug 2014 #6

Of course not. YarnAddict Aug 2014 #7

can you clarify what risk is run by transplanting tissues from gay men? MNBrewer Aug 2014 #8

It is a bit dated, but here: Ms. Toad Aug 2014 #9

16 years old, gay and statistically tainted with HIV. MNBrewer Aug 2014 #10

The population is statistically most likely to have a new infection. Ms. Toad Aug 2014 #11

Really? REP Aug 2014 #12

I posted about this travesty earlier... doxydad Aug 2014 #3

The article you posted had a lot of inaccuracies REP Aug 2014 #13

That poor woman, I do weep for her. Rex Aug 2014 #14