Hacker News Reader

Comment by renewiltord | Hacker News Reader

We already have that laundered through something else. Like if you’re a drinker you won’t get a liver.

That's not a moral judgment: that's a judgment about whether you're likely to not wreck the new organ and have a good outcome.

That's a common rationalization for the moral judgment, but without evidence. "Recent studies have shown similar survival rates among individuals who undergo LT [liver transplant] for ALD [alcoholic liver disease] and those who undergo LT for other chronic causes of end-stage liver disease." [1]

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30018475/

As your link says, there's an association between sobriety and liver transplant outcome.

As your link also says, in most areas, you can receive a liver for ALD; there's just a 6 month sobriety rule.

So we know:

- 6 months of sobriety increase odds of ongoing subsequent sobriety

- Sobriety improves LT transplant outcomes.

Many believe, without strong numerical evidence either way:

- 6 months of sobriety before procedure improves outcome of LT transplantation.

Fewer believe:

- A 6 month sobriety requirement is an unnecessary impediment to transplantation.

Your paper says:

"An interval of sobriety prior to LT is very desirable from a medical point of view. Abstinence may markedly improve liver function"

i.e. in many cases, if people could stop drinking, they might not even need the liver!

That is not a universal statement[0]. They may get lower priority in many cases, but MELD[1] or a similar model is used to determine who gets priority for liver transplant.

[0] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/articles/destigmatizing...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_for_End-Stage_Liver_Dise...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com