Reply #24: I have seen them reject organs

[Horse with no Name]

for brief elevated kidney function tests post-mortem that may or may not have been lab error. IMHO, it is a waste of a good kidney.
It's really up to the surgeon as to what HIS criteria is for what he feels will be a successful transplant.
The team of Docs that I have worked very closely with harvested a donor and transplanted last year and several patients contracted rabies.
It didn't matter that the majority of these patients who received these organs already had a foot in the grave, they all sued or settled.
So people who would have died if they didn't get an organ died when they got one that was infected with rabies. It was worth millions of dollars to their families.
Btw, there isn't a test available to detect rabies in organs that won't destroy the organs--as far as I am concerned, it is a chance you just have to take for a chance to live.
Homosexuals can't donate blood either--I am not saying it is right, it is just the way it is.
There is a window--albeit brief--that HIV is undetectable by any method so by omitting a high risk group, it narrows the possibilities of HIV being transmitted.
(Also...just some info...it is not just organs that are harvested. Other tissues are taken and used in burn patients, for grafts in heart surgery, etc...so those are also patients that are being put at risk if they receive diseased tissues.)