Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Left Kidney

astralcodexten.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 325 posts

Re: My Left Kidney

#71

Post by sashank_1509 »

timmytokyo wrote: post #65
sashank_1509 wrote: post #27

This does honestly kind of shock me, it’s respectable that he did something like this for a random person but I could never imagine myself doing it for anyone except close family. I used to think EA was some kooky AI safety Cult but if so many EA folks donate their kidney, my opinion of them has improved far more. They at least have balls!

A lot of EAs, including the author of this piece, are also really into IQ, eugenics and "human biodiversity" (aka race science). Consider that Scott Alexander (aka squid314) once expressed a desire to donate to "Project Prevention", a eugenics charity formulated to pay undesirables to sterilize themselves [1][2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Prevention [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20131230050925/http:…

I don’t see anything wrong with the charity you mentioned. It certainly isn’t what normal people consider eugenics though technically that charity might meet its definition. If you are a crack addict, you shouldn’t be anywhere close to having children. You will ruin the child’s life first and foremost. Apart from that you will create an undue burden to society, neither of which is fair. First they should cure themselves of their addiction and then have children.

Re: My Left Kidney

#73

Post by mquander »

woodruffw wrote: post #64

I know a few people who have donated kidneys (both to friends and strangers), and I find it admirable (and supererogatory). At the same time, I think this post demonstrates a kind of selective unawareness that I’ve seen members of the EA community demonstrate. A significantly less charitable summary of Scott’s situation is “our prospective kidney donor is newly-married high-stress professional with a history of SSRI…

Your summary literally doesn't even sound more stressful than the median American adult life. He has a job? He got married? He has taken psychiatric drugs before? Some people don't like him? There exists social drama sort of nearby him? So what? These are incredibly superficial assessments.

Why is the standard for donating a kidney that your life has to be, in the opinion of some bureaucrats who just met you, super chill? Nobody applies this standard to any other similarly-risky (i.e. not very risky) decision. The standard should be whether you are a person in sound mind who wants to donate it and is physically fit to donate it.

Re: My Left Kidney

#74

Post by the_shivers »

woodruffw wrote: post #64

I know a few people who have donated kidneys (both to friends and strangers), and I find it admirable (and supererogatory). At the same time, I think this post demonstrates a kind of selective unawareness that I’ve seen members of the EA community demonstrate. A significantly less charitable summary of Scott’s situation is “our prospective kidney donor is newly-married high-stress professional with a history of SSRI…

You make a good case, but I cant help but wonder if the people who will die from lack of a transplant agree with UCSF's decision.

Re: My Left Kidney

#76

Post by mpreda »

matisseverduyn wrote: post #23

"But looking more closely at the increased deaths, they were mostly from autoimmune diseases that couldn’t plausibly be related to their donations." Kidneys make calcitriol. One kidney means you'll make less, and if you don't supplement, you'll become deficient. Deficiency would (possibly) lead to autoimmune diseases. Also EPO (erythropoietin). One kidney means less, and less (possibly) means fewer new red blood cell…

About erythropoietin (EPO), I understand it's a hormone whose amount is regulated by the need for oxygen in the blood (i.e. a feedback loop which regulates the amount of red blood cells to be just what is needed to satisfy the oxygen needs of the body).

So EPO is not limited by the ability of the kidneys to produce it (I expect, by a large margin). So one kidney would just as well be able to produce all the EPO you may need, the kidney is not the limiting factor.

Re: My Left Kidney

#77

Post by TheDong »

zabzonk wrote: post #9

Wow. Bonkers. Also, prolix. Evolution has equipped us with two kidneys for presumably good reasons. Don't go giving one away unless you really have to.

> Evolution has equipped us with two kidneys for presumably good reasons

As the article pointed out, on average you live a totally fine life with only 1 kidney, so clearly no.

Like, that same argument would be "evolution gave us poor eyesight, so glasses must be bad. Why else would evolution make so many people's vision fail? Blurry eyesight must have an evolutionary advantage", or "evolution made some people white for a reason, don't use sunscreen, skin-cancer research says to sunscreen up, but we shouldn't second-guess evolution and play gods".

Evolution is random mutations with a very course-grained utility function. Rejecting evidence in favor of it gives you nothing but nonsense. And fad diets, but mostly nonsense.

Re: My Left Kidney

#78

Post by OfSanguineFire »

woodruffw wrote: post #64

I know a few people who have donated kidneys (both to friends and strangers), and I find it admirable (and supererogatory). At the same time, I think this post demonstrates a kind of selective unawareness that I’ve seen members of the EA community demonstrate. A significantly less charitable summary of Scott’s situation is “our prospective kidney donor is newly-married high-stress professional with a history of SSRI…

What’s the "community/cult" here? I’m apparently missing context.

Re: My Left Kidney

#79

Post by woodruffw »

mquander wrote: post #73
woodruffw wrote: post #64

I know a few people who have donated kidneys (both to friends and strangers), and I find it admirable (and supererogatory). At the same time, I think this post demonstrates a kind of selective unawareness that I’ve seen members of the EA community demonstrate. A significantly less charitable summary of Scott’s situation is “our prospective kidney donor is newly-married high-stress professional with a history of SSRI…

Your summary literally doesn't even sound more stressful than the median American adult life. He has a job? He got married? He has taken psychiatric drugs before? Some people don't like him? There exists social drama sort of nearby him? So what? These are incredibly superficial assessments. Why is the standard for donating a kidney that your life has to be, in the opinion of some bureaucrats who just met you, super c…

The average American isn’t donating half of their kidneys, as the post points out. It’s entirely possible that the average American isn’t psychologically suited to do so without an extensive (and fallible) filtration process.

But beyond that: the author is not an average American, and we both know that. Most Americans don’t find themselves in the NYT, or somewhat central to a large, wealthy controversial community that’s actively imploding.

Re: My Left Kidney

#80

Post by TheDong »

woodruffw wrote: post #64

I know a few people who have donated kidneys (both to friends and strangers), and I find it admirable (and supererogatory). At the same time, I think this post demonstrates a kind of selective unawareness that I’ve seen members of the EA community demonstrate. A significantly less charitable summary of Scott’s situation is “our prospective kidney donor is newly-married high-stress professional with a history of SSRI…

We have a long waiting list for recipients, and we don't have an excess of donors to be picky with.

Why are you assuming Scott was not "able to see" the explanation you laid out, when in all likelyhood that thought has crossed his mind (he's thought about this far more than you, a commenter who speculated that in 5 minutes)?

Perhaps he thought of it, and decided saying it would be even meaner to the hospital... which frankly, I think that framing is far crueler to the hospital. Like, if they rejected him from bureaucratic incompetence as they tried to filter out people who can't consent to surgery? Fine, incompetence is bad, but fine.

If they rejected him because they could give someone with kidney failure 10 more years of good life, they thought he had a healthy kidney and could consent, but they had a personal grudge or moral judgement... That's a much more repugnant way to operate a hospital than simple incompetence. Reducing the quality of life of a potential kidney recipient for any of those reasons intentionally is far crueler than mere incompetence.

I also suspect saying anything other than the hospital's purported reason would be grounds for libel.

Post reply on HN