I think the point may be that if the guy got AIDS through drug use, unprotected sex, etc then dumping marrow and organs in him at the expense of say a leukemia patient or somebody that had a need for an organ transplant due to reasons they didn't control, it may be wrong.
That is certainly part of my reasoning.
...
Bone marrow transplants are still listed as an experimental procedure. Most patients don't live more than 3 years. It is given to patients in the hope that they may live with some quality of life for just a little while longer. People with AIDS aren't candidates for transplant, and this man was not dying of AIDS, he lived with the disease for over a decade. He was given viable marrow to treat a disease that is really irrelevant considering his condition. Add to that they are giving immunosuppressants to an AIDS patient, so they can then waste bone marrow to "cure" his AIDS. To a layman like me that makes about as much sense medically as blood-letting.
by that logic, there should be a cutoff for medical interventions at, oh let's say 50 years old? Logan's Run anyone?
I'm not going to pick some abstract number, but yeah, certain treatments should (and are) limited based on age and lifestyle. There aren't enough hearts, lungs, kidneys,.....for everyone. Fat people shouldn't get new hearts after being obese their whole life, smokers don't get new lungs, no livers for acholics.
Good people pay their own money to get test kits, volunteer to have their pelvic bone punctured, all in the hope that they will give some poor sap a few more weeks with their family, not so a doctor can make a splash in the news with an unprovable gimmick.
R8R- It was a fucking joke.
Then where is the punchline, Dice? In case you haven't noticed, "jokes" are accompanied by something remotely funny.
Of course, I was only joking too. I wouldn't really find joy in watching you take a beating from someone like Patrick Vieria.