Cleveland Clinic denies boy, 9, a kidney from naturally immune, healthy donor over vaccine status

by WorldTribune Staff, May 1, 2022

The Cleveland Clinic will not allow a U.S. Army veteran to donate a kidney to a 9-year-old boy because the donor has not received the Covid vaccine.

In a recent interview with John Davidson, the donor, Dane Donaldson discussed the family’s struggle after the clinic removed Donaldson, an ideal kidney donor for his son, Tanner, according to the Broken Truth web series.

Tanner, born without the valve that enables urination, arrived in this world with already severely compromised kidneys. He has been under Cleveland Clinic’s care since birth, undergoing multiple surgeries. He currently has one partially functioning, declining kidney.

An ideal match for a kidney for Tanner, Donaldson, once a mechanic for the Green Berets, was approved in 2017. Donaldson has spent the last nine years in rigorous athletic conditioning and healthy eating in order to donate one of his kidneys to his son when the time comes. 

In October, Cleveland Clinic informed Donaldson and his wife, Tanner’s mother, that his approval as a donor would be rescinded unless he received the Covid-19 vaccine.

However, according to a study by Cleveland Clinic itself, published in Clinical Infectious Diseases, as  healthy survivors of Covid-19, Dane and Tanner’s natural immunity affords greater protection than that conferred by the vaccine. The CDC has also recognized the benefits of natural immunity. 

More importantly, research shows that for those vaccinated post-Covid infection vaccination carries greater risk of adverse reaction than for those who have not had the disease. This group was never included in the clinical trials prior to FDA authorization. Therefore, those vaccinated post-infection are participating in a novel medical experiment. 

During a meeting with the clinic’s committee of doctors, Donaldson pointed out that the effects of receiving an organ from a vaccinated donor by an already infected recipient also has not been studied. Cleveland Clinic is therefore, requiring a nine-year-old boy to participate in a medical experiment against his own will and that of his family’s, or else be denied a kidney from a living donor, which is ideal for the boy’s long term health.

The policy, it turns out, runs contrary to the Cleveland Clinic’s own published scientific data, and actually poses risks that could permanently ruin Donaldson’s suitability as a donor.

Were he to have a serious adverse reaction as a result of the vaccination, Donaldson could also be removed as a donor, Cleveland Clinic doctors admitted when asked.

Cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough noted dangers for those who have already had the disease in a lecture in December of 2020, warning, “Don’t forget, they are still clearing out the spike protein. To get juiced with the spike protein again is causing harm and landing people in the hospital or severe reactions.”

In the intervening months, Pfizer data on adverse reactions obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request on a judge’s order, shows that during the first three months of the rollout, over 30% of recipients experienced adverse health events and 27% experienced severe adverse health events that were still unresolved, as reported by Canadian physician Dr. Daniel Nagase.

For the Donaldsons and their son Tanner, the vaccine carries greater risk than benefit, they reasonably believe. Cleveland Clinic, which had actively recruited to retain Tanner as a patient, however, has not reconsidered its position. 

Prior to the new policy, the Donaldson’s previously passed on a less ideal kidney for Tanner in preference for his father’s and in order to allow another child to receive it.

Cleveland Clinic’s media relations spokesperson provided the following comment for World Tribune, but would not answer questions: 

As indicated in the statement, the health and safety of our patients is our top priority. Cleveland Clinic developed COVID-19 safety protocols for transplantation and living donation to minimize the risks of possible COVID-19 exposure during the pandemic.  Vaccination is particularly important in these patients for their safety. 

Living donation for organ transplantation has been a life-saving treatment, but it is not without risks to the donor.  For the living donor, reducing the risk of a COVID-19 infection around the time of their surgery and recovery is crucial. Individuals who are actively infected with COVID-19 have a much higher rate of complications during and after surgery, even if the infection is asymptomatic. We continually strive to minimize risk to our living donors, and vaccination is an important component to ensure the safest approach and optimal outcomes for donors.    

The World Tribune’s unanswered questions follow: 

  • What is the basis of prohibiting a healthy and ideal transplant donor with natural immunity on the basis of non-vaccination, alone? Does this not remove informed consent?
  • What is the basis for mandating such a policy when numerous serious adverse reactions have been reported, even now by Pfizer’s own data disclosed through through court enforcement of a FOIA request?
  • Since the sufficiency and even superiority of natural immunity has received widespread recognition, including in a study by the Cleveland Clinic, how can the Clinic maintain such a policy with individuals who have natural immunity?
  • What system do you have in place when your own published research and CDC findings contradicts your policy? Who makes these decisions?
  • On what basis does Cleveland Clinic believe it is ethical to require vaccination of individuals in a group that was never studied in any of the vaccine’s clinical trials, in this case those who have had previous Covid-19 infection?
  • Since there is evidence of increased adverse reactions among those vaccinated post-Covid-19 infection, and therefore possessing naturally immunity, how can it ethically be required that such a person, if otherwise healthy, be denied as a donor?
  • Does Cleveland Clinic receive monetary incentives from Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers based on percentage of patient who receive the vaccine?  
  • Has HSS provided the Cleveland Clinic with requirements for Covid-19 vaccination among patients or donors as requisite for receiving funds from HSS? If so, please provide that documentation.

About . . . . Intelligence . . . . Membership

You must be logged in to post a comment Login