My point was that there were reasons for deciding that unvaccinated people were not eligible for organ transplants that were based on science. And sadly yes. With organs being a very limited resource, lines have to be drawn. You describe it as playing God. I see it as a common sense way to do the best for the most. That is simply the way it is. It would be grand if everyone who needed a new organ could walk into a hospital and get one but that is just not the reality of the situation. Doctors and hospitals are making touch decisions based the best information they have. But these "experimental jabs" as you call them are based on a lot of data and study before the epidemic broke out and as I understand it, the issue of whether natural immunity gives you greater protection than vaccinations do
is still very much up in the air. You are just going to dismiss all of that and will prefer to see some grand corporate greed machine sucking the life out of the health and welfare of Americans. As far as I am concerned, that was the Trump administration. Not the scientists who were trying their best to come up with solutions but Trump and his butt boys who pushed things that did not work and that they conveniently were invested in. You guys all tell me how brainwashed I am and then I see your talking points which tell me that it is actually you who needs your eyes opened. I realize there is no good outcome here. But when I see you completing besmirching doctors who are motivated to do the best for the most people, I have to step in.
If by talking points you mean common sense, I’m guilty as charged.
You’re continuing to use the failed premise that these “vaccines” are some foolproof solution to avoiding or diminishing any contraction of any Covid variant, without considering any subsequent side effects of the jab. A jab so effective that you have to get at least three, soon to be four (I’m sure) to continue to be effective. Again, while ignoring and dismissing any potential side effects. Why is the data being locked up for 50 years if it’s so safe? Would you take any other injection or drug without considering the side effects of said treatment? Probably not.
So again, the premise that you are denying one patient over another of a proven life saving treatment because of some false premise that the “vaccine” is all proven is a logical fallacy.
Using that logic I think we should say, everyone should show their medical profile showing a level of bmi, cholesterol etc in order to buy certain foods or eat at certain establishments. You can’t get any medical treatment like a bypass or transplant if you’re too unhealthy. Since you know, it’s about the limited availability. That to me would be a much fairer way to decide whether or not someone is higher or lower on the list for treatment.