Taiwanese singer Lu Jian-zhong (呂建中), also known as Tank, recently traveled to Hangzhou, China, to undergo a simultaneous heart and liver transplant. Beneath surface-level astonishment, I feel a deep sense of unease over ethics and the fairness of resource allocation.
When I was a child, I remember seeing a news report about the police discovering an unidentified body. I blurted out: “How sad, I sure hope it is not her.” My mother dispassionately replied: “Then who do you hope it is?”
That response has stayed with me to this day. People often feel sympathy for familiar names, yet are completely desensitized to the deaths of strangers.
That emotional mechanism is particularly evident in organ transplants. It is much more likely that the survival of celebrities or high-status individuals is celebrated. However, hidden behind their new chance at life is a fundamental question. Organs are an extremely scarce resource — who, then, is more likely to be prioritized to undergo a prompt transplant?
Cases involving simultaneous heart and liver transplants are extremely rare. It is more than just a matter of finding a medical match — that case raises significant concerns over the transparency of the organ allocation system and potential resource bias. If we cannot ensure that the organ distribution system is based on the principles of medical urgency and fairness, then access to healthcare could be in danger of becoming a transaction where survival is determined by wealth and social status.
What is more concerning is that Lu’s transplant was not conducted in Taiwan, but in China. The source of organs in China has long been a subject of international controversy. Although China promised in 2015 that it would shift to a completely voluntary donation system, there have continued to be questions over transparency. Not only was the country previously exposed for harvesting organs from executed prisoners, but international human rights organizations continue to say that there is a high likelihood that organ harvesting is still occurring in China.
When society applauds a successful organ transplant such as Lu’s, perhaps we should also pause to reflect — who was the “donor” who simultaneously gave up two vital organs? Did that person give their consent? Might they have had a chance to live? Did their family mourn a decision they might or might not have made? If the source of organ donations in a country cannot be trusted, should all transplant operations performed within its system not be subject to even stricter scrutiny?
Organ transplantation has always been more than just a medical issue — it involves ethics, law and social justice. As a society, we must never allow our enthusiasm for saving one person overshadow the cost of losing another. When organ transplants become a tailor-made treatment allowing privilege to cut the line between life and death, the foundations of medicine have already begun to crumble.
Of course, everyone hopes for patients to be saved — but the fairness, transparency and integrity of organ allocation systems is even more essential. Taiwan must uphold that principle and not allow its resources to flow into less transparent environments. Otherwise, the hopes of so many nameless people waiting behind the scenes could be sacrificed for more glamorous and seemingly miraculous stories of revival.
The sanctity of medicine lies in its commitment to treat all lives equally. Organs are not commodities, and lives are not bargaining chips. Only by respecting every donor and every patient in wait, and by adhering to the foundations of medical ethics can healthcare return to its original essence — saving lives, regardless of wealth or status.
Lu Chun-wei is a dermatologist and an assistant professor at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
After thousands of Taiwanese fans poured into the Tokyo Dome to cheer for Taiwan’s national team in the World Baseball Classic’s (WBC) Pool C games, an image of food and drink waste left at the stadium said to have been left by Taiwanese fans began spreading on social media. The image sparked wide debate, only later to be revealed as an artificially generated image. The image caption claimed that “Taiwanese left trash everywhere after watching the game in Tokyo Dome,” and said that one of the “three bad habits” of Taiwanese is littering. However, a reporter from a Japanese media outlet
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework