Well, I am happy to report that my fifth (and hopefully final!!!) 24-hour urine tests (this set and the previous focused specifically on protein and albumin) have come back normal.
Although I am almost afraid to say it, this may be the last real test of the screening process. My main goal now is to get a date for the surgery.
Bill, thank you for your last post. The more I think about it, the more I marvel at how the ethics board were prepared to deny an MD the right to donate, since there would be no benefit to him. Aside from the fact that they probably should have realized that you are experienced in assessing and weighing medical risks, did it really never occur to them that people might donate primarily for the "good deed"? [Although I have a hard time using the term, it is called "altruistic donation" for a reason]. Since it's considered a heinous act--and is illegal--to pay a donor, just who do they think are donating, beyond close friends and relatives? If they're going to permit some form of non-directed donation, they should grasp that donors might seek intangible "compensation".
Still, I realize they're trying to protect us (and, thanks, Bill, for reminding me to guard my own health). Indeed, the doc who was originally so enthusiastic about terminating my process is precisely the team member I like the most. She's very warm, friendly, and I trust her fully to "watch my back". If I thought that the team members were vultures out to snatch my kidney, despite it being risky for me, I'd not be able to be so brave and virtuous. I'd have to focus on protecting myself--which, in such a case, might require running for the hills! But, with this doc so concerned to protect me, I feel safer pushing ahead. Anyway, the fears she had last month have been put to rest, hopefully, by my last three tests (24-h urine collections tests #3-5, if anybody's keeping score).
Again, I want to thank members of this board, such as Linda, Bill, Sherri, Fr. Pat, and all the others who have patiently answered so many of my questions, offered so much encouragement, and been such loyal supporters.
Also, permit me to repeat a thought I posted last month. Do you remember Terry, the English fellow who was disqualified because of a borderline GFR? I don't think he ever had a re-test, and I think he's not been active on the list. Although I don't know much about GFR tests, I can say that over this summer I've been "threatened" by imperfect blood pressure, glucose, and protein-in-urine lab results. In each case, the problem, thankfully, disappeared on re-test. I would highly recommend that anybody who gets abnormal lab results just take a deep breath and request a re-do. Do not panic, do not get depressed. Recognize that, especially when they test a gazillion things, one or two might well pop up abnormal, with no true problem present. Lab testing is not really as precise a business as we might assume, and the human body is immensely complex--it might be thrown off a bit by passing factors such as climate, stress, what you ate or didn't eat (or drink) that morning, etc. Terry--if you read this, I hope it's not too late to take another crack at it.
But, if there truly is something wrong with one's GFR, creatinine, etc., and it's not safe to donate, then...you did your best, and there are lots of other beautiful ways to help people.
Sorry for the long post.
Be well, Snoopy