Tag: organ harvesting

RFK Jr. Reveals Fatal Organ Scandal, Takes Action

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the unprecedented decertification of the University of Miami’s organ procurement organization following a federal investigation that uncovered unsafe practices, inadequate staff training, and a fatal error involving a donor heart.

This marks the first time in recent memory that HHS has taken such decisive action against a major organ procurement organization for safety failures. The investigation revealed systemic problems that directly endangered patients’ lives and violated the fundamental trust placed in these organizations.

Kennedy emphasized that this crackdown represents a broader commitment to accountability in healthcare, stating that the federal government will no longer tolerate organizations that show “systemic disregard for the sanctity of life.”

The Miami OPO’s failures are particularly egregious given that organ transplant patients are among the most vulnerable in our healthcare system, relying entirely on these organizations for life-saving procedures.

Broken System Finally Faces Accountability

For years, conservative Americans have watched government agencies fail to hold healthcare organizations accountable for their failures, while bureaucrats collected paychecks and patients suffered.

Kennedy’s decisive action represents the kind of common-sense leadership that puts patient safety above institutional politics and entrenched interests.

The organ procurement system has operated with minimal oversight for too long, creating an environment where preventable deaths occurred while administrators faced no consequences.

This investigation reveals what happens when government agencies prioritize bureaucratic processes over protecting American lives.

The Miami OPO’s inadequate training protocols and unsafe practices represent a fundamental breach of trust with families who donate organs and patients desperately waiting for transplants.

Kennedy’s willingness to take swift, decisive action demonstrates the kind of accountability that was sorely missing during the previous administration’s tenure.

Keep reading

HHS Calls on US to Cut Ties With China’s Organ Transplant System

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has called on the United States to sever ties with China’s transplantation system over ongoing concerns about organ sourcing.

“In China, forced organ harvesting of prisoners has continued for over 20 years. To affirm the sanctity of human life, America must sever its ties with China’s organ transplant system,” the department wrote in a post on X, pointing to an article published in The Baltimore Sun titled “America’s complicity in China’s organ harvesting.”

The HHS in July uncovered issues with a federally funded organization and identified more than 100 cases in the United States in which organ procurement occurred when patients showed signs of life or had no cardiac time marked down.

The “domestic scandal” is nonetheless “no isolated incident,” reads the commentary article, which points to the decades-long program of forced organ harvesting in China targeting prisoners of conscience.

In 2019, the independent China Tribunal concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that forced organ harvesting had taken place in China on a large scale, and practitioners of the spiritual discipline Falun Gong were the primary source. In its final report, issued in 2020, the tribunal said it believed the Chinese regime continued to harvest organs from unwilling prisoners of conscience, as there was no evidence that the abuses had stopped.

Falun Gong, also known as Falun Dafa, is a spiritual discipline based on the principles of truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance. Its practitioners have been persecuted by the Chinese communist regime since 1999.

Keep reading

Their Fathers’ Organs Were Stolen in China: The Xi–Putin Hot Mic Opens Fresh Wounds

Grief and shock hit 19-year-old Han Yu at once as she walked into a room filled with police.

Center in the throngs lay the lifeless body of her father, who had been in perfect health two months before the Chinese authorities threw him into jail.

Even with makeup, traces of suffering were evident. There was tissue missing from under his left eye and bruises around his chin. Black stitches led downward from his throat.

The police yelled and pushed Han out when the teen tried to unbutton her father’s clothes and check how big the incision was.

A few other relatives managed to lift his shirt up and saw that the cut went all the way to the abdomen. They pressed down on his stomach. There were no organs. It was all ice.

What did they do with the organs?

Fast forward 21 years, and the sense of horror recurred when she saw the hot mic moment of Chinese leader Xi Jinping musing with Russian President Vladimir Putin about continual, multiple transplants leading to longevity.

“Earlier, people rarely lived to 70, but these days at 70 you are still a child,” Xi said through a translator in Russian at a massive military parade in Beijing commemorating World War II on Sept. 3.

Putin replied through his interpreter in Mandarin: “As biotechnology advances, human organs can be continuously transplanted, allowing us to become younger and younger, perhaps even achieve immortality.”

Keep reading

Censorship Concerns Surge As China Yanks Video Of Xi–Putin Organ Transplant Discussion

China’s state-owned broadcaster has rescinded international wire agency access to a hot mic video of Chinese and Russian leaders discussing longevity and organ transplants, an effort that shows the Chinese regime’s fear of attention on the topic, critics say.

The open mic exchange between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping took place in Beijing on Sept. 3, as the two leaders walked together ahead of a military parade commemorating World War II.

Xi at the parade told Putin that “these days at 70 you are still a child,” prompting Putin to remark that continued organ transplants could allow one to live younger and even reach immortality. Xi in response said that it is predicted that there’s a chance of humans living to 150 years old.

The conversation became global news and sparked discussions about the Chinese regime’s state-sanctioned forced organ harvesting, a taboo topic in China. CCTV has since taken down the livestream video that captured the exchange and removed the moment from replays.

CCTV also sent a letter through its lawyer to Reuters—which licensed the video through CCTV and edited it into a four-minute clip—requesting the news agency to remove the footage on the grounds that the clips Reuters published exceeded the agreed-upon scope.

CCTV lawyer He Danning claimed Reuters’ “editorial treatment applied to this material has resulted in a clear misrepresentation of the facts and statements contained within the licensed feed.”

Reuters withdrew the video and issued a “kill” notice to its clients on Sept. 5. The agency said it had earlier distributed the clip to more than 1,000 media clients around the world, including major international news broadcasters and TV stations.

In a statement, Reuters said it was removing the content because it no longer has the legal permission to publish this copyrighted material.

“We stand by the accuracy of what we published. We have carefully reviewed the published footage, and we have found no reason to believe Reuters longstanding commitment to accurate, unbiased journalism has been compromised,” Reuters stated.

According to the London-based China Tribunal, forced organ harvesting has taken place in China for years “on a significant scale,” and practitioners of the Falun Gong spiritual group are the primary victims. It said that persecuted religious minorities including Uyghurs are also potential targets. Since 1999, millions of Falun Gong practitioners have been incarcerated in prisons, labor camps, and other facilities, with hundreds of thousands tortured and untold numbers persecuted to death, according to the Falun Dafa Information Center.

Keep reading

The Moral Cost of Modern Transplant Medicine

In a time when trust in public health is already hanging by a thread, recent revelations from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have delivered another blow—one that strikes at the very heart of medical ethics. 

“Our findings show that hospitals allowed the organ procurement process to begin when patients showed signs of life, and this is horrifying,” Secretary Kennedy said. “The organ procurement organizations that coordinate access to transplants will be held accountable. The entire system must be fixed to ensure that every potential donor’s life is treated with the sanctity it deserves.”

Hidden beneath the surface and quietly ignored by corporate media is a story that should horrify every physician, patient, and policymaker: the commodification of human life in the American transplant system.

The Independent Medical Alliance (IMA), a coalition of physicians dedicated to restoring transparency and patient-centered care, has publicly denounced the findings of a recent HHS report. As President of IMA, I can tell you this: what we’ve uncovered is not a case of benign negligence. It is a deliberate erosion of the most sacred values in medicine—consent, dignity, and the inviolability of the human body.

A System That No Longer Sees the Patient

Organ transplantation is, in theory, one of the great achievements of modern medicine. When practiced ethically and transparently, it has saved countless lives. But like so many institutions corrupted by profit and policy, it has drifted far from its original mission.

In 2024 alone, over 45,000 organ transplants were performed in the United States. That number should inspire hope—but instead, it invites scrutiny. A substantial portion of those organs were harvested under ethically ambiguous conditions, including donation after circulatory death (DCD) and questionable determinations of brain death. The line between patient and donor is blurring—and not in a way that honors either.

Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) are incentivized not by patient outcomes, but by volume. The more organs they harvest, the more funding they receive. Hospitals, too, receive significant reimbursement for transplant procedures, creating a perverse system where terminal patients are seen less as individuals with complex medical stories and more as reservoirs of reusable parts. The New York Times has published a piece that urges standards of death to be liberalized even further. “We need to figure out how to obtain more healthy organs from donors… We need to broaden the definition of death.”

Where Are These Organs Coming From?

The public assumes, understandably, that most organ donors are willing participants—cadaveric donors who’ve signed cards or checked boxes. But the data doesn’t support that rosy picture. A growing percentage of organ procurement comes from patients who are not dead in the traditional sense but are declared brain dead or transitioned to DCD protocols under murky guidelines.

Let’s talk plainly: Who decides when a person is truly dead? And how confident are we, as physicians, that our criteria are airtight?

Keep reading

NYT Op-Ed Pushes “New Definition of Death” So We Can Harvest More Organs

An op-ed in the New York Times is calling for a “new definition of death” so that we can increase the number of available donor organs.

I’m not exaggerating, it’s right there in the headline.

Sometimes you can only look at a headline and wonder.

Of course, redefining words and phrases is nothing new in the Great Reset world. “Case”, “cause of death”, “vaccine”, “terrorist”, “democracy”…all have received updated definitions in just the last few years. Rubberizing language so that words become malleable, with vague or even totally inverted meanings, is par for the course, just as Orwell predicted.

In this case, you take the word dead and “broaden” its definition to include…people who are alive.

Keep reading

Comatose woman woke up moments before organ harvesting surgery… but pushy donor boss ‘told doctors to operate anyway’

An organ harvesting organization has faced allegations that it urged doctors to remove body parts from a comatose woman – who went on to make a full recovery after medics insisted she showed signs of life. 

Danella Gallegos said she feels lucky to be alive after her organs were almost taken by ‘pushy’ donor bosses when she fell into a coma in 2022.

Gallegos, who was 38 at the time, was homeless when she suffered an unspecified medical emergency, and doctors at Presbyterian Hospital in Albuquerque, New Mexico told her family she would never recover. 

Without any hope, her family agreed to donate her organs and preparations were made with procurement organization New Mexico Donor Services. 

In her final days, Gallegos’ family said they saw tears in her eyes – a sign that they say donation coordinators quickly brushed off, claiming watery eyes were just a reflex.

On the day her organs were set to be taken, one of Gallegos’ sisters said she was adamant Danella was still sentient because she saw her move while holding her hand.

Doctors in a pre-surgery room were left stunned when Gallegos, deep in a coma but still medically alive, was able to blink her eyes on the medic’s command.

But the organ coordinator in the room told doctors that they should ply the patient with morphine and move ahead anyway, according to a New York Times report.

Keep reading

When “Dead Enough” Becomes a Metric

The heart monitor flatlines. The family weeps. The doctors wait exactly 75 seconds—then restart the procedure. In the world of organ transplants, “dead enough” has become a moving target.

The New York Times just reported something most people aren’t ready to hear: in the rush to expand organ transplants, procurement teams have sometimes started too early. Not after death—before it was fully established.

This isn’t just investigative journalism anymore—it’s official. In July, the US Department of Health and Human Services released the results of a federal investigation into the transplant system. Their words, not mine: “Hospitals allowed the organ procurement process to begin when patients showed signs of life, and this is horrifying,” declared HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The federal report found that at least 28 patients may not have been dead when organ removal began.

This is happening under a protocol called donation after circulatory death (DCD). It’s fundamentally different from the more established practice of donation after brain death, where patients have irreversibly lost all brain function and are kept on machines only to maintain their organs. DCD patients still have some brain activity—they’re dying, but not yet dead. Doctors determine they’re near death and won’t recover, but that’s a medical judgment call, not biological certainty.

DCD used to be rare. Now it accounts for a huge and growing share of transplants. Every day, 13 people perish waiting for organs that never come. That urgency is real, and it explains why the system feels pressure to expand every possible avenue for donation. But saving lives by potentially taking them prematurely isn’t salvation—it’s a different kind of death sentence.

This is not a debate about whether transplants save lives—they do. It’s about something more fundamental: the line between life and death being treated as a flexible scheduling variable.

Keep reading

Dead? Or Just ‘Mostly’ Dead?

Until recently, anyone who believed there was anything fishy about the U.S. organ donation system was labeled a conspiracy theorist. Yet now the old adage: “What’s the difference between conspiracy and truth? About six months,” rings true again, as so-called conspiracy theorists have been proven right by none other than the federal Health and Resources Services Administration (HRSA) itself.

The “conspiracy?” That organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and hospitals declare living individuals dead in order to harvest their organs.

The truth? In March 2025, the federal Health Resources and Services Administration reported in its investigation of a procurement organization called Network for Hope that there had been dozens of instances where organ retrieval was nearly begun despite the donors exhibiting signs of life. 

The investigation was started in response to the infamous case of T. J. Hoover. Hoover, a resident of Kentucky (which along with parts of Ohio and West Virginia is exclusively served by Network for Hope) had overdosed on drugs in October 2021 and been declared brain dead. His body was being prepped for organ retrieval when he regained consciousness on the operating table, banging his legs and crying. Thankfully, the process was halted, but not without significant pressure to continue by the OPO representative in the room, according to doctors who testified. 

Hoover’s story is apparently one among many. HRSA reviewed 351 donation-authorized cases and found that 73 patients showed neurological activity and at least 28 patients may not have been deceased when the procurement process began. 

These shocking revelations led to a hearing last week by the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Dr. Raymond Lynch, chief of the organ transplant branch within HRSA, testified to Congress regarding the safety and efficiency of the organ donation process.

Lynch admitted that the current method of operation has serious issues, but argued that the root cause is a system that grants a quasi-monopoly to individual procurement operators. Only a single contractor per region can service the OPTN, which is the federal Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network that connects donated organs with patients needing transplants. Over-reliance on the OPOs has impeded “meaningful government oversight,” according to Lynch.

Members of both parties peppered Lynch with questions about the practices of OPOs and the OPTN. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, referenced a New York Times article revealing the growing use of “circulatory death,” which is defined as the irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, even though in some cases circulatory death is reversible through proper resuscitation. Nonetheless, using this definition to determine the end of life allowed hospitals to harvest organs faster, leading to concerns about a grim conflict of interest.

Compounding this issue is pressure from OPO representatives, who are required to be present for donation. DeGette asserted that doctors may look to OPO representatives as “experts” and feel pressured to certify death. While Lynch did not affirm DeGette’s concerns, he conceded that “increased emphasis on performance in any area of medicine is not an excuse for noncompliance.”

Lynch stressed that it is possible that a “good faith” assessment of death could be wrong, and that often, doctors are doing their best in a difficult and fast-paced environment. Rep. Gary Palmer  wasn’t having it. “There’s clearly things that happened that I think could count as euthanasia,” said the Alabama Republican. In response, Lynch stressed that the HRSA has a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) in place for OPOs and the OPTN, with its authority stemming from Congress.

The renewed interest in Congress follows passage of the Securing the OPTN Act, signed into law by President Biden two years ago. This new law the OPTN turns a single-vendor system into a multiple-vendor system, meaning that  multiple OPOs can now service the same region. It also establishes a separate OPTN board from any other contractors to ensure transparency, removes the $7 million HRSA funding cap and allocates more money for modernization, and requires a GAO review of the OPTN’s financial history.

The HRSA created its CAP to better implement the terms of the act. The CAP lists several important reforms: Any staff member will be allowed to halt procedures due to safety concerns; the OPTN must now monitor and report safety-related halted donations; the HRSA now has authority to decertify OPOs not meeting its standards; and the Network for Hope and any other implicated OPO must implement minimum safety standards, better documentation, clearer donor eligibility criteria, and family communication plans within six months.

Keep reading

Feds reveal dozens of organ donors may not have been dead when ‘procurement’ processes started!

And 73 exhibited ‘neurological signs incompatible with donation.’

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirms it has launched a “major initiative” to reform America’s organ-transplant system after it stunningly revealed that dozens of organ donors may not have been dead when the process to procure their organs was started, and dozens more exhibited “neurological signs incompatible with donation.”

“Our findings show that hospitals allowed the organ procurement process to begin when patients showed signs of life, and this is horrifying,” explained HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“The organ procurement organizations that coordinate access to transplants will be held accountable. The entire system must be fixed to ensure that every potential donor’s life is treated with the sanctity it deserves,” he said.

A commentary posted at the Washington Stand on the situation highlighted one case:

“According to a partially redacted, eight-page report dated May 28, 2025, HHS received ‘an allegation of potentially preventable harm to a neurologically injured patient.’ This prompted the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the subdepartment of HHS that oversees the organ donation system, to launch an investigation after HRSA Administrator Thomas Engels assumed his post in February. The New York Times identified that victim as Anthony Thomas Hoover II, then 33 years old, who was hospitalized with a drug overdose in 2021. Hours after a doctor had declared him brain-dead, Hoover awakened to find medical staff preparing to remove his organs. ‘Even though the man cried, pulled his legs to his chest and shook his head, officials still tried to move forward.’ Hospital staff ultimately became ‘uncomfortable with the amount of reflexes’ Hoover showed, and a doctor ultimately refused to remove him from life-support. The man ultimately survived.”

Keep reading