>>6331
Why donate a kidney at all? Besides "muh EA for the sake of muh EA"

>>6335
It's lower cost than you might expect for removing a vital organ. The most risky part of the operation is the anesthesia, though you'll be out of commission for a few weeks. If your remaining kidney fails you're in trouble but I think many places give you priority for receiving a transplant if that happens.
In return you significantly improve someone's quality of life and life expectancy.
In the case of donations to family or friends: compare to other sacrifices for family or friends. It's positive-sum, so reciprocation makes it worth it in such a context.
In the case of donations to strangers: compare to volunteer work. Probably a pretty juicy signal.

>>6338
Is the anesthesia really a greater risk than the potential complications of the surgery?

>>6344
I remember reading it a few years ago and being really surprised, but now I can't find it. I probably misread back then. Mortality for general anesthesia is very low.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20215610 gives a 25/80,000 3-month mortality rate, and a slightly increased (but p=0.11, not statistically significant) mortality rate over ~5 years. But thinking about it a bit more, it could be that having only one kidney becomes a real problem when you're 70 or so, which the study wouldn't cover.

>>6345
General anesthesia can permanently decrease neurological function. I wouldn't do it even if it gave me a third kidney, and I'm less concerned about my (((IQ))) than many rats, which is why I feel like EA folks just aren't aware of the risks.

Alas, I received it during one surgery in my childhood, and my memory was shit ever since. Perhaps it was inevitable, but I'm not convinced.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/going-under-anesthesia-may-impact-memory#2

>>6350
The study was conducted on middle-aged people and hasn't been replicated yet. I understand that it compared general anesthesia together with surgery in people who needed the surgery to no general anesthesia or surgery in people who didn't need a surgery. There were no controls who received general anesthesia and no surgery or, for example, spinal anesthesia and the same surgery. Whatever causes the need for surgery could also affect memory. Or maybe it's the surgery itself and how it affects the body.

>>6350
How bad is your memory? Could anything else has caused it?

What was the surgery?

>>6351
Valid methodological criticisms, however it's treated as common knowledge among the surgeons I know that every instance of general anesthesia is using up a certain resource.

>>6352
It's pretty bad. Before, I could remember pages of text verbatim (no superhuman von Neumann shit, but occasionally it worked), or retell the few minutes of conversation. Now I'm like an animal that has no ability to mark stuff as "important" and is forced to expressly repeat stuff many times (Anki helps a little), and to re-derive/reread most everything I didn't use for a few months.

It was to treat a case of testicular torsion. Pretty sure that didn't have anything to do with brain function.

>>6357
>testicular torsion
Does that normally require general anesthesia?

>>6359
I don't know, anon, but quick search indicates it is. Apparently, abdominal surgery with local anesthesia is uncommon in general.

>>6357
>however it's treated as common knowledge among the surgeons I know that every instance of general anesthesia is using up a certain resource.
Then it's disturbing there isn't more research on it, let alone warnings for patients.

>and to re-derive/reread most everything I didn't use for a few months.
Is that so unusual? After multiple months of not thinking about something read one time, how many people would remember it?