Bitcoin Forum

I've had this idea in my head since 2019, what if it was legal in the US for people to get paid to become a donor.
2 years later, I think I've worked out a framework, but unfortunately it looks like I missed the cutoff date for state ballot initiative requests for the 2022 election cycle.

So here's my framework
Adopting a VC style of investment.
-people are paid a set price for the exclusive right per organ.
-they are given the money upfront, no exams needed
-there are no lifestyle restrictions
-the transplant only occurs after you die
-your estate is given equal or more money than you were given upfront
-if the organ is no longer viable, no big deal, just the cost of doing business. Your off the hook.
-if you change your mind, no big deal, pay back the money at 10% interest to remove your name off the list.
-you must be 18 years or older to apply
-you can enroll your children into the program. Same rules apply, money upfront, transplant only happens after death. On their 18th birthday, they are removed from the program, and have the option to re-enroll. If accepted, same rules apply.

The idea here is that there are over 100,000 people in US in need of transplants and not enough donors. Over 8,000 people die annually, with most waiting over 3 years. The longer they wait, the less productive they become, not including all the stress due to uncertainty.
My proposal is would provide cash upfront, work like the typical VC/Crypto model where you diversify and only need a small handful to breakeven.
The exclusive right would be sold to insurance companies or governments, who would pay 3-5x multiples.

Example 1
Jim, 20 years old, male, lives in Denver Colorado.
He sells us the exclusive right to both his kidney's for $500 each upfront.
We then sell the right to XYZ insurance company for $50,000 per kidney.
I'm assuming insurance companies would then sell term life organ policies to cover expenses.

This transaction is beneficial because insurance companies generally have to spend about $25,000 per year for some dialysis treatments which take up 10+ hours per week for the person in need of a transplant. We are filling the demand. And the cost of the transplant surgery wise is often $100-200,000 anyway. But because their policy holder becomes more productive and increased years to live, the insurance company can justify the expense. Plus based on public data, there are 33,244 fatal motor vehicle crashes in the United States in 2019 in which 36,096 deaths occurred. This resulted in 11.0 deaths per 100,000 people and 1.11 deaths per 100 million miles traveled. The fatality rate per 100,000 people ranged from 3.3 in the District of Columbia to 25.4 in Wyoming. Also based on the numbers, it seems that men in the US begin to start dying in their 40's/50's, 10 years earlier than women. I want to avoid culture war issues and really focus on college kids and not the poor, I don't want this being seen as a payday lending scheme.

I'm working on the website now. Will start on the blockchain next month. The goal is to raise money to get this on the ballots of state elections for the 2024 Presidential election cycle. I want to amend the first line of the current law prohibiting the sale of organ donations after death. This is a felony currently. The average signature needed is about 100-300k per state and seems to be a huge undertaking. Do you guy's see the crypto community getting behind this effort either as early investors or joining the waitlist? What do you guys think of the concept overall.


Blockchain
-----------------------
Each transaction will be available in a blockchain. Those in need will know where in line they are, but the public won't know the names of said people, only the public ID's, and transaction codes.
-shows transaction data
--new donor registration, payout, removal, death
--donor recipient moving up in line, currently in surgery, successful transplant
--insurance company, policy sales




  

One of the countries where donating organs is a source of income is Iran. You can sell your kidneys, parts of the liver or anything else that you can do without for money. As you may imagine this is a resource for the most deprived citizens and it has been shown to have negative psychological effect in the long term as the money goes away and the organ is lost forever.


In China, it was legal to harvest the organs of the executed. This obviously creates a perverse incentive of the system to sentence to death more people - not that they really need much incentive.



https://sites.ndtv.com/moretogive/organ-donation-what-other-countries-are-doing-1297/ (https://sites.ndtv.com/moretogive/organ-donation-what-other-countries-are-doing-1297/)

America already has lots of problems with poverty, inequality and absurdly expensive health care, legalizing organ selling is like adding oil to the fire, poor people will have no choice but to give away their health for money. A better solution is to just make every deceased person an organ donor, with an option to opt out of this program for the paranoid people, making them ineligible to receive organs in exchange.

And what does the blockchain solve in this situation? If someone wants to cheat in this system and has a power to do so, they would still do it. They can create fake identities and put them into the queue, for example.

If I am not mistaken, it is not illegal to donate organs. What is illegal is selling them.

Anyway, between somebody who is already unproductive and dying in need of an organ transplant and somebody who is active, productive, and healthy who is a possible organ donor and would face risks by doing so, I'd rather leave the dying to face his/her own death than possibly cause another man a difficult life.

Donation is donation. The moment you monetize it, all hell breaks loose. If a donation is made in exchange for money, it is not anymore a donation. That is selling. Legalized organ selling will cause more harm.

I'd rather forget about the 8,000 people who die annually if what it takes to try to heal them is the risky process of taking some organs from healthy persons which could make them ill as a result. A healthy person in exchange for a dying person is never cost-beneficial.  

for the case of organ donation, in countries where there is a "presumed consent law" for organ donation after death like in Spain, France, Norway etc, it is my opinion that more awareness be raised about it, so everyone knows about it and they at least know that they have the choice of opting out if they don't like it. It makes sense that your working organs could be the reason another person is alive after your death, but people should be made to know the concept and reason behind it.

This is actually a good proposition, with blockchain on the way, Jim wouldn't worry that the insurance company is going to fuck things up just to gain much more profit from him when he dies. But it may sound good but I don't like the idea of organ donation in the first olace especially if it enables human traffickers, look up China's illegal organ harvest industry, this is their way of persecuting minorities in their country. Plus, there's already a revolution in 3D printing that can easily print you an organ.

If it's legal to sell blood and sperm in the US (and it's legal in some states), then I don't see it disputable to regulate and pay people to donate organs - although moral dilemmas arise as to how to protect such data and reduce manipulation to the least possible measure. The fact is that the demand for human organs is very high, and that people may need to be encouraged to become voluntary donors in the event of death, and the question is how people and the community in general would react to the fact that there is a monetary initiative behind organ donation?

---

I was familiar with the data for China because a lot has been written about it in recent years, especially when the Uighur issue is mentioned. It is unbelievable that people are killed just because of their religion or political views, and then their organs are taken away and given to those who are loyal to the regime. However, this is the first time I have heard about Iran and their law on this issue, because since it is a predominantly Muslim country, isn't the literal sale of organs in conflict with their religion?

I do understand the point of view of OP and I think that he just wanted to try to provide another way to save lives of those people who were in need for a donor of organs but also thinking that if it would be monetize I'm afraid that it will only lead to a many crimes like kidnapping and human trafficking. Is it only me who is thinking that maybe the mafia for human trafficking may regroup for a big group sharing common goal and that is to get money in exchange of organs? I may be exaggerated it but this is what have come to my mind after reading the thread.

larry niven (a "hard" science fiction writer) wrote several stories about harvesting organs for profit or "the greater good" in the 1960's/70s. basically, the whole concept goes south real fast. i tend to agree with him.

brief overview:
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=337

I know that for some organ donor you are being paid for it, both if I see it from your point of view it will become a normal business and can create avenue for things not so good in the community and so on.

Organ transplant has gone commercial now, and not only that there other medical surgeries, artificial surgery, replacement and adjustments made on human bodies now. This is having effect on the economy and may not be excluded for the high rate of kidnapping and terrorism attacks which may have the connection of organ replacement for money. People risk the life of others for money and some give birth and sell them for money. Encoding these into the blockchain will lead to increase in the rate of organ transplant because identities will be concealed. I'm just looking at the negative effect anyway.

I don't think the united states is a suitable climate for a future hub of organ donations. Cost of living is too high. Taxes, regulation and expenses too much overhead. Health and dietary regimen of americans can be a negative trend in contrast to healthcare and standard of living of countries who enjoy healthier average diet and lifestyle.

The natural progression would likely be for nations outside the USA to be offered monetary incentive for organ donation. With organs being imported into the US.

With the format being shifted to include monetary payout only upon the event of death via natural causes.

How this going to work effectively is still a myth. Because the donar is paid upfront, and the donar agree for the organ transfer after his death. This could increase the chance of crime.

For example person A is rich and he has got good sum of money. Person B is poor and he agrees for the organ donation and gets upfront payment. Now person B is in the urge of transplantation for survival. By this time some people will intend to kill and take the organ. So, this isn't going to be more effective plan. If something offensive or controversial I'm sorry for that, nothing intentional. Human minds are built in such a way.

This might lead to a dangerous idea since we all know that people are greedy. I have no problem with the donation of organ thing but when there's money involved that's a different story. It would make a bad reputation to the blockchain or to the crypto community if things goes sideways. I know some government will try to make it look like the source of the problem is the crypto currency. And worse is like what happened in China as @paxmao mentioned.

It may still be under in a debate but I don't agree to monetize donating organ. Donation is different from monetizing.

There must still be some untapped ways to improve or maximize organ donation. But never the monetization of it. I'm afraid the negative consequences of which would be much bigger than the problem it intends to address. As you mentioned, one of which is the possible emergence of syndicates focusing on human trafficking or kidnapping for the sake of organ gathering.

How many people die everyday? Accidents, deaths, happen every hour of the day. How many of the dead have healthy organs which could still be used by people who need transplant? Many, I suppose. I guess we could develop or strengthen programs, if there are already existing ones, to encourage families to donate the organs of their dead loved ones.

It is necessary before every project to know the negative aspects. Does this project encourage criminals who trade in human organs to kill more victims??!! If such a project is approved and the sale of organs becomes legal even if it is after death, perhaps this will be tantamount to obtaining an official certificate for gangs selling human organs to practice their work freely. There are many such gangs, especially in third world countries, who kill their victims and then sell their organs to Wealthy sick people who need these organs to continue their luxurious lives!!! What is the deterrent anymore for these criminal gangs to increase their brutal activities against innocent victims?!!
I know you have a good intention, but such a project may have very serious consequences for the safety of society.

I think you are not aware of the dark web that secretly takes the organs out of poor people sometimes then sells it in either black market and for some of them they end up getting sold in countries with legal organ donation. It's not as simple as it sounds since at the end of the day, organ donation becoming legal might mean these activities will increase in some corrupted Nations. It is legal in some countries but it still comes with a lot of negative effects. Also at the same time it's not really a 100% safe procedure, I myself would not recommend anyone to do it as a means of earning money since your body might have infection, sepsis, internal bleeding, long term damage and death as well. If done for emergencies it's completely understandable, if done for selling and earning some money, a lot of things can go wrong.

The idea is that for people becoming donors, there's close to zero risk. We are paying you to become a member and forget your on the list. Many fintech companies like Paypal/Coinbase have done the same. You then go and live your life. After death, your estate (family) would get paid out 2-3x whatever you were paid initially so in this case ($1500) which they can use for anything (funeral costs, cover daily expenses, etc) if the organ is viable and the transplant occurs. After death, hospitals would run your name to see if your in the system. Each hospital would have their own credentials and everyone can see logs of hospitals accessing the blockchain, but the donor and recipient names remain encrypted.

This is what makes what I am doing so expensive and why I will need the crypto/VC community to fund this. So if I pay 100 people $500 just to sign up and sell me the exclusive right to one kidney for example, and I sell that right to xyz insurance company or government healthcare system (europe) for $50k, 1 death covers 100 bets. The cypto/VC investors see their investment grow since margins are so big. And we fill a pressing need. Even if we account for the additional $1500 payout to the family after death, this expense is easily accounted for since I'm expecting the average member's lifespan to reach 30-50 years. Inflation will reduce their payout amount, and conservatively investing small sums in an index fund or AAA bond (gov or corporate bond) over 10 years would yield the amount needed and the rest would be profit.

Math
$50k Crypto/VC investment per 100 people, excluding additional expenses to keep the math simple
$500 per person
$1500 estate payout upon death and transplant
$50,000 average payout from insurance company payout to us
10% average return on the S&P500 from 1926 to 2018
18-25 years old average donor age up registration
30 year conservative projection of average life expectancy of each donor after registration

$50,000 - $50,000 (100 people) = $0
100 * $50,000 (insurance pays us) = $5,000,000

$49,500 invested in the S&P500 at a conservative 4% expected return over 10 years with zero additional contributions = $23,770 profit
$49,500 invested in the S&P500 at 10% expected return over 10 years with zero additional contributions = $78,890 profit
$49,500 invested in the S&P500 at a conservative 4% expected return over 30 years with zero additional contributions = $111,048 profit
$49,500 invested in the S&P500 at 10% expected return over 30 years with zero additional contributions = $814,245 profit


Insurance company's projected profits per term policy, assuming $1000 initial investment and $200 monthly contribution over 30 years at 10% return = $398,935
Starting amount - $1,000
Total contribution (monthly fee paid by policy holder) - $72,000
Total investment - $471,935

I think the increase of crime is somewhat overstated. Sure crypto and bitcoin are used for crime but it pales in comparison to the amount of transactions that are normal. It would be hard for criminals to disrupt this process, a lot would have to go right for them.
-They would have to be colluding with a rich person in need of an organ. This person would tell them where they are in line. The blockchain would tell them this, but it wouldn't tell them who is infront or below them in line.
-If the rich person is not #1 in line, nothing can be done since the blockchain won't revel the identity of people on the waiting list.
-If the rich person is #1 in line or close to it, there's little incentive for him to pay for an illegal service and risk felony charges. At scale, people wouldn't have to wait long anyway, maybe days or weeks as oppose to the current 3-5+ years.
-They would have to know who's a donor and which organ have they sold rights to. People won't tell you this, just like most won't tell you their social security number. And the transplant only occurs after death. It would look suspicious for a new member to die within a week, or month, or year. I'm certain investigators/reporters/data scientists and AI would notice this anomaly and piece it all together which would result in the rich guys finances being scrutinized until they find the link to the criminal organization.

I don't really think it's a good idea to sell your organ for money to save lives. That could translate to: "I will only save your life if you give me money".

I haven't really sat down to deeply consider the use of organs from strangers and the implications. Assuming it's moral, I would rather encourage donations and look for ways to get more people to donate. Maybe by offering their children/relatives some sort of beautiful certificates/cards that prove that their dead parents or relatives helped save the lives of those in need of organs. Donors could be treated with respect... That all the certificate can do
I don't like the idea of people selling part of their body for money, it could encourage all sort of abominable behaviors.
I think you could just publicly list those who need organs, with urgent cases at the top of the list. If someone on the list dies, it should be public too so that more people will be willing to apply to save others. Those on the list can be anonymous, but there should be ways to verify they are real humans in need of organs.

Thanks for the clarification, it is very important as you know to keep the donors safe because their lives can be in danger so I think there has to be some kind of government adoption first so that the police can track such anomalies through the blockchain and punish the criminals who can do business They are criminally responsible for speeding up the execution of orders that they can easily view via the Blockchain.
I know of course that there are many patients who are in dire need of some organs to sustain their lives but it is also very important that this does not cause misfortune to other people who are willing to donate their organs because they need the money.

Nice and useful idea! Due to the lack of donor organs, a huge number of people die every year. Diseases, injuries, whatever - and besides transplantation, there are no other options ... And we all, with a non-zero probability, can end our life so that some part of our physical body can SAVE another life. Why is it bad to conclude a donation agreement in case of a fatal case, having received a benefit now, when it can be used? As for me, an almost perfect combination of useful and pleasant!

"Yes, man is mortal, but that would be half the trouble. The bad thing is that he is sometimes suddenly mortal, that's the trick!" (c) Woland is a character in the novel "The Master and Margarita"

^{(a little off-topic)} the pros and cons that have occurred on the issue of organ donors have emerged for a long time, in my country this is a special fear for prospective donor recipients because it is found that some people have the personality of an organ donor to them, if the organ comes from being angry person then the recipient becomes angry person too or the personality that the donor has given them.  this is the reason why until now the organ donor program is still being discussed in our parliament.

donating organs is very noble, it's just that some of its applications are often misused by several related parties and intermediary organizations. appropriate, maybe on this side there needs to be improvements and crypto can take part in it in the field of transparent transaction data

I don't really think that you really need blockchain technology in order to implement this idea,OP.
A simple database can do the same work.
Anyway,I don't think that creating a marketplace for human organs is humane and/or morally justified.
Mostly likely all the criminals/gangsters/mobsters will take advantage of such "marketplace" by killing more people and selling their organs.
I better solution would be the state to make it mandatory for all people to declare their will to donate their organs after their death.Most of the transplantation recipients don't have any money to buy a human organ.
I know that you want to make a business out of this idea,but this doesn't seem right.
You should focus on other business ideas.

Here in India, it is illegal for individuals who are not related to the patient to donate their organs. As a result, tens of thousands die every year, from ailments to kidney and liver. Three years ago there was no such rule, and poor people used to get exploited by the middle men and forced in to selling their organs. But now the situation is even worse. Even those who want to donate organs on their own free will are prevented by the law from doing that. I fully support any initiative, which compensates organ donors financially.

And in just one page this went from saving lives to making a whole shitload of money...
It's now pretty understandable why some poeple have expressed their concerns previously, the focus of this is money, making money by selling stuff that in a normal society that has a serious problem with it should be donated at death.

Again:


Seriously, do you know how this would sound while you're pitching your project to investors? You're going to hear the mice's hiccups 10 floors below after this.

Anyhow, if you think poeple who take care of their own health so they might still be considered as donors at 40-50 are going to sell you the rights for 500$, you live in a bubble. The ones that will grab this cash will probably be rejected even for blood donation.

There are many drawbacks for this kind of standardisation or regulations because organ donation could turn into mass-money laundering project. Already there are crimes which are rising in the view of kidnapping and organ scrambling!! This filthy business is more prominent in the metropolitan countries and way more dominant in the asian countries. Imagine if they started regulating it then corrupted peeps can manage to get these deals fixed with the criminals just for the sake of money making.

We already have self-donations, donations at will after death and they are fine for now. But I do not think that it should go the way you think. It could take very bad turn over the time in the medical field.

Exactly! If there is one thing I've known of humans from my years on earth, is the fact that we humans we like to cut corners to almost everything. For the supposed donor, putting yourself out or enrolling is actually putting yourself directly in the line of danger. Instantly you become a target of what is sponsoring and might find a way to ensuring your life ends sooner as the organ is of great value.

Secondly, the said individual that was paid upfront, upon exhaustion of funds or after testing what it felt like to be rich would see the need not yo comply with agreement and would instead, try to invest, make ROI and then pay back. So, indirectly, you've loaned someone some investment cash without any interest. That aside, the individual might still decide to go unhealthy on organs of value to discourage its donation.

The initial target group are college students aged 18-25. This group is seen by the public as generally informed and with social mobility and capital. I do not intend my operation to become predatory and solely relying on low income or minority groups. That's bad press and terrible morally. At first I thought $5000 upfront and $5000 after death but a government official who works at USAID convinced me I could get away with offering people way less since its upfront and nothing is required of them, so this is where the $500 figure came from. $500 to a 40-50 year old is not much, lets be honest, but to someone under 30, could be significant. Especially considering I expect them to sell rights to multiple organs. Also, 40% of Americans have less than $400 in emergency savings according to the US Federal Reserve. I think at scale, one person could be able to secure about $25,000 to $50,000 with this program. Again all upfront, and with nothing required, until after their death. Because they are college kids, we assume they will live another 50+ years. As for my role, I am merely getting them to sign up, so I can sell the right to an insurance company or government agency handling insurance, similar to how if you get a $300,000 mortgage at say Bank of America, they may sell it to another bank or investment fund for say $250,000 upfront.


I'm a bit surprised how resistant people are of this. Again, the cash is upfront, we expect you to live for decades and forget about it, and the transplant only occurs after death. No one can see who's a donor, and who's where in line. There's very little room for foul play here. And I want to re-emphasize this, you can take your name off the list at anytime, you just have to pay back the amount give at a 10% annual interest rate from the time you borrowed it, up to 30 years. If the organ is no longer viable, you don't have to pay back anything but your estate/family won't receive the last payment.

Contradiction much?
At one point you're starting well-informed groups and at the same time you're putting up that price range because another group has less than in...emergency funds. Would be ironic if there would be anything thing to laugh about this.

Let me be blunt, you expect somebody who goes to college, has taken care of its body to grant you rights for their organs who might save a relative in case of need for 5 days of work at flipping burgers or mopping the floor at Mcdonald's? You could buy of course a lot of rights from poorer persons for that sum but I'm willing to bet that your bet of 1:100 would be a losing ticket.


Oh, just 10% interest, I mean, yeah, like a bank..expect 10x times costlier.


Because you started this with the idea of doing something for the poeple and you end up with a money milking machine.

If you would have cared that much about this you could have easily found a way to redistribute that money to the ones that needed it, rather than going in 1:100 bets you could have simply made a program in which the sum you are making from the selling of those would be half redistributed annually to the ones in the program
to keep them caring about it and another half to be given to to the relatives after the death of the person so that they would be incentive to approve the donations.

But no, for god's sake would you be pleased with 1% of it and the feeling of actually doing something, you want to profit at most from poeple who desperately need 500$.

We have something similar here as well. When you let everyone donate to everyone as a law then it would become a bit of a problem because mafia and similar bad people end up either stealing organs from others and if not then they would simply pay for people a lot less and get it, rich people willing to pay 5k dollars for a kidney? Mafia would pay 3k to you and get yours and get 2k profit from it, do it for 10 people and you get 20k, do it for 100 people and you get 200k... I am not even going to continue, 100 people for 200k dollars for 100 kidney is more than enough to understand how big of a problem it is.

However when you remove that and make it illegal then it suddenly causes people to die, literally death, so is that a better option? I do not think so because that results with death and everything is better than death. So, it's really a fine thin line.

Selling your organs in exchange for a consideration is not illegal perse, but what is prohibited by law is the illegal act of harvesting organs without following the prescribed rules/laws mandated per country.

Unfortunately with stringent requirements mandated, only chosen individuals are possible candidates in order to legally sell their organs. But you are right- the implications of selling one's organs in third-world countries post a risk on both the donor and the donee.

Me too don't think it has to be Blockchain... what is important is the need to decentralize the processes due to its sensitive nature. It's more like using a DNA database, it needs to be as secure and privacy-friendly as possible and I don't believe centralized platform can offer that level of security.

The risk also stands at you killing the participants as well. Say you paid 5k before they die, and 5k after they die to their relatives or whatever, how would they know 100% that you will not kill them? Sure you could randomize it, sometimes it is 7 years 312 days, sometimes it is a week later, sometimes 2 years 123 days, but as long as they die at young age, or even from anything really then how would they really know if that person died normally?

There are also situations where you won't get anything, for example my mother in law has cancer now, she "beat it" technically but she still has it in her blood and she could get it again any moment, could be tomorrow or could be 5 years later we do not know, hence she can't donate organs because if she does then the new person may have it too, and you would technically kill that person a little later. So if you pay someone 20 years old money to get their organs after they die, then that person may end up getting cancer at old age and their organs would be worth zero.

There is an easier, legal, humane and honest way - to bequeath the donation of your organs in case of an accident, or premature death from illness (provided that you can use the organ or organs). And the family of the rescued can make a contribution, for example, to a charitable foundation, which will officially transfer some kind of reward (the word is not very suitable for the situation) to the family of the deceased. No one cuts out a kidney from a living, no one sells their organs - everything is built on charity

Decentralize it because it's sensitive?
Why? It should be as close to the public as possible because of the risks involved!
Imagine that somebody is desperate for a relative transplant and knows that only 4 people are left in the queue before his turn, and he has all the data of the donors, what do you think is going to happen, poeple have been killed for a few hundred bucks, what price do you put on the life of a relative?
Especially since if he chooses carefully from the list chances are he will never be caught?


Care to explain why?
It's one thing to gain access to data and it's another to store that data safely.
Do you think the blockchain would prevent leaks just like so, because it's a blockchain?
Databases get hacked because somebody gets access to them, just like hackers and malware spreaders get the private keys of guys holding bitcoin, once they got access to that it doesn't matter what kind of database it is, the data will be retrieved.


5k? There are people willing to pay even 200k for one, there are companies involved in "medical tourism" in which you travel to a foreign country and get a transplant there, prices start at 50k for a kidney and that was a few years back.

For 2k for a killing the mafia won't be involved in such, for 200k, it will be a massacre.

Actually, I have heard about organ donation for a long time, if it was legalized of course this could be better so that people don't worry about organ donation, but we have to be careful because many people sell their organs such as kidneys, eyes or others because they want to be rich , in my country 1 kidney costs around $125k.

A thoroughly encrypted data that only the owner can have access to should be better. You think this can be guaranteed on a centralized database? Everyone running a node, controlling his/her private keys and always verifying the integrity of the data on the decentralized network sounds more secure to me.
It's hard to trust a centralized entity to keep My sensitive data safe and secure. Better I control the data myself and be the only one with the keys to decrypt it. As a hacker you can only obtain private keys from few network participants rather than the entire participants unlike on centralized database.
Probably better to store the hash of the data on the shared network or store both encrypted data and the hash keys.

If only the owner can access that data how the hell would that scheme work when both the poeple in need, the insurance company, the company making the connection between those need the data?
You storing some secret code in a blockchain that can't be read by others is useless, others need access to it, once you grant access to anybody else this can lead to leaks.


How can you verify the integrity of the data if the data is not checked to be accurate by somebody?
Unlike transactions in a chain where the origin of your coins is validated when they are minted in a new block how will this data be inserted in the chain? How will nodes verify you are an actual person, you are a citizen of that country, you actually are healthy enough to donate?

And most importantly, if you want to keep your data secret!!!!, how can others validate it?
You realize the contradiction in this?

I think it's important to first learn how it's done these days to analyze the proposal. So I decided to read a bit about my country and some others, and here's what I learned: in Spain, there's a presumption of consent to become a donor after death, unless a person explicitly said they were against it. From what I read about the US, it's the opposite, but 54% of citizens (https://www.pennmedicine.org/updates/blogs/transplant-update/2019/march/5-quick-facts-about-organ-donation#:~:text=According%20to%20Donate%20Life%20America,percent%20are%20actual%20registered%20donors) sign agreements to become donors. Given that 95% support the idea in the US, I think what this country needs is simply the presumption of consent because it indeed makes sense where the vast majority supports it.
So it's already happening, and there are no financial incentives involved, no 'money upfront' or anything.
In my country, you can register as a potential donor in an event of your death, and there's no financial incentive to do this.
I'm not sure any country would provide a financial incentive for people to register, especially in the US, where 54% already registered.

This doesn't have to be a Blockchain like I said before. You could develop a decentralized system designed for that particular industry and have users control their data and choose who to share it with. It could be done with zero proof knowledge or some other secured means I have outlined before. It's not impossible to do  this without leaks.
In a decentralized system, a data could be verified once, hashed and stored on the network. Any unauthorized changes to the verified data can always render it invalid.
I have discussed several how to securely verify data, have it hashed and use it for authentication purposes on websites.

No, you haven't discussed anything and you haven't answered the most important question:
How will you insert by yourself data in that database that nobody has access to but at the same time it will be verified?
If you do it like that is just like creating an account on facebook, till nobody askes you to provide information that that person is indeed you that data is totally unreliable, the moment someone verifies it is the moment your details are no longer secret.


No, you haven't outlined anything, you're just writing the same statement without showing one real example of how this will be done. Besides, if the data is encrypted once you insert it, how it will be safer if it's decentralized compared to being centralized?
If you're going to reply do it by answering my question, this is going nowhere with your just reposting the same things over and over.

Where you said that the organs should be recorded and people should be paid without any form of examination to know their health status or that there shouldn’t be any form of lifestyle restrictions, is that really a good idea? So, what if the person is living a kind of reckless lifestyle that will affect the particular organ that will be needed later on? And maybe when they die, it happens that the organ is no longer in good condition to be used for the transplant, is it not going to be a huge loss for the company and those that needed the organ transplant?

So, do you think that is a good idea, or don’t you think that there should be an examination to know whether the organ is really in good condition before a payment is to be made to the person upfront?

I don't really think this is a wise idea.

Foremost, why would you suggest that there's no need for an examination of the organ donor? That alone, is a very risky move, mate. This is very essential most especially if the topic is about healthcare. It is necessary to background check the lifestyle and medical record of a person who is any way a potential donor of an organ. This is to ensure that the health being of the one being transplanted the organ to, wouldn't be compromised the moment the operation would happen. In addition, to ensure the proper functionality of the organ once stored and used the moment someone already needs it.

Secondly, I think your the concept is just twisted. Organ donation is legal in most countries. What illegal is, is to sell it in exchange of money. In this topic, the idea of organ trafficking is included as well as the selling of organs due to poverty. This will just make more problems instead of filling in and being a solution to a medical problem. If ever this would be legalized, people who think there's no more other way to generate money would just resort to impulsively and carelessly selling their organs in exchange for ample amount of money. And then you will sell it at a higher price to the insurance company. This sounds like a great capitalistic mindset that basically abuses the poor and marginalized. This would just profit the insurance company and the midman, and would left the organ seller at the losing end. Despite saying that this would be voluntary, this is still abusive and just pure greedy. Because as you know, anyone who is desperate would do any measure they know to survive, most especially now wherein life is harder and more challenging than ever.

Lastly, what would be the specific role of blockchain technology in this? What you just mentioned in the post seems like black market to me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it really appeals to be just those listed in black market where you would buy an organ and everyone is anonymous, only showing the transaction ID's etc as a proof of purchase and whatnots. If this kind of thing would be like what your concept is trying to imply, then I don't really want it. Let's not taint the blockchain technology reputation with these kinds of ideas.

Of course im in for the organ donation but the problem comes when you actually realise that its one to donate clothes or books etc. and its totally different thing to donate  something (without earning anything) that will never be replaced like an organ .At the same time its a crime to sell organs... Theres a mix of emotions going through everyone of our heads while discussing a subject like that and thats why its so interesting for me to read other peoples' opinion.
thanks

I have heard for a long time about organ donation, if it is legal, of course there are also legal and illegal because the others are used in the wrong way except for government donations, it is a good method so that it will not be difficult.  people seek organ donation, but we still need to be careful because I said that sometimes it is used in the wrong way many people sell their organs I know what is available they want to get rich, all over the world millions are in need  of the organ and sells it and others just donate to a government where it is legal.

I did not know that you were presumed a donor in Spain unless stated otherwise, but I guess it makes sense. Particularly in a country that is quite strong in organ transplants in general already for a few decades. I cannot help but to feel that this is kind of a "harvesting" by the public health system though.

In my view, and based on the studies, donating for money is an ultimate way of exploitation of the poor. Anyone with a little imagination can figure out how ugly this may get... e.g. selling children for their organs, giving organs away to avoid deprivation and hunger or extreme poverty... My take is that this is already happening in the black market, yet making it official is simply intolerable.