Odds 'n Sods

Did you know that the only one of "Hitler's trees" brought here to Canada has gone missing? Not that I would expect anyone to be losing much sleep over this, but it is apparently of great interest to Carleton University journalism professor Klaus Pohle. It was presented to Canada's only gold medalist, Frank Amyot, in the 1936 Olympics, and then given by him to Ottawa's mayor at a ceremony honouring his Olympic achievement. After that, it disappeared from record. There are others still thriving in places as far spread as the Netherlands and New Zealand, including the one awarded to Jesse Owens. The Olympic Oak was given to him as one of the 130 gold medallists at the Berlin Games, and taken home to be planted at his high school practice field, where it still scatters its acorns each year. But the Olympic Oak brought here to Canada can not be found. Professor Pohle has gone on record as saying he is not sure that he would divulge the location graced by Amyot's oak, even if he does find it, out of concern for the well-being of the tree. Because the oaks were awarded at the games presided over by Hitler, Pohle fears there would be those who would hack the tree down if it were found.



Still here in Ontario, there is once again a move afoot to introduce a bill giving presumed consent to organ donation. Two MPP's at Queen's Park are pushing for a law that would grant automatic donor consent unless a person takes steps explicitly to opt out. The law is being touted as a way to address the issue of the currently lengthy waits for organ transplants, not only here in Ontario, but nationwide, as well. At the moment, between 140 and 250 Canadians die annually, while waiting in vain for a transplant that could have saved them.
The two MPP's, Peter Kormos and Cheri Di Novo, have the right idea. There are too many people who do not sign the donor portion of their drivers' license, for instance, not so much because they really oppose the idea but because they just don't bother. It is currently assumed that unless a person takes steps to fill out a card indicating their wish to be a donor, they are not willing to give such a gift as their last gesture of goodwill toward humankind. Why should that be the case? It is not the assumption made in either Belgium or Spain, where everyone is registered as a potential donor, unless they very specifically state otherwise.
Once a person is dead, time becomes of the utmost concern in the harvesting of organs. For the attending medical personnel to have to approach grief-stricken survivors takes valuable time, not to mention the time they might want to consider and discuss the move. A cornea taken in optimum time could allow a recipient to see the light of day again; to see the faces of their loved ones again. Why should anyone have a problem with being part of such a miracle? Obviously, the lack of a properly functioning cornea will not kill anyone, but the lack of a properly functioning kidney, lung, or heart can and does kill. The patient survival rate is now approximately 78% according to data released by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, and heart transplants are performed at an approximate rate of 5.1 per million population. It could be more, and the question that needs answering is why it isn't. It's a question that that should be answered by all who oppose the bill being proposed by the two MPP's.
Some, of course, will utter dire warnings about supposed donors being whisked off to the dissection labs before they're even dead, by doctors in a hurry for organs. Such a scenario has not occurred in Spain or Belgium. Others will whine about God needing them to be buried intact so that they can be resurrected intact. Anyone who indulges in such nonsensical opposition needs first to give their head a good shake, and then to consider a fact, or two. If Great Aunt Matilda knocks off tomorrow, then J.C is going to have to get his act in gear damn fast. Unless the Parousia happens right after Matilda's last waltz, the process of rot is going to set in, and who the hell wants to picture themselves spending eternity with half their visage vanished? It seems to me that assuming god is omnipotent means s/he will have a solution to any possible problem posed by decomposed human flesh, and it isn't going to be based on the corpse's having rotted in its entirety. I'm betting the deity will be perfectly able to improvise "missing" lungs, hearts, kidneys, and corneas for donors the same as s/he will for all those countless others who have already gone on to their rest and rot.
For god's sake (pun intended or not, as the reader sees fit) pass the law!