In May (the last time I took a vacation, by the way), I wrote a review of Larry’s Kidney for the Wall Street Journal that pointed out how entertaining the book is while it tended to celebrate the lack of ethical consideration in going to China for an organ transplant. This clip from CNN allows author Daniel Asa Rose to give his side of the story, and just like the book, he’s entertaining and likable. However, once again, Rose avoids two big ethical problems with the medical tourism that he and his cousin indulged:

CNN did ask Rose why he didn’t just donate a kidney himself, which Rose avoids answering. He never gets asked about the ethical considerations of buying an organ from an executed prisoner in a regime that executes dissidents — Rose tried to slough it off in the book by telling readers he’d been assured that the executee was a very bad man — or in pushing ahead of the line in China, where 2 million people need transplants. I would have liked to have heard Rose’s perspective on that, especially because he seems like a very likable and voluble guy, and squaring that circle would have proven interesting … and I’d bet that he wouldn’t have bothered.

Rose also misses another point in his call for people to designate themselves as organ donors in case of death. People can donate kidneys while they’re still alive, too, and hundreds of thousands of lives could be saved if they would. Don’t forget to read my post on Sally Satel’s book, When Altruism Isn’t Enough, and my longer post on that subject.