Health
Recovered ‘brain dead’ man dancing at sister’s wedding reminds us organ donors are sometimes alive

TJ Hoover and his sister on her wedding day
From LifeSiteNews
Since brain dead people are not dead, it is not surprising that the only multicenter, prospective study of brain death found that the majority of brains from ‘brain dead’ people were not severely damaged at autopsy.
In 2021, a supposedly brain dead man, Anthony Thomas “TJ” Hoover II, opened his eyes and looked around while being wheeled to the operating room to donate his organs. Hospital staff at Baptist Health hospital in Richmond, Kentucky assured his family that these were just “reflexes.”
But organ preservationist Natasha Miller also thought Hoover looked alive. “He was moving around – kind of thrashing. Like, moving, thrashing around on the bed,” said Miller in an NPR interview. “And then when we went over there, you could see he had tears coming down. He was visibly crying.” Thankfully, the procedure was called off, and Hoover was able to recover and even dance at his sister’s wedding this past summer.
Last month, this case was brought before a U.S. House subcommittee investigating organ procurement organizations. Whistleblowers claimed that even after two doctors refused to remove Hoover’s organs, Kentucky Organ Donor Affiliates ordered their staff to find another doctor to perform the surgery.
Because brain death is a social construct and not death itself, I can tell you exactly how many “brain dead” patients are still alive: all of them. When brain death was first proposed by an ad hoc committee at Harvard Medical School in 1968, the committee admitted that these people are not dead, but rather “desperately injured.” They thought that these neurologically injured people were a burden to themselves and others, and that society would be better served if we redefined them as being “dead.” They described their reasoning this way:
Our primary purpose is to define irreversible coma as a new criterion for death. There are two reasons why there is need for a definition: (1) Improvements in resuscitative and supportive measures have led to increased efforts to save those who are desperately injured. Sometimes these efforts have only partial success so that the result is an individual whose heart continues to beat but whose brain is irreversibly damaged. The burden is great on patients who suffer permanent loss of intellect, on their families, on the hospitals, and on those in need of hospital beds already occupied by these comatose patients. (2) Obsolete criteria for the definition of death can lead to controversy in obtaining organs for transplantation.
Since brain dead people are not dead, it is not surprising that the only multicenter, prospective study of brain death found that the majority of brains from “brain dead” people were not severely damaged at autopsy – and 10 actually looked normal. Dr. Gaetano Molinari, one of the study’s principal investigators, wrote:
[D]oes a fatal prognosis permit the physician to pronounce death? It is highly doubtful whether such glib euphemisms as “he’s practically dead,” … “he can’t survive,” … “he has no chance of recovery anyway,” will ever be acceptable legally or morally as a pronouncement that death has occurred.
But history shows that despite Dr. Molinari’s doubts, “brain death,” a prognosis of possible death, went on to be widely accepted as death per se. Brain death was enshrined into US law in 1981 under the Uniform Determination of Death Act. Acceptance of this law has allowed neurologically disabled people to be redefined as “dead” and used as organ donors. Unfortunately, most of these people do not, like TJ Hoover, wake up in time. They suffer death through the harvesting of their organs, a procedure often performed without the benefit of anesthesia.
Happily, some do manage to avoid becoming organ donors and go on to receive proper medical treatment. In 1985, Jennifer Hamann was thrown into a coma after being given a prescription that was incompatible with her epilepsy medication. She could not move or sign that she was awake and aware when she overheard doctors saying that her husband was being “completely unreasonable” because he would not donate her organs. She went on to made a complete recovery and became a registered nurse.
Zack Dunlap was declared brain dead in 2007 following an ATV accident. Even though his cousin demonstrated that Zack reacted to pain, hospital staff told his family that it was just “reflexes.” But as Zack’s reactions became more vigorous, the staff took more notice and called off the organ harvesting team that was just landing via helicopter to take Zack’s organs. Today, Zack leads a fully recovered life.
Colleen Burns was diagnosed “brain dead” after a drug overdose in 2009, but wasn’t given adequate testing and awoke on the operating table just minutes before her organ harvesting surgery. Because the Burns family declined to sue, the hospital only received a slap on the wrist: the State Health Department fined St. Joseph’s Hospital Health Center in Syracuse, New York, just $6,000.
In 2015, George Pickering III was declared brain dead, but his father thought doctors were moving too fast. Armed and dangerous, he held off a SWAT team for three hours, during which time his son began to squeeze his hand on command. “There was a law broken, but it was broken for all the right reasons. I’m here now because of it,” said George III.
Trenton McKinley, a 13-year-old boy, suffered a head injury in 2018 but regained consciousness after his parents signed paperwork to donate his organs. His mother told CBS News that signing the consent to donate allowed doctors to continue Trenton’s intensive care treatment, ultimately giving him time to wake up.
Doctors often say that cases like these prove nothing, and that they are obviously the result of misdiagnosis and medical mistakes. But since all these people were about to become organ donors regardless of whether their diagnoses were correct, I doubt they find the “mistake” excuse comforting.
However, Jahi McMath was indisputably diagnosed as being “brain dead” correctly. She was declared brain dead by three different doctors, she failed three apnea tests, and she had four flat-line EEGs, as well as a cerebral perfusion scan showing “no flow.” But because her parents refused to make her an organ donor and insisted on continuing her medical care, McMath recovered to the point of being able to follow commands. Two neurologists later testified that she was no longer brain dead, but a in minimally conscious state. Her case shows that people correctly declared “brain dead” can still recover.
READ: Woman with no brainwave activity wakes up after hearing her daughter’s voice
Brain death is not death because the brain death concept does not reflect the reality of the phenomenon of death. Therefore, any guideline for its diagnosis will have no basis in scientific facts. People declared brain dead are neurologically disabled, but they are still alive. “Brain dead” organ donation is a concealed form of euthanasia.
Heidi Klessig MD is a retired anesthesiologist and pain management specialist who writes and speaks on the ethics of organ harvesting and transplantation. She is the author of “The Brain Death Fallacy” and her work may be found at respectforhumanlife.com.
Mental Health
Suspect who killed 11 in Vancouver festival attack ID’d

Quick Hit:
Authorities have identified the driver responsible for the devastating attack at Vancouver’s Lapu Lapu Day festival that killed at least 11 and injured dozens more. The suspect, Kai-Ji Adam Lo, 30, had a well-documented history of mental illness, and his family sought help just hours before the tragic event.
Key Details:
- Kai-Ji Adam Lo, 30, was identified as the driver who plowed into a crowd, killing 11 and injuring dozens more.
- Lo’s family sought psychiatric help for him hours before the attack; he was already known to law enforcement.
- Police believe the attack was not terror-related, citing Lo’s extensive mental health struggles.
At least 9 dead in mass casualty event after driver crashes into crowd at Vancouver street festival.
The 30 year old driver was taken into custody by festival goers then arrested.
According to law enforcement “the suspect was known to police for certain circumstances”. pic.twitter.com/slG7LsZNFG
— Kevin Dalton (@TheKevinDalton) April 27, 2025
Diving Deeper:
The city of Vancouver is grappling with unspeakable tragedy following the deadly assault that unfolded during the Lapu Lapu Day festival, a vibrant celebration honoring the Filipino community. Authorities have identified the man behind the wheel as 30-year-old Kai-Ji Adam Lo, who was apprehended at the scene Saturday night.
Lo, whose troubled history with mental illness was well known to local authorities and mental health professionals, faces eight counts of second-degree murder, with additional charges expected as the investigation continues. According to reports, Lo’s family had reached out to a hospital psychiatric ward just hours before the incident, desperately seeking help for him amid his escalating paranoia and delusions. It remains unclear whether any intervention was made in response to the family’s call.
Vancouver Police Chief Steve Rai confirmed that Lo had no interactions with law enforcement immediately prior to the event, but acknowledged that the city is reeling from its “darkest day.” Investigators emphasized that, because of Lo’s mental state, they do not believe the attack was terror-related.
Adding to the complex portrait of the suspect, Lo was mourning profound personal loss. His brother, Alexander Lo, was murdered in January 2024. Following the death, Lo had penned heartbreaking posts online, sharing how his brother’s death and his mother’s subsequent suicide attempt shattered their family.
Tragically, among the 11 killed during Saturday’s carnage was a 5-year-old child. Dozens more were wounded when Lo drove his SUV into the densely packed crowd gathered for the festivities. Lo has since appeared in court and will remain in custody as prosecutors prepare to bring additional charges.
The horror that unfolded in Vancouver serves as a stark reminder of the broader systemic failures surrounding mental health interventions. While Canadian authorities attempt to grapple with the aftermath, this tragedy sadly echoes similar stories in other nations where warnings about individuals in crisis have gone unheeded—with catastrophic results.
Addictions
Four new studies show link between heavy cannabis use, serious health risks

Cannabis products purchased in Ontario and B.C., including gummies, pre-rolled joints, chocolates and dried flower; April 11, 2025. [Photo credit: Alexandra Keeler]
By Alexandra Keeler
New Canadian research shows a connection between heavy cannabis use and dementia, heart attacks, schizophrenia and even death
Six months ago, doctors in Boston began noticing a concerning trend: young patients were showing up in emergency rooms with atypical symptoms and being diagnosed with heart attacks.
“The link between them was that they were heavy cannabis users,” Dr. Ahmed Mahmoud, a cardiovascular researcher and physician in Boston, told Canadian Affairs in an interview.
These frontline observations mirror emerging evidence by Canadian researchers showing heavy cannabis use is associated with significant adverse health impacts, including heart attacks, schizophrenia and dementia.
Sources warn public health measures are not keeping pace with rapid changes to cannabis products as the market is commercialized.
“The irony of this moment is that society’s risk perception of cannabis is at an all-time low, at the exact moment that the substance is probably having increasingly negative health impacts,” said Dr. Daniel Myran, a physician and Canada Research Chair at the University of Ottawa. Myran was lead researcher on three new Canadian studies on cannabis’ negative health impacts.
Legalization
Canada was the first G7 country to create a commercial cannabis market when it legalized the production and sale of cannabis in 2018.
The drug is now widely used in Canada.
In the 2024 Canadian Cannabis Survey, an annual government survey of cannabis trends, 26 per cent of respondents said they used cannabis for non-medical purposes in the past year, up from 22 per cent in 2018. Among youth, that number was 41 per cent.
Health Canada’s website warns that cannabis use can lower blood pressure and raise heart rates, which can increase the risk of a heart attack. But the warnings on cannabis product labels vary. Some mention risks of anxiety or effects on memory and concentration, but make no mention of cardiovascular risks.
The annual cannabis survey also shows a significant percentage of Canadians remain unaware of cannabis’ health risks.
In the survey, only 70 per cent of respondents said they had enough reliable information to make informed decisions about cannabis use. And 50 per cent of respondents said they had not seen any education campaigns or public health messages about cannabis.
At the same time, researchers are finding mounting evidence that cannabis use is associated with health risks.
A 2023 study by researchers at the University of Calgary, the University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services found that adults with cannabis use disorder faced a 60 per cent higher risk of experiencing adverse cardiovascular events — including heart attacks. Cannabis use disorder is marked by the inability to stop using cannabis despite negative consequences, such as work, social, legal or health issues.
Between February and April of this year, three other Canadian studies linked frequent cannabis use to elevated risks of developing schizophrenia, dementia and mortality. These studies were primarily conducted by researchers at the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and ICES uOttawa (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences).
“These results suggest that individuals who require hospital-based care for a [cannabis use disorder] may be at increased risk of premature death,” said the study linking cannabis-related hospital visits with increased mortality rates.
The three 2024 studies all examined the impacts of severe cannabis use, suggesting more moderate users may face lower risks. The researchers also cautioned that their research shows a correlation between heavy cannabis use and adverse health effects, but does not establish causality.
Subscribe for free to get BTN’s latest news and analysis – or donate to our investigative journalism fund.
Budtenders
Health experts say they are troubled by the widespread perception that cannabis is entirely benign.
“It has some benefits, it has some side effects,” said Mahmoud, the Boston cardiovascular researcher. “We need to raise awareness about the side effects as well as the benefits.”
Some also expressed concern that the commercialization of cannabis products in Canada has created a race to produce products with elevated levels of THC, the main psychoactive compound that produces a “high.”
THC levels have more than doubled since legalization, yet even products with high THC levels are marketed as harmless.
“The products that are on the market are evolving in ways that are concerning,” Myran said. “Higher THC products are associated with considerably more risk.”
Myran views cannabis decriminalization as a public health success, because it keeps young people out of the criminal justice system and reduces inequities faced by Indigenous and racialized groups.
“[But] I do not think that you need to create a commercial cannabis market or industry in order to achieve those public health benefits,” he said.
Since decriminalization, the provinces have taken different approaches to regulating cannabis. But even in provinces where governments control cannabis distribution, such as New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, products with high THC levels dominate retail shelves and online storefronts.
In Myran’s view, federal and provincial governments should instead be focused on curbing harmful use patterns, rather than promoting cannabis sales.
Ian Culbert, executive director of the Canadian Public Health Association, thinks governments’ financial interest in the cannabis industry creates a conflict of interest.
“[As with] all regulated substances, governments are addicted to the revenue they create,” he said. “But they also have a responsibility to safeguard the well-being of citizens.”
Culbert believes cannabis retailers should be required to educate customers about health risks — just as bartenders are required to undergo Smart Serve training and lottery corporations are required to mitigate risks of gambling addiction.
“Give ‘budtenders’ the training around potential health risks,” he said.
“While cannabis may not be the cause of some of these negative health events … it is the intersection at which an intervention can take place through the transaction of sales. So is there something we can do there that can change the trajectory of a person’s life?”
This article was produced through the Breaking Needles Fellowship Program, which provided a grant to Canadian Affairs, a digital media outlet, to fund journalism exploring addiction and crime in Canada. Articles produced through the Fellowship are co-published by Break The Needle and Canadian Affairs.
Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism, consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.
-
Alberta8 hours ago
New Alberta Election Act bans electronic vote counting machines, lowers threshold for recalls and petitions
-
International2 days ago
U.S. Army names new long-range hypersonic weapon ‘Dark Eagle’
-
Alberta8 hours ago
Hours after Liberal election win, Alberta Prosperity Project drumming up interest in referendum
-
Alberta16 hours ago
Premier Danielle Smith responds to election of Liberal government
-
Automotive1 day ago
Major automakers push congress to block California’s 2035 EV mandate
-
Business2 days ago
Net Zero by 2050: There is no realistic path to affordable and reliable electricity
-
Autism2 days ago
UK plans to test children with gender confusion for autism
-
COVID-192 days ago
Former Australian state premier accused of lying about justification for COVID lockdowns