One's Enough: Kidney Donors Live Just as Long as Nondonors

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Every 30 minutes all the blood in our bodies is filtered through two kidneys. But diabetes can cause these fist-size organs to fail, leading to a buildup of chemicals in the blood that would be fatal without dialysis or a kidney transplant.

At least 6,000 healthy people every year in the U.S. donate a kidney to someone they know, and about 100 more come forward to anonymously give the gift of glomeruli (the basic filtration units of the kidney). It’s true that you only need one kidney to live, but the operation required to remove its twin and the risk of disease developing in the remaining one later on make donation a serious decision.

Transplant surgeon Dorry Segev of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine studied mortality among 80,000 kidney donors during the past 15 years, comparing them with healthy people who have both kidneys. The study, published March 10 in the Journal of the American Medical Association—60 years after the first kidney transplant in the U.S.—found no increase in mortality among donors once they recover from the operation.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Although donors are carefully screened before the procedure, Segev emphasizes that there are risks: “It’s still a major operation. You’re still living with one kidney. People still need to think about it and be aware of the risks in taking on this heroic act.”

Scientific American Magazine Vol 302 Issue 5This article was published with the title “One’s enough: Kidney Donors Live Just as Long as Nondonors” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 302 No. 5 (), p. 20
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican052010-3pDyq1qD8ixrqFjbD6U0k1

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe