Greetings, REALL!

A co-worker of mine was commenting on an urban legend I had never
heard of:  The so-called "Stolen Kidney" urban legend which has been
simmering in the United States for some 20 years now.  It seems that
the legend is once again gaining in popularity in the Southern states.
Louisiana police officers, I'm told, are getting somewhat annoyed.

The legend has it that people -- mostly business men and women --
are going to bars in the evening, meeting new friends, and then
returning to their hotels where they pass out, only to wake up in
the tub with a kidney missing.  The legend states that the
people who steal these kidneys -- mobil bands of rogue surgons,
I must imagine -- aren't entirely unhelpful since victims are left
with some kind of drainage tube sticking out of their wounds and
the hotel room telephone having been placed within easy reach.  A
written note attached to the telephone offers the helpful suggestion
that the victim telephone a hospital or the authorities to have
themselves professionally looked after.

The question is:  Are these reports really an urban legend?  This has
some believability since so many people must wait for long times for
kidney doners.  Anyone skilled enough to hack-out someone's kidney
in a marketable condition would doubtless be able to do so in a hotel
room -- given the right tools.  And it would be at least as profitable
as selling drugs to the CIA.

But then there are so many problems with this legend.  If I were a
medical doctor I would probably be able to come up with hundreds of
problems with this legend.

If I was a rogue surgeon looking for a profitable kidney, I would want
to launch a series of blood workups on a fairly large number of intended
victims before getting someone drunk enough to slip him a Mickey Finn.
Drawing someone's blood is bound to also draw their attention.
Alternative methods of finding a suitable -- however probably
uncooperative -- doner would need to involve conspiracies which
include medical facilities and perhaps government agencies; any of
the many organizations a person may leave blood with.

Then you've got to ask whether these surgeons know the medical
history of their victims.  It would be a bummer to go through the
effort of removing a victim's kidney and keeping the victim alive
when you've removed his _last_ kidney.

Of course a big question is why leave the victim alive in the first
place?  Could it be the hypocratic oath kicking-in somewhat belatedly?
And why stop with one kidney?  If I'm unethical enough to steal
someone's kidney and leave them unattended in a hotel bathtub, I
would think I would also be unethical enough to farm the guy totally
and be done with it.