Donating Blood

[lowviz]

I'm guessing that blood bank shortages could be decreased if they PAID people for this valuable product - I bet $50/pint would entice a lot of people.

My family and I get free blood if any of us needs it. -but that isn't why I donate regularly, it's just a plus. The question was: IF one chooses to donate regularly, how long should one wait before no minor symptoms are percieved? -a lot of good answers have been offered.

 

[NudeDiver]

The question was: IF one chooses to donate regularly, how long should one wait before no minor symptoms are percieved? -a lot of good answers have been offered.

Why yes, I know. But I was addressing the comment immediately above mine:

...and no, I do not work for the Red Cross, but if I needed a pint, I hope someone will step up for me.

...and suggesting that if agencies adopted a policy of paying people a suitable amount for their blood, there would be a lot more people willing to "step up" for that poster (and others). As the payment amount increases, the need for "hope" can be expected to decrease.

 

[Gene_Hobbs]

I posted an abstract and case report in this older thread that might be of interest to a few of you.

 

[wve]

I'm guessing that blood bank shortages could be decreased if they PAID people for this valuable product - I bet $50/pint would entice a lot of people.

Blood banks used to pay for blood, but analysis showed that they were attracting the wrong kinds of donors. Drug addicts discovered that it was a quick way to score some cash for drugs. It turns out that those are the kind of people who pass along HIV and hepatitis C.

So blood banks ended up paying for blood they couldn't use. When they stopped paying, the blood supply cleaned up a lot. This is why they are now so heavily dependent upon people who donate because they are good people.

 

[wve]

WVE - if Brad is doing pheresis as opposed to whole blood, 2 product/units red cells would not be uncommon.

I thought he donated two units of whole blood, but you are correct if he was donating components instead.

 

[Walter]

It's interesting to me that usually people "donate" blood, but then the agency (such as Red Cross) to whom it is donated turns around and sells it to someone else (such as a hospital), who will (usually) charge the person who gets it.

Not really. They charge for the cost of drawing, testing, transporting, etc. There is no charge for the blood itself. Blood banks are non-profit, but they do have to meet operating expenses. The cost of blood would go up dramatically if they didn't get so many donations of both blood and financial support. When you donate blood, you get credit and are not charged the blood bank's break even fee.

 

[NudeDiver]

So blood banks ended up paying for blood they couldn't use. When they stopped paying, the blood supply cleaned up a lot. This is why they are now so heavily dependent upon people who donate because they are good people.

Ah, but all they have to do is withhold payment until blood is determined usable. Not so hard. By requiring proper ID and checking their databases BEFORE drawing blood, they could also really cut down a lot on the repeat losers coming in.

Maybe initially they would incur the costs screening blood that turns out to be unusable - but they can just pass that cost on to their customers. I mean, really, if someone is hurt bad enough that they require blood donations, adding another $50, $100 or even $200 per pint to a bill already in the thousands isn't really going to matter much. It's certainly going to matter less than not being able to get the blood they need because not enough people wanted to donate.

 

[Walter]

Why are you trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist? There is no reason to buy blood. While there are shortages from time to time, the volunteer system is working quite well. Buying blood would increase costs while increasing the risk to patients receiving blood. Tests are not 100% accurate.

 

[Fionab]

I started donating blood in 1974 (35 gallons)

Blimey that is equivalent to 8 x 1 pint donations a year, how often can you donate in the US as that is far more than here in the UK as donations should be 16 weeks apart.

 

[sibermike7]

Why are you trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist? There is no reason to buy blood. While there are shortages from time to time, the volunteer system is working quite well. Buying blood would increase costs while increasing the risk to patients receiving blood. Tests are not 100% accurate.

Amen to that Walter!
I received blood from a donor who later tested HIV+. I had to have MASSIVE transfusions and plasmapheresis. I asked the nurse how soon after receiving my 1st transfusion would I have to be tested for AIDS and here is how the conversation went:
She said, "Don't worry about it the blood supply is safe."
"How do you know."
"We test all the blood."
"Oh. O.K. How soon can I be tested."
"Well... You'll have to wait 6 months."
"SIX MONTHS!!??? WHY!??!"
"Because you won't show any signs for at least 6 months."
"WELL THEN HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THE BLOOD YOU ARE GIVING ME NOW IS SAFE!!??"
"We tested it."

IOW, if a person was infected and hadn't carried the HIV long enough for his body to develop the antibodies, a test would not show the infection and he could pass the disease along.