4 ms·

that is until the market is opened up and regulated. with so many young people around realizing that a thing they constantly produce for free is worth something

that is until the market is opened up and regulated. with so many young people around realizing that a thing they constantly produce for free is worth something - there will be no incentive to go through the criminal path. also worth mentioning that this could positively impact young population health as there is now clear monetary incentive to keep your blood healthy. it's a win all around, regulators just have to be careful and not screw it up.

d--b 9y ago
Blood is worth a lot, people know that already, and illegal blood farming exists in some countries. But paying for blood increases the risk of people lying about the quality of their blood, which is why the administration doesn't incentivize blood donations. Your argument about criminality is very wrong. Maybe I speak for myself, but I'd much rather be a criminal than a professional blood donor. People are not criminals because they have no other way...
- keymone 9y ago
  > risk of people lying about the quality of their blood this is where middlemen companies come into play, testing the blood and ensuring level of quality > People are not criminals because they have no other way sorry, i was not clear enough in my comment. what i meant is that opening up the legal way to sell blood reduces the incentive for criminals to do blood farming or human trafficking for the same purpose. much like legalizing marijuana will push drug traffickers out of the market.
- bko 9y ago
  In the US it's already legal to sell plasma, semen, eggs, bone marrow , breast milk, and rent wombs as a surrogate [0]. The legality of selling blood would not eliminate donations much like the ability to sell clothing does not eliminate clothing donation. Considering that there are negatives to selling blood (e.g. time, marginal risk, inconvenience, etc) I think some form of compensation is fair and would only increase the supply [0] http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/10-body-parts-you-can-legally-sell-for-big-bucks/ http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/10-body-parts-you-can-le...
  - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
    >rent wombs as a surrogate If the tenant stops paying does the baby get delivered prematurely?
- HarkMamilton 9y ago
  Back in college I donated sperm for money. It's not like I was forced into it; it was just nice to have an extra source of income besides my student job. This also enables sperm banks to retain recurrent donors, which means they can afford to do very rigorous testing amortized over several dozen sperm samples. DNA screening, urine tests, blood tests, etc. That wouldn't be viable under the blood donation model. I've donated blood 5 or 6 times but I doubt even that's enough to make it worth the kind of testing they did on me as a sperm donor.
gutnor 9y ago
Western world is already struggling to find enough blood donor, and one of their main source are the students. You would not want to force those students to have to choose between morality and 1 order of magnitude more money than what they can do in the official public blood donation center.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  It is not immoral to sell one's own blood, so long as one is not left unable to fulfill other moral obligations.
  - gutnor 9y ago
    The moral bit is choosing between 2 competing blood donations service - one that is run publicly to save life, the other to extend the life of healthy individual. I make the assumption that the remuneration of the second one will be most likely way bigger than in the first case. The only reason people would chose to donate to the first one is morality which is unfair. The morality of the remuneration is orthogonal. I assumed we were talking about countries where it is moral and legal to remunerate blood donation. I don't think that countries that today do not allow remuneration (for any reason) would allow it for this new use case.
    - HarkMamilton 9y ago
      You can still use blood from a private company for the treatments you would use "public" blood for.
    - Jotra7 9y ago
      Don't try to bring morality into any discussion with the free market religionists. The only true morality is profit. Everything else is just stupid.
- keymone 9y ago
  i don't buy it. my gut feeling is that loss in number of donors due to incentive to sell will be completely offset by lowering the barrier to giving your blood. companies fighting for customers and public image will start charity programs where some % of sold blood will be donated. there are just many more ways in which blood would be donated into the system with open market than with the closed one.

d--b 9y ago

Blood is worth a lot, people know that already, and illegal blood farming exists in some countries. But paying for blood increases the risk of people lying about the quality of their blood, which is why the administration doesn't incentivize blood donations. Your argument about criminality is very wrong. Maybe I speak for myself, but I'd much rather be a criminal than a professional blood donor. People are not criminals because they have no other way...

keymone 9y ago
> risk of people lying about the quality of their blood this is where middlemen companies come into play, testing the blood and ensuring level of quality > People are not criminals because they have no other way sorry, i was not clear enough in my comment. what i meant is that opening up the legal way to sell blood reduces the incentive for criminals to do blood farming or human trafficking for the same purpose. much like legalizing marijuana will push drug traffickers out of the market.
bko 9y ago
In the US it's already legal to sell plasma, semen, eggs, bone marrow , breast milk, and rent wombs as a surrogate [0]. The legality of selling blood would not eliminate donations much like the ability to sell clothing does not eliminate clothing donation. Considering that there are negatives to selling blood (e.g. time, marginal risk, inconvenience, etc) I think some form of compensation is fair and would only increase the supply [0] http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/10-body-parts-you-can-legally-sell-for-big-bucks/ http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/10-body-parts-you-can-le...
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  >rent wombs as a surrogate If the tenant stops paying does the baby get delivered prematurely?
HarkMamilton 9y ago
Back in college I donated sperm for money. It's not like I was forced into it; it was just nice to have an extra source of income besides my student job. This also enables sperm banks to retain recurrent donors, which means they can afford to do very rigorous testing amortized over several dozen sperm samples. DNA screening, urine tests, blood tests, etc. That wouldn't be viable under the blood donation model. I've donated blood 5 or 6 times but I doubt even that's enough to make it worth the kind of testing they did on me as a sperm donor.

gutnor 9y ago

Western world is already struggling to find enough blood donor, and one of their main source are the students. You would not want to force those students to have to choose between morality and 1 order of magnitude more money than what they can do in the official public blood donation center.

jessaustin 9y ago
It is not immoral to sell one's own blood, so long as one is not left unable to fulfill other moral obligations.
- gutnor 9y ago
  The moral bit is choosing between 2 competing blood donations service - one that is run publicly to save life, the other to extend the life of healthy individual. I make the assumption that the remuneration of the second one will be most likely way bigger than in the first case. The only reason people would chose to donate to the first one is morality which is unfair. The morality of the remuneration is orthogonal. I assumed we were talking about countries where it is moral and legal to remunerate blood donation. I don't think that countries that today do not allow remuneration (for any reason) would allow it for this new use case.
  - HarkMamilton 9y ago
    You can still use blood from a private company for the treatments you would use "public" blood for.
  - Jotra7 9y ago
    Don't try to bring morality into any discussion with the free market religionists. The only true morality is profit. Everything else is just stupid.
keymone 9y ago
i don't buy it. my gut feeling is that loss in number of donors due to incentive to sell will be completely offset by lowering the barrier to giving your blood. companies fighting for customers and public image will start charity programs where some % of sold blood will be donated. there are just many more ways in which blood would be donated into the system with open market than with the closed one.