6 ms·

These appeals to saving lives would be entirely unnecessary with just one small fix. The supply of blood would be dramatically increased if the United Blood Se

These appeals to saving lives would be entirely unnecessary with just one small fix. The supply of blood would be dramatically increased if the United Blood Services would simply pay $50 per unit. After testing and transportation, a unit of blood costs hospitals about $400. With transfusion services, the hospital charges the patient between $1400 and $3000 depending on provider. Adding a mere $50 to that in order to permanently solve supply constraints would be a huge win for everybody.

stochastic_monk 8y ago
Part of why I don't donate blood is that the Red Cross has a history of misappropriating funds and hasn't been honest about how their money has been used. It's been a multibillion dollar industry for decades, and it sure seems to me that I'd donate my time and blood only to enrich other people.
- aleksei 8y ago
  I would hope only a very small part. Sure, don't give money, but it's not like your blood will be diverted to some offshore blood haven. It's one of the few things you can be pretty sure will be given to people in need.
  - zokier 8y ago
    > will be given to people in need. Given or sold? Big difference there. If sold, then it is pretty much the same as giving ARC the equivalent amount of money.
    - firethief 8y ago
      On their finance sheet maybe, but not in terms of lives saved.
aleksei 8y ago
I believe the point for not paying for donating blood is to prevent people from lying about their health when donating. Anyway, saving a life should be far more valuable than 50 bucks. BTW, a huge win for everybody would be not to have to pay ridiculous amounts for a bag of donated blood.