5 ms·

Can you please explain? On the surface this all sounds great, then again, on the surface a lot of things sound great. Especially looking for clarity around thi

by atwebb 7y ago

Can you please explain? On the surface this all sounds great, then again, on the surface a lot of things sound great. Especially looking for clarity around this part: Are there side-effects to using this? Plasma is very safe. It is screened for bloodborne pathogens and blood typed so you don't have a transfusion reaction. Blood transfusion is one of the most regulated industries in the United States. It's one of the safest things available.

1996 7y ago
> Plasma is very safe. It is screened for bloodborne pathogens For those we know. In some countries with centralized organizations handling transfusions, both HIV and hepatis were spread before they knew to test them -- then even after they learned. People sued for willful poisoning in Europe, as there was documented evidence the persons taking the decision were told about the risks yet decided to ignore them against experts advice. To the best of my knowledge, nobody was convicted, ever. > Blood transfusion is one of the most regulated industries Now, given that background, do you think regulations will protect you from unknown pathogens? Or from known ones if someone decides not to bother with the testing?
- 14 7y ago
  That was a huge failure on [1] the Canadian Red Cross. They knew the blood was tainted but wanted to use up existing supply. They were buying blood from prisoner populations, didn't bother to do testing that would have detected most of the Hepatitis C cases, and infected more then 2000 Canadians with HIV. This was a giant screw up I have heard many times because back just before it went public the doctors wanted to give my dad a transfusion for a massive cut he sustained at work. He refused saying no way he trusts the blood. It was just a gut feeling. The doctor said he was making a foolish decision. Two weeks later it was all over the paper. So of course my dad took the paper to his next doctors appointment to get his stitches out and asked the doctor what he thought of his decision now. [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/strombo/news/canadas-tainted-blood-scandal https://www.cbc.ca/strombo/news/canadas-tainted-blood-scanda...
  - 1996 7y ago
    Or maybe it was Canada, I can't say for sure. I just wouldn't call that a screw up, but deliberate risk taking by managers ignoring experts. Tell us, what was the doctor reply? That your dad was lucky? But luck favors the prepared mind - or something like that.

by atwebb 7y ago

1996 7y ago

> Plasma is very safe. It is screened for bloodborne pathogens For those we know. In some countries with centralized organizations handling transfusions, both HIV and hepatis were spread before they knew to test them -- then even after they learned. People sued for willful poisoning in Europe, as there was documented evidence the persons taking the decision were told about the risks yet decided to ignore them against experts advice. To the best of my knowledge, nobody was convicted, ever. > Blood transfusion is one of the most regulated industries Now, given that background, do you think regulations will protect you from unknown pathogens? Or from known ones if someone decides not to bother with the testing?

14 7y ago
That was a huge failure on [1] the Canadian Red Cross. They knew the blood was tainted but wanted to use up existing supply. They were buying blood from prisoner populations, didn't bother to do testing that would have detected most of the Hepatitis C cases, and infected more then 2000 Canadians with HIV. This was a giant screw up I have heard many times because back just before it went public the doctors wanted to give my dad a transfusion for a massive cut he sustained at work. He refused saying no way he trusts the blood. It was just a gut feeling. The doctor said he was making a foolish decision. Two weeks later it was all over the paper. So of course my dad took the paper to his next doctors appointment to get his stitches out and asked the doctor what he thought of his decision now. [1]: https://www.cbc.ca/strombo/news/canadas-tainted-blood-scandal https://www.cbc.ca/strombo/news/canadas-tainted-blood-scanda...
- 1996 7y ago
  Or maybe it was Canada, I can't say for sure. I just wouldn't call that a screw up, but deliberate risk taking by managers ignoring experts. Tell us, what was the doctor reply? That your dad was lucky? But luck favors the prepared mind - or something like that.