6 ms·

Obviously if this succeeds, then the life-saving implications are tremendous. It would become practical to keep a stock of lab-grown blood in ambulances, as it

Obviously if this succeeds, then the life-saving implications are tremendous. It would become practical to keep a stock of lab-grown blood in ambulances, as it can just be rotated out when it expires, but the immediate availability of blood in the field can mean the difference between life and death. I just hope that blood donation doesn't go away as a result. There are both ethical and personal benefits - ethical, because it's a visceral experience of doing something good for society that most people can do, and with little effort; personal, because of potential health benefits from donating blood, see e.g. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2790905 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle... .

senkora 4y ago
I don’t think this is the right way to think about it. If donating blood is no longer a useful societal good, then there are no ethical benefits. If there are health benefits to bloodletting, then we can do that independently of donating the blood.
- TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
  And are those substances filtered out before being used? Could a recipient end up with higher concentrations in their blood?
  - wongarsu 4y ago
    Blood transfusion comes with a bunch of health risks. When it is done you generally have bigger problems than some PFAS accumulation.
armchairhacker 4y ago
also financial: some people rely on blood donations for extra cash to pay for food and bills. Though, there are better ways to give people opportunities…
- AkshatJ27 4y ago
  People get paid to donate blood?
  - otachack 4y ago
    I believe you can get paid for donating your plasma components.
  - KyleSanderson 4y ago
    In the US, yes.
  - guynamedloren 4y ago
    Not paid to donate blood, as far as I know, but plasma. I did this a handful of times in college for extra cash.
    - doliveira 4y ago
      They still pierce you to remove blood and you get paid for it, don't you? I don't think "it's just the plasma" makes much of a difference.
      - asib 4y ago
        It does with respect to how frequently you're able to donate. In the UK, blood donation can be no more frequent than once every 12 weeks (for men). Plasma can be donated up to once every 2 weeks.
      - PeterisP 4y ago
        They pierce you to remove blood and put it back. You get to keep all the non-plasma components - blood cells, etc.
        doliveira 4y ago
        So...? The ethical (political? social? moral?) component seems the same to me.
dsign 4y ago
Well I do hope that this succeeds beyond the wildest expectations, and blood-donations go the way of the horse[^1]. We can cultivate ethics in everything else. -------------------------------- [^1]: We still have horses. So there is a chance some people will become recreational vampire-feeders and some people will adopt vampirism as a hobby. Fine, I won't judge.
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  "So there is a chance some people will become recreational vampire-feeders and some people will adopt vampirism as a hobby. Fine, I won't judge. " Not very surprising, that is already a thing. Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_vampirism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_vampirism
frozenport 4y ago
>>then the life-saving implications are tremendous Are people in medical settings dying because of a lack of blood? It seems that unless you're in some exotic blood group you will likely find a compatible donor, and it is not clear as to severity of an imperfect match to rarer groups like the mentioned "Bombay" group.
- ip26 4y ago
  Your parent is theorizing that people in edge medical settings are. For example, an EMT might not be able to give you a transfusion while you lay bleeding in the dirt, because they may not have twenty units of blood to spare in the bus.
clintonb 4y ago
This is not a solution to a general need for blood, but a need for rare blood types. Hospitals may keep the lab-grown rate blood, but not ambulances.
- tempestn 4y ago
  Initially, but once the technology is proven I don't see why it wouldn't become more generalized over time.
- russdill 4y ago
  I think a lot of people commenting just didn't read the article. The feedstock is donor blood.
Terr_ 4y ago
I imagine that donations will continue to be important for a range of subtler purposes, such as using the plasma for immunological stuff.
- gus_massa 4y ago
  Donation to get antigens for the RH group to give to RH- mother after a RH+ baby is an important application. For example https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/11/health/james-harrison-blood-donor-retires-trnd/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/11/health/james-harrison-blo...
  - tait 4y ago
    Right idea, but I think maybe you may have used the wrong word. The donation is to get antibodies. Antigens are are the stimulus that causes the body to form antibodies. We give the Rh- mom antibodies so they bind to antigens on the blood from baby; the idea being that "hiding" the antigens from mom's immune system will prevent her from making her own antibodies.
lesuorac 4y ago
While your article calls out PFAS in firefighters, there are people who for other reasons need blood letting. It's one of my biggest gripes with blood donation in the US is that those people are prohibited from donating blood because they're getting "value" from doing so (instead of having to pay somebody to draw their blood the red cross would be drawing it for free -- note, the blood isn't unusable for any other reason than drawing it provides value to the donater). Like you have a population that must give blood by some means and regularly the various blood banks complain about a shortage and they never seem to be able to put two and two together ...
- tait 4y ago
  I would love to see more donor centers allow hemochromatosis patients to donate. I think there is not actually regulatory ban. Last I looked into this, it was because of the conflict of interest - the FDA requires blood from donors with hemochromatosis be labeled as such. And even that requirement can be worked around. See, for example, https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/blooddonor/donationtypes/hemochromatosis.html https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/blooddonor/donationtypes/hemo.... Background, most centers charge for therapeutic phlebotomy but obviously not for volunteer blood donation. The exception is permissable if the center agrees to allow the patient's blood to be drawn for free, whether or not they would qualify as a blood donor. The issue with "getting value" from donating is that people sometimes lie in order to be able to get that value. The downstream issues can be very painful - I have personally taken care of patients who got HIV or hepatitis from blood transfusion. I am pretty sure any of them would emphatically agree it is important to ensure the blood supply is as safe as possible. So it can be done, but it has to be done carefully.
- kyleyeats 4y ago
  This actually reversed just this year, with most major blood banks (following the example of the Red Cross) now allowing donations from diagnosed hemochromatosis patients.

senkora 4y ago

I don’t think this is the right way to think about it. If donating blood is no longer a useful societal good, then there are no ethical benefits. If there are health benefits to bloodletting, then we can do that independently of donating the blood.

TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
And are those substances filtered out before being used? Could a recipient end up with higher concentrations in their blood?
- wongarsu 4y ago
  Blood transfusion comes with a bunch of health risks. When it is done you generally have bigger problems than some PFAS accumulation.

armchairhacker 4y ago

also financial: some people rely on blood donations for extra cash to pay for food and bills. Though, there are better ways to give people opportunities…

AkshatJ27 4y ago
People get paid to donate blood?
- otachack 4y ago
  I believe you can get paid for donating your plasma components.
- KyleSanderson 4y ago
  In the US, yes.
- guynamedloren 4y ago
  Not paid to donate blood, as far as I know, but plasma. I did this a handful of times in college for extra cash.
  - doliveira 4y ago
    They still pierce you to remove blood and you get paid for it, don't you? I don't think "it's just the plasma" makes much of a difference.
    - asib 4y ago
      It does with respect to how frequently you're able to donate. In the UK, blood donation can be no more frequent than once every 12 weeks (for men). Plasma can be donated up to once every 2 weeks.
    - PeterisP 4y ago
      They pierce you to remove blood and put it back. You get to keep all the non-plasma components - blood cells, etc.
      - doliveira 4y ago
        So...? The ethical (political? social? moral?) component seems the same to me.

dsign 4y ago

Well I do hope that this succeeds beyond the wildest expectations, and blood-donations go the way of the horse[^1]. We can cultivate ethics in everything else. -------------------------------- [^1]: We still have horses. So there is a chance some people will become recreational vampire-feeders and some people will adopt vampirism as a hobby. Fine, I won't judge.

hutzlibu 4y ago
"So there is a chance some people will become recreational vampire-feeders and some people will adopt vampirism as a hobby. Fine, I won't judge. " Not very surprising, that is already a thing. Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_vampirism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_vampirism

frozenport 4y ago

>>then the life-saving implications are tremendous Are people in medical settings dying because of a lack of blood? It seems that unless you're in some exotic blood group you will likely find a compatible donor, and it is not clear as to severity of an imperfect match to rarer groups like the mentioned "Bombay" group.

ip26 4y ago
Your parent is theorizing that people in edge medical settings are. For example, an EMT might not be able to give you a transfusion while you lay bleeding in the dirt, because they may not have twenty units of blood to spare in the bus.

clintonb 4y ago

This is not a solution to a general need for blood, but a need for rare blood types. Hospitals may keep the lab-grown rate blood, but not ambulances.

tempestn 4y ago
Initially, but once the technology is proven I don't see why it wouldn't become more generalized over time.
russdill 4y ago
I think a lot of people commenting just didn't read the article. The feedstock is donor blood.

Terr_ 4y ago

I imagine that donations will continue to be important for a range of subtler purposes, such as using the plasma for immunological stuff.

gus_massa 4y ago
Donation to get antigens for the RH group to give to RH- mother after a RH+ baby is an important application. For example https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/11/health/james-harrison-blood-donor-retires-trnd/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/11/health/james-harrison-blo...
- tait 4y ago
  Right idea, but I think maybe you may have used the wrong word. The donation is to get antibodies. Antigens are are the stimulus that causes the body to form antibodies. We give the Rh- mom antibodies so they bind to antigens on the blood from baby; the idea being that "hiding" the antigens from mom's immune system will prevent her from making her own antibodies.

lesuorac 4y ago

While your article calls out PFAS in firefighters, there are people who for other reasons need blood letting. It's one of my biggest gripes with blood donation in the US is that those people are prohibited from donating blood because they're getting "value" from doing so (instead of having to pay somebody to draw their blood the red cross would be drawing it for free -- note, the blood isn't unusable for any other reason than drawing it provides value to the donater). Like you have a population that must give blood by some means and regularly the various blood banks complain about a shortage and they never seem to be able to put two and two together ...

tait 4y ago
I would love to see more donor centers allow hemochromatosis patients to donate. I think there is not actually regulatory ban. Last I looked into this, it was because of the conflict of interest - the FDA requires blood from donors with hemochromatosis be labeled as such. And even that requirement can be worked around. See, for example, https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/blooddonor/donationtypes/hemochromatosis.html https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/blooddonor/donationtypes/hemo.... Background, most centers charge for therapeutic phlebotomy but obviously not for volunteer blood donation. The exception is permissable if the center agrees to allow the patient's blood to be drawn for free, whether or not they would qualify as a blood donor. The issue with "getting value" from donating is that people sometimes lie in order to be able to get that value. The downstream issues can be very painful - I have personally taken care of patients who got HIV or hepatitis from blood transfusion. I am pretty sure any of them would emphatically agree it is important to ensure the blood supply is as safe as possible. So it can be done, but it has to be done carefully.
kyleyeats 4y ago
This actually reversed just this year, with most major blood banks (following the example of the Red Cross) now allowing donations from diagnosed hemochromatosis patients.