5 ms·

Reading the title, I assumed James' donation was a one-time thing and scientists had sequenced something in his blood which was later used for the babies he'd s

Reading the title, I assumed James' donation was a one-time thing and scientists had sequenced something in his blood which was later used for the babies he'd saved, but no, he gave blood almost 1200 times in his life. Absolutely incredible. He was 81 the last time he donated blood. >According to Lifeblood, 17% of Australian women who become pregnant end up needing anti-D injections — and most of the country's supply comes from a pool of less than 200 regular plasma donors. This was the most shocking part of this article though. I've never heard of "anti-D" but it sounds incredibly needed and that's a very small supply.

quesera 2y ago
Imagine saving 2000 lives by sitting down for 30 minutes with a coffee and biscuit. What they don't say is whether these 200 donors constitute more or less than 100% of the clinical need for anti-D plasma. If my contributions were that valuable, I'd wonder if it made sense to keep me on life support just to extract my blood every two weeks. But alas, blood donors in Australia must be 81 years or younger, so I guess the question is academic in this case.
- belval 2y ago
  > If my contributions were that valuable, I'd wonder if it made sense to keep me on life support just to extract my blood every two weeks. It's a really interesting somewhat thought provoking idea. To some extent these people are valuable enough that turning them into blood factories after cerebral death is the more moral option?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - RandomDistort 2y ago
    By the sounds of it, if there was a painless way of doing it, he would probably be fine with this. If he consented when he was alive, I don't see how it could be moral to ignore his wishes and let more people die as a result. I guess laws will get in the way of this kind of thing though.
  - MrLeap 2y ago
    I mulled over this for a while, thought deeply about it from a lot of angles. I think the only useful heuristic for thorny issues like this is to do our best to balance compassion for self and others, and encourage others to do the same. I can see it from a "yes" perspective and from a "no" perspective, and I can find reasons to regret saying either. Agency, autonomy and compassion are critical features of the scenarios that have the least regrets. At the bottom of that article it indicated they've successfully recreated the antibody in a lab, I hope that saves a lot of families from suffering.
    - quesera 2y ago
      I'd sign up for it. On the list of "best options" for my vegetative body, this would rate fairly highly. But yeah, like assisted suicide, there are people with non-aligned motives who could be incentivized to coerce a decision from weak/befuddled/old patients. There are many decisions I'd like to make now, while of sound mind and body, that I would like to be respected when I am no longer able to make decisions for myself. The state allows some of them, but not all.
  - trhway 2y ago
    >turning them into blood factories after cerebral death we already turn people into transplant organs source, so i don't see much difference between harvesting a kidney, heart or blood
    - belval 2y ago
      I think the duration makes it different, the ECMO (blood + oxygen being pumped out of the body) record according to Google is something like 554 days. That's much much longer than the typical transplant.
  - Boogie_Man 2y ago
    "no"
- chneu 2y ago
  Radiolab recently re-released an episode that kinda sorta deals with this. https://radiolab.org/podcast/the-immortal-life-of-henrietta-lacks https://radiolab.org/podcast/the-immortal-life-of-henrietta-...
- dekhn 2y ago
  My dad has been donating regular blood and then plasma for decades. I used to do it frequently- apparently, I'm "CMV negative", which is good for babies.
- Scoundreller 2y ago
  > But alas, blood donors in Australia must be 81 years or younger, so I guess the question is academic in this case. > Once you’re 81 you must have donated in Australia in the last 5 years to remain eligible. https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age?_gl=1*n1657z*_gcl_au*MTg4NTg3NzQxNy4xNzQxMDM2NzY1*_ga*MTMzNDgzMDg5OS4xNzQxMDM2NzY1*_ga_YKWGBSJP2H*MTc0MTAzNjc2NC4xLjEuMTc0MTAzNjc3Ny40Ny4wLjA.*_ga_S6DC1VY4ED*MTc0MTAzNjc2NS4xLjEuMTc0MTAzNjc3MC4wLjAuMA..*_ga_VYV3F6SLKF*MTc0MTAzNjc3Mi4xLjAuMTc0MTAzNjc3Mi42MC4wLjA https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age?_gl=1.... (That’s the nastiest long URL I’ve ever seen. All I did was click the “find out more” link here: https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/eligibility/quiz https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/eligibility/quiz )
  - OJFord 2y ago
    As is often the case, you can strip the query string ('?' and everything following it): https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age (It's probably just a load of analytics & tracking gumpf, maybe 'ga' = Google Analytics, I don't know.)
    - bot347851834 2y ago
      I'm from mobile so I can't see much more but I can spot that the url contains the _gl parameter. That's the parameter (and cookie) used by Google Analytics to perform cross-domain tracking so I believe your assumption that GA is active is correct. More info here if you want: https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/10071811 https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/10071811
- gus_massa 2y ago
  Is it possible to keep only a,bone that has bone marrow that produces white cells that produce the antibody? It would be less creepy, but white cell maturation is not easy, so I guess there are many problems I don't imagine. But there is also monoclonal antibodies for cancer, and this antibody production looks somewhat similar.
- yencabulator 2y ago
  This made me think of the eternal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- wkat4242 2y ago
  > Imagine saving 2000 lives by sitting down for 30 minutes with a coffee and biscuit. I tried doing it too but it's a lot more involved. I don't have this anti-D thing though. Just normal blood. You need to go through an interview, a medical check and various forms. Once I went through all that they told me I can't give any :(. Multiple sex partners, regular tattoos etc. I did want to and was prepared to do it regularly. I can see how they are having difficulty getting enough. But anyway I tried. I wish they were better at screening blood so I could help.
devilbunny 2y ago
D is another name, as the article explains, for Rh (Rhesus) factor. Since some fetal blood ends up in the maternal circulation during birth, an Rh-positive baby with an Rh-negative mother will trigger mom’s immune system to make anti-Rh antibodies, which causes problems for any future Rh-positive babies. Giving mom anti-Rh antibodies immediately after delivery scavenges all those Rh antigens from mom’s blood before her immune system can react. She has to repeat this for every Rh-positive birth.
- andrewla 2y ago
  There's more information in one of the linked articles [1]. Apparently some very small percentage of Rh-negative people have an enzyme which allows them to accept Rh-positive blood; that's the "anti-D" factor which saves these lives. [1] https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/learn-about-blood/plasma/anti-D https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/learn-about-blood/plasma/...
- blindriver 2y ago
  How many millions of babies have died because of this? Humans truly are incredible that we were able to figure this out, and this guy is a hero for donating blood as often as he did. He needs to be memorialized.
  - throwup238 2y ago
    It's hard to say because it depends on population genetics and demographic patterns which vary widely over time period and culture, but it's probably in the ballpark of a hundred million or more in the totality of human existence. I'm on my phone and can't access my notes so I'm going from memory but if we are to take the hemolytic fatality rate in Sub-Saharan Africa as the upper limit, it's on the order of 0.1% of all births. Given the general estimate of 100-120 billion humans who have ever lived, the numbers are staggering.
    - blindriver 2y ago
      Thank you, that is an incredible number of deaths and the fact that someone was able to study this and figure out a solution is just mind boggling.

quesera 2y ago

Imagine saving 2000 lives by sitting down for 30 minutes with a coffee and biscuit. What they don't say is whether these 200 donors constitute more or less than 100% of the clinical need for anti-D plasma. If my contributions were that valuable, I'd wonder if it made sense to keep me on life support just to extract my blood every two weeks. But alas, blood donors in Australia must be 81 years or younger, so I guess the question is academic in this case.

belval 2y ago
> If my contributions were that valuable, I'd wonder if it made sense to keep me on life support just to extract my blood every two weeks. It's a really interesting somewhat thought provoking idea. To some extent these people are valuable enough that turning them into blood factories after cerebral death is the more moral option?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- RandomDistort 2y ago
  By the sounds of it, if there was a painless way of doing it, he would probably be fine with this. If he consented when he was alive, I don't see how it could be moral to ignore his wishes and let more people die as a result. I guess laws will get in the way of this kind of thing though.
- MrLeap 2y ago
  I mulled over this for a while, thought deeply about it from a lot of angles. I think the only useful heuristic for thorny issues like this is to do our best to balance compassion for self and others, and encourage others to do the same. I can see it from a "yes" perspective and from a "no" perspective, and I can find reasons to regret saying either. Agency, autonomy and compassion are critical features of the scenarios that have the least regrets. At the bottom of that article it indicated they've successfully recreated the antibody in a lab, I hope that saves a lot of families from suffering.
  - quesera 2y ago
    I'd sign up for it. On the list of "best options" for my vegetative body, this would rate fairly highly. But yeah, like assisted suicide, there are people with non-aligned motives who could be incentivized to coerce a decision from weak/befuddled/old patients. There are many decisions I'd like to make now, while of sound mind and body, that I would like to be respected when I am no longer able to make decisions for myself. The state allows some of them, but not all.
- trhway 2y ago
  >turning them into blood factories after cerebral death we already turn people into transplant organs source, so i don't see much difference between harvesting a kidney, heart or blood
  - belval 2y ago
    I think the duration makes it different, the ECMO (blood + oxygen being pumped out of the body) record according to Google is something like 554 days. That's much much longer than the typical transplant.
- Boogie_Man 2y ago
  "no"
chneu 2y ago
Radiolab recently re-released an episode that kinda sorta deals with this. https://radiolab.org/podcast/the-immortal-life-of-henrietta-lacks https://radiolab.org/podcast/the-immortal-life-of-henrietta-...
dekhn 2y ago
My dad has been donating regular blood and then plasma for decades. I used to do it frequently- apparently, I'm "CMV negative", which is good for babies.
Scoundreller 2y ago
> But alas, blood donors in Australia must be 81 years or younger, so I guess the question is academic in this case. > Once you’re 81 you must have donated in Australia in the last 5 years to remain eligible. https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age?_gl=1*n1657z*_gcl_au*MTg4NTg3NzQxNy4xNzQxMDM2NzY1*_ga*MTMzNDgzMDg5OS4xNzQxMDM2NzY1*_ga_YKWGBSJP2H*MTc0MTAzNjc2NC4xLjEuMTc0MTAzNjc3Ny40Ny4wLjA.*_ga_S6DC1VY4ED*MTc0MTAzNjc2NS4xLjEuMTc0MTAzNjc3MC4wLjAuMA..*_ga_VYV3F6SLKF*MTc0MTAzNjc3Mi4xLjAuMTc0MTAzNjc3Mi42MC4wLjA https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age?_gl=1.... (That’s the nastiest long URL I’ve ever seen. All I did was click the “find out more” link here: https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/eligibility/quiz https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/eligibility/quiz )
- OJFord 2y ago
  As is often the case, you can strip the query string ('?' and everything following it): https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age https://www.lifeblood.com.au/faq/eligibility/other/age (It's probably just a load of analytics & tracking gumpf, maybe 'ga' = Google Analytics, I don't know.)
  - bot347851834 2y ago
    I'm from mobile so I can't see much more but I can spot that the url contains the _gl parameter. That's the parameter (and cookie) used by Google Analytics to perform cross-domain tracking so I believe your assumption that GA is active is correct. More info here if you want: https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/10071811 https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/10071811
gus_massa 2y ago
Is it possible to keep only a,bone that has bone marrow that produces white cells that produce the antibody? It would be less creepy, but white cell maturation is not easy, so I guess there are many problems I don't imagine. But there is also monoclonal antibodies for cancer, and this antibody production looks somewhat similar.
yencabulator 2y ago
This made me think of the eternal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wkat4242 2y ago
> Imagine saving 2000 lives by sitting down for 30 minutes with a coffee and biscuit. I tried doing it too but it's a lot more involved. I don't have this anti-D thing though. Just normal blood. You need to go through an interview, a medical check and various forms. Once I went through all that they told me I can't give any :(. Multiple sex partners, regular tattoos etc. I did want to and was prepared to do it regularly. I can see how they are having difficulty getting enough. But anyway I tried. I wish they were better at screening blood so I could help.

devilbunny 2y ago

D is another name, as the article explains, for Rh (Rhesus) factor. Since some fetal blood ends up in the maternal circulation during birth, an Rh-positive baby with an Rh-negative mother will trigger mom’s immune system to make anti-Rh antibodies, which causes problems for any future Rh-positive babies. Giving mom anti-Rh antibodies immediately after delivery scavenges all those Rh antigens from mom’s blood before her immune system can react. She has to repeat this for every Rh-positive birth.

andrewla 2y ago
There's more information in one of the linked articles [1]. Apparently some very small percentage of Rh-negative people have an enzyme which allows them to accept Rh-positive blood; that's the "anti-D" factor which saves these lives. [1] https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/learn-about-blood/plasma/anti-D https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/learn-about-blood/plasma/...
blindriver 2y ago
How many millions of babies have died because of this? Humans truly are incredible that we were able to figure this out, and this guy is a hero for donating blood as often as he did. He needs to be memorialized.
- throwup238 2y ago
  It's hard to say because it depends on population genetics and demographic patterns which vary widely over time period and culture, but it's probably in the ballpark of a hundred million or more in the totality of human existence. I'm on my phone and can't access my notes so I'm going from memory but if we are to take the hemolytic fatality rate in Sub-Saharan Africa as the upper limit, it's on the order of 0.1% of all births. Given the general estimate of 100-120 billion humans who have ever lived, the numbers are staggering.
  - blindriver 2y ago
    Thank you, that is an incredible number of deaths and the fact that someone was able to study this and figure out a solution is just mind boggling.