3 ms·

Do we really have 38% of Europe's BLOOD as a bargaining chip in trade agreements? This does not bode well for them.

busterarm 1y ago
Globalization has led to most countries deluding themselves about supply chain vulnerabilities for a long time. COVID was the first shock. Now Trump's tariffs are the second.
- kspacewalk2 1y ago
  However, I think people grossly overestimate the degree to which this state of affairs is static. If the supply chain shows itself to be vulnerable, economies often adjust quite easily. Even when it's not "easy", like natural gas in Europe post-2022, it's still very much doable without too much hullabaloo and frozen seniors. Point being: if it no longer makes sense to import 38% of blood from the US or whatever, it'll be imported from elsewhere or made locally, and that's pretty much the whole story. This is true of most goods and services, though not all.
  - busterarm 1y ago
    That's only really true for raw materials and assemblies. Chip production is the very obvious and real hole in this argument. It'll take half to a full decade to get new chip fabs up to what TSMC's Taiwan fabs are doing now. Quality steel production and machining is going to take time and investment as well.
abxyz 1y ago
it's outsourcing by choice rather than necessity. Europe can grow its own blood. The much more permissive laws in the U.S. which cause an oversupply for local usage mean it's cheaper to import it. During periods of high demand that exceed current supplies, countries are typically able to increase donations substantially to cover the shortfall, and long term, could pursue similar laws to the U.S. There is no prospect of blood being a meaningful bargaining chip in a trade war.
- Sanzig 1y ago
  Yep, blood donation infrastructure isn't like an oil pipeline or a refinery. Sure, it'll be painful for a little while, but it doesn't take nearly as long to set up, especially if there's an urgent shortage motivating a country to move fast.
  - debo_ 1y ago
    Yes, all the blood economy needs is a shot in the arm.
layer8 1y ago
Denying the blood would increase the US trade deficit though, so it would cut both ways.
keybored 1y ago
People could just donate more. Just make a campaign that you can Stick it to Trump and Help Your Country and you would get an influx of plasma. As long as the demand is not steep. Since you can do it only a dozen or so times each year according to recommendations. (American Red Cross recommends every 28 days; private donors are not beholden to that)
tomjen3 1y ago
You also have most of our digital services. Use either as a bargening chip and you are likely to lose them.
riskable 1y ago
Blood from US Sweat from China Tears from everywhere else
pkaye 1y ago
In the past the WHO recommended countries don't compensate for blood or plasma donations. The following countries countries decided to still allow compensation for plasma donations for drug products: Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, and the US. Its just that the US has the largest population of these five countries. And generally the rest of the countries outside the five don't get sufficient plasma donations to make the drug products needed for their patients and have to import it. The plasma can be separated out to different products to treat various diseases many of them genetic. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-products/fractionated-plasma-products https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-... The only ones to hold accountable are the WHO and those countries that followed their advice. If more countries paid for plasma donations there would be more supply of these drug products available.
- lproven 1y ago
  > the Czech Republic Interesting. Now I know why in a small town I regularly visit there's a high-street plasma "clinic". Sad news.

Globalization has led to most countries deluding themselves about supply chain vulnerabilities for a long time. COVID was the first shock. Now Trump's tariffs are the second.

kspacewalk2 1y ago
However, I think people grossly overestimate the degree to which this state of affairs is static. If the supply chain shows itself to be vulnerable, economies often adjust quite easily. Even when it's not "easy", like natural gas in Europe post-2022, it's still very much doable without too much hullabaloo and frozen seniors. Point being: if it no longer makes sense to import 38% of blood from the US or whatever, it'll be imported from elsewhere or made locally, and that's pretty much the whole story. This is true of most goods and services, though not all.
- busterarm 1y ago
  That's only really true for raw materials and assemblies. Chip production is the very obvious and real hole in this argument. It'll take half to a full decade to get new chip fabs up to what TSMC's Taiwan fabs are doing now. Quality steel production and machining is going to take time and investment as well.

abxyz 1y ago

it's outsourcing by choice rather than necessity. Europe can grow its own blood. The much more permissive laws in the U.S. which cause an oversupply for local usage mean it's cheaper to import it. During periods of high demand that exceed current supplies, countries are typically able to increase donations substantially to cover the shortfall, and long term, could pursue similar laws to the U.S. There is no prospect of blood being a meaningful bargaining chip in a trade war.

Sanzig 1y ago
Yep, blood donation infrastructure isn't like an oil pipeline or a refinery. Sure, it'll be painful for a little while, but it doesn't take nearly as long to set up, especially if there's an urgent shortage motivating a country to move fast.
- debo_ 1y ago
  Yes, all the blood economy needs is a shot in the arm.

layer8 1y ago

Denying the blood would increase the US trade deficit though, so it would cut both ways.

keybored 1y ago

People could just donate more. Just make a campaign that you can Stick it to Trump and Help Your Country and you would get an influx of plasma. As long as the demand is not steep. Since you can do it only a dozen or so times each year according to recommendations. (American Red Cross recommends every 28 days; private donors are not beholden to that)

tomjen3 1y ago

You also have most of our digital services. Use either as a bargening chip and you are likely to lose them.

riskable 1y ago

Blood from US Sweat from China Tears from everywhere else

pkaye 1y ago

In the past the WHO recommended countries don't compensate for blood or plasma donations. The following countries countries decided to still allow compensation for plasma donations for drug products: Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, and the US. Its just that the US has the largest population of these five countries. And generally the rest of the countries outside the five don't get sufficient plasma donations to make the drug products needed for their patients and have to import it. The plasma can be separated out to different products to treat various diseases many of them genetic. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-products/fractionated-plasma-products https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/approved-blood-... The only ones to hold accountable are the WHO and those countries that followed their advice. If more countries paid for plasma donations there would be more supply of these drug products available.

lproven 1y ago
> the Czech Republic Interesting. Now I know why in a small town I regularly visit there's a high-street plasma "clinic". Sad news.