3 ms·
Yeah, I am in the Netherlands. They say paying donors puts them & patients at risk, because it would stimulate donors' to lie about their health when donating
by boesboes 1y ago
Yeah, I am in the Netherlands.
They say paying donors puts them & patients at risk, because it would stimulate donors' to lie about their health when donating and we can't be asked to test blood for everything. And the say it is unethical to pay for human tissues.
Except when they are selling it ;)
- ozornin 1y agoI have the same story in the same country with presumably the same organization (Sanquin). I used to give blood, but not anymore because I don't find what they're doing ethical.
- aeternum 1y agoDoes it just not feel ethical or is one of their claims false? Both of the key claims do seem to have evidence to support them: 1) Paying for blood shifts the socioeconomic distribution of the donor pool. 2) The socioeconomic shift results in more contaminated blood due to greater incidence of drug use and/or related blood-borne diseases that cannot all be tested for with high accuracy.
- amadeuspagel 1y agoThe second claim would applies just as much to the US.
- refurb 1y agoI can assure you that the Netherlands tests all blood donations. It’s been standard for decades now. People have diseases they don’t know about and if people are ashamed by a disease, they’ll lie even when donating. I just shuddered thinking that donations wouldn’t be tested.
- reycharles 1y agoto be fair they said "test for everything"
- refurb 1y agoIf it’s things like CJD or other prion diseases then it’s true they don’t test, but AIDS, hep C, and other common blood borne diseases? They’ve been screening every donation since the 80’s.