Re: Blood donations, etc.

[Guest guest]

I am by no means a specialist in such things, but I believe there are

usually some alternatives, if whole blood of your type is in short

supply. Like packed red cells, or plasma, or even saline to pump up

the volume of your body fluids.

But no, I think autologous donations are not free. I do not, for the

life of me, understand why our blood banks don't take the blood, put

it through the usual tests, hold it for the donor and then, if it is

not needed, make it available to others who do need it.

Perhaps there is a professional in the field out there who can

enlighten me. I worked with the Red Cross for years, particularly in

their blood drives (as I have had two family members who have needed

and benefitted from transfusions) and have given several gallons

myself, so I am in support of the program. But this part of it, I

don't comprehend, given the heart-rending pleas they send out

continuously for more donors.

Cammie

> Wow, I did not realize blood donation before the surgery is not

> free! Is that the case all the time? I'm also O positive, so

blood

> will be hard to find if I ever need it.

>

[Guest guest]

I hear ya...

I'm a regular blood donor, and it makes me feel a little resentful

to know that Red Cross has no problem actually calling me at home

and asking me to donate for other people, but makes me pay if I'm

the one who might end up using the blood. Doesn't make much sense,

does it?

> I am by no means a specialist in such things, but I believe there

are

> usually some alternatives, if whole blood of your type is in short

> supply. Like packed red cells, or plasma, or even saline to pump

up

> the volume of your body fluids.

>

> But no, I think autologous donations are not free. I do not, for

the

> life of me, understand why our blood banks don't take the blood,

put

> it through the usual tests, hold it for the donor and then, if it

is

> not needed, make it available to others who do need it.

>

> Perhaps there is a professional in the field out there who can

> enlighten me. I worked with the Red Cross for years, particularly

in

> their blood drives (as I have had two family members who have

needed

> and benefitted from transfusions) and have given several gallons

> myself, so I am in support of the program. But this part of it, I

> don't comprehend, given the heart-rending pleas they send out

> continuously for more donors.

>

> Cammie

[Guest guest]

My friend works for the Canadian Blood Service, so I have asked this

of her before.

Autologous blood is not subjected to the same testing (if it's

tested at all) that they do for regular donated blood. I think the

concept is that if you have some disease like HIV, there's no

problem giving it back to you. So it's a decision right at the front

end of the process - collect it, store it, toss it out if it's not

used by the donor.

From a business perspective (and hospitals have to think about costs

too), you want your own blood instead of someone else's? Why doesn't

it make sense that you pay some of that cost? (hey, sorry if I

offend anyone, that's the beancounter in me coming out)

As for subsequent testing, I don't know. Maybe expiry issues, maybe

they don't want it coming through the collection process from the

back door of surgery, I don't know. Good question, I'll ask my

friend next time I talk to her.

> > Wow, I did not realize blood donation before the surgery is not

> > free! Is that the case all the time? I'm also O positive, so

> blood

> > will be hard to find if I ever need it.

> >

[Guest guest]

Ask 'em about it.

I think the autologous donations may be expensive because it's a lot

of trouble (and probably time of expensive people) to keep your units

separate from the rest of the blood supply. But I don't know that.

It used to be the case that you could store up donated units, and

specify them to cover the " cost " of blood other people used, or

indeed, use them to cover your own needs. I don't know whether that's

still the case, but doubt that it is, as the whole system seems to

have changed. I do know that the needs are much greater now, in part

because newer medical techniques use a lot more blood -- open heart

surgery, for example -- but they can split a unit into components and

use one unit to help several people.

My last go at working with the program was in the 1960s, so it's

reasonable that things have changed. (I'd hope so!)

And no, overall, it does make sense that they call when they need

you. The intention is to provide for everybody's needs. If everybody

gave regularly (or those who can do so, did, anyhow) there probably

would not be a shortage. But if you're doing it just for yourself and

it can't be used by anyone else, then you pays your $$$.

Cammie

> > I am by no means a specialist in such things, but I believe there

> are

> > usually some alternatives, if whole blood of your type is in

short

> > supply. Like packed red cells, or plasma, or even saline to pump

> up

> > the volume of your body fluids.

> >

> > But no, I think autologous donations are not free. I do not, for

> the

> > life of me, understand why our blood banks don't take the blood,

> put

> > it through the usual tests, hold it for the donor and then, if it

> is

> > not needed, make it available to others who do need it.

> >

> > Perhaps there is a professional in the field out there who can

> > enlighten me. I worked with the Red Cross for years, particularly

> in

> > their blood drives (as I have had two family members who have

> needed

> > and benefitted from transfusions) and have given several gallons

> > myself, so I am in support of the program. But this part of it, I

> > don't comprehend, given the heart-rending pleas they send out

> > continuously for more donors.

> >

> > Cammie