[quote=JulieM;8491]Dear Goudrea,
Quote:
|
Progress always brings benefits regardless of the source
|
.
Right but you can not deny religion played a significant part concerning blood issues.
Quote:
|
Though the religious position taken by most Jehovah witnesses about blood transfusion has significantly influenced the medical community in relation to treatment options, it is not the only driving force
|
.
Shouldn't we be particularly greatful for the extreme lengths they took and the hard decisions to abide by their faith and refuse what was proned by medecine as the ONLY solution proposed during many decades.
Quote:
|
Medical science is constantly striving for improved therapies. As medical science recognizes complications and hazards associated with a particular treatment this community of dedicated scientists is compelled to find newer and better medicines, technologies, procedures or methods of delivery. This is a non-religious force affecting blood based therapy
|
.
Did organisations involved in blood products recognize their mismanagement and the infection of so many with deadly diseases. For how long were they aware of the dangers and didn't bother to change their practices (Kreaver commission).
What about the Arkansas inmates given blood transfusions with 'HIV' . Were they sick? Doctor's orders? Hurt and bleeding? NO. Why did they get blood transfusions in the first place? They are suing the governement they claim is responsable for this mess. .
Quote:
|
National interest compels governments to improve military efficiency. A major cause of mortality in wartime is hemorrhage on the battlefield due to trauma. This is another non-religious force affecting blood based therapy. This force also represents an economical incentive for research and development of alternative therapy.
|
When my father was a young soldier it was a common practice to give blood transfusions to ALL the demobilized soldiers before sending them home to their wives in order give them a 'boost' whether they had been wounded or didn't even have a scratch. These men came back with what kind of infectious or deadly diseases? Was the blood imported from 'modern society' or collected locally with all the risks associated with viruses we didn't even know about. ''Congo Belge''
Quote:
|
Societal fear builds an economic market for alternate therapy. When a populace learns of fearsome diseases related to blood transfusion then it starts asking for alternatives and is willing to pay for it. This is another non-religious force affecting blood based therapy.
|
When warned of such diseases. Isn't it also true the the word is out to ''camouflage'' as much as possible the risks. A serious look at consent forms offered to patients concerning the risks of blood transfusions in certain hospitals is surprising. Different Web sites involved in the ''blood collection'' affirm how 'safe' the blood supply has become. Is it so? Many countries pay blood donors. Here it is considered 'a gift of life' We don't pay the donors...but we charge to provide it. Why would a force not motivated by 'obligation to provide alternative therapy' opt to find a replacement for blood. After all don't they believe it is the 'Only' or 'Best' therapy.
Quote:
|
The business of providing blood to the medical market is like any other business except the raw material supply depends on voluntary donation, at least in developed nations. Otherwise those in the business of collecting, processing and distributing blood for medical purposes have no particular bias towards the product (blood).
|
Just as any other business...when the blood supply is high you have to get rid of the 'over stock' regardless if the necessity is real or just borderline (according to the physician).
Quote:
|
Those who are in the business for economic reasons are only following market demand like any other business. When market demands change then we have every reason to think these will again follow market demand. Those who are in the business for humanitarian reasons will happily look to alternate therapies as they represent the best medical outcomes.
|
What would motivate them to look for alternatives...after all they are convinced 'blood is the ONLY saving therapy' Isn't this why they are collecting it for ''humanitarian reasons'' Otherwise wouldn't they have opted for other ''humanitarian therapies'' in the first place.
Quote:
|
When we pay for blood products we are paying for the delivery and not the blood itself. So the business of blood is about delivery and not the product.
|
...then we may assume delivery prices have jumped quite high in a short time.
Quote:
According to top minds in the medical community, including several ardent bloodless enthusiasts, the blood supply is safer than it ever has been. But that does not mean blood therapies are immune from risk. Like any other medicine, use of blood comes with risk.
Quote Julie Morgan
|
Would top minds of the medical community take a blood transfusion for themselves? ....That is the question.
Compelled to review their practices yes Blood organisations had to 'get their act together'. But is it safer? How many more infections, viruses and other blood transfusion complications unknown now will we discover, just as HIV, hepatitis etc was discovered?
Is it not last november that an important blood bank was compelled to 'clean up' or pay fines?
Confidence in science and society has let us down many times before. Let us not forget that greed is a powerful motivator.