I was doing a search on blood-related forums

[tyciol]

I was doing a search on blood-related forums since I was curious about the health aspects of both taking and giving out blood.

I have had Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door several times. They did not emphasize the anti-transfusion stance, I expect that would have come up had I visited their church. I still might since they seemed like very nice people who wen out of their way. I wish my mom hadn't told them to not come back

Anyway, I am sort of curious about policies related to that, but also to blood transfusions in general.

When people get blood, it is usually in an emergency and stuff, like if you're bleeding to death. Hospitals keep blood on hand to help victims.

What I was wondering, is is the main reason most people are against this because it is other people's blood, and other people's blood is contaminated and stuff? If so, I was wondering, if there are restrictions about getting blood, what about them giving it?

Basically, I plan to be having my blood taken later in life, so that health-related factors in the blood (lipid leves, etc) can be measured as one way of getting feedback on healthiness.

Also, I might take some paid medical studies since I need the money and what they do after having you take medication (usually a pill) is take some blood to measure how long the chemicals lurk in your system and stuff.

So in either case, I thought volunteering to give blood might be a good way to get used to needles since I'm still not totally comfortable with them, especially with losing quantities of blood. I imagine the amount of blood you lose for donations is much more compared to the amount you would need to give to get it tested for medical studies or personal health assessments. So basically, you do the harder thing first so the tiny pricks later in life are not so intimidating.

Even if there are potentially better alternatives than people giving each other blood, for the present, it is sort of better than nothing right? Like, if it stops people from dying or something maybe. I know some people's spiritual beliefs say it corrupts the spirit or whatever (actually I'm not totally familiar with it) so for people who believe in an afterlife I guess that is why they choose no tranfusions?

Anyway, in regards to taking blood in an emergency situation in a hospital, I do admit, the idea of getting someone else's blood is strange to me. I know they do test it for contaminants, blood type, diseases, etc. Even so, I can't help but worry they might be missing something that might affect me badly, I dunno. I don't imagine it'd be much worse than any drug I might take into me for money, and better than dying, but at the same time, I'd rather replace my blood with MY blood.

One thing I have read about that some endurance competitors do (not sure if it is against the rules now) is 'blood doping'. Where they take out their own blood, store it in a freezer, and then prior to competition they inject the blood back into themselves to increase their ability to use oxygen and increase their blood pressure and stuff.

If everyone did this, and somehow had their blood accessible in a nearby hospital wherever they went, then it would be a neat way to be able to have your own blood on hand in these emergencies. Even if some people do not desire this, I think even objectors would have to admit that this is probably preferable to getting injected with someone else's blood right?

Of course it would preclude travelling and stuff unless you had some way to bring it along with you, and would require a LOT of management efficiency and fast-ID procedures by the hospital. Overall, it might be too complicated to be realistic considering how unpredictable accidents usually are.