vCJD - Millions banned from giving blood

[Garry Anderson]

FINALLY - help save us from these pathetic morons. vCJD is a horrific way to die - or have to watch close friend or family member die. The authorities risked everybodies life to this terrible disease.

Quote: "Millions who have had transfusions since 1980 will not be able to give blood to stop any risk of the human form of mad cow disease being passed on."

Of course, government figures are lot less - the usual propaganda.

I warned about this on my SKILFUL.com website pre-August 2000:

"Blood is the MOST obvious transport for this disease. Even if it were not, it would still be a possibility, therefore the word 'theoretical' is totally superfluous. Used to lessen significance - to avoid prosecution." In other words, SPIN.

August 2002, two years later - I was proven correct:

BBC News quote: The study's authors suggest the risk of vCJD transmission through blood may be "appreciable" where the government had previously described it as "theoretical".

March 2004, one and half years later - they finally stop passing contaminated blood about.

Of course, I have spoken to authorities (inc. police) about all things surrounding this matter - but they did not do anything about it.

I would have thought they had a test for vCJD by now - but looks like it is being held up. Quote from first article:

"Currently there is no test for vCJD but neurophysiologist Dr Chris Pomfrett, of Manchester Royal Infirmary, who is working on one, yesterday urged two specialist CJD centres in London and Edinburgh to help him.

They have not given him access to 20 vCJD patients who could test his Government-funded electrocardiogram system which could detect the disease five years before symptoms show."

 

[Mr Webname]

Makes my domains cellsaver.org and cellsavers.org increase in value every day!
Finally one would hope that the NHS Trust hospitals will do what they were encouraged to do back in 2000, in the NHS Executive Circular "Better Blood Transfusion", and positively seek alternatives to blood transfusion e.g. intra-operative cell salvage.
As long as blood is routinely transfused and alternatives are not put to full use the public will remain at risk from vCJD and other known and unknown viruses, prions and whatever.

 

[Garry Anderson]

Hi Mr Webname - must admit, I did not think of the domain name angle - some people are born businessmen

My interest in this topic is purely to save lives and make those accountable take responsibility.

My mother and sister are Jehovah witness and do not accept blood from others - I am pure agnostic.

They can use things like saline.

People should have been given alternative to blood transfusion years ago.

 

[Mr Webname]

Hi Mr Webname - must admit, I did not think of the domain name angle - some people are born businessmen

My interest in this topic is purely to save lives and make those accountable take responsibility.

My mother and sister are Jehovah witness and do not accept blood from others - I am pure agnostic.

They can use things like saline.

People should have been given alternative to blood transfusion years ago.

I have a number of blood-related domains so maybe there is a profit to be made from them yet :-D
I wonder Jehovah's Witnesses don't go around shouting "We told you so!" - the more we learn about blood the more it becomes clear that it's use in medical practice requires extreme caution.
Research shows that transfusions are responsible for many problems, including reduction of efficacy in the immune system and a much higher incidence of cancer reccurrence when used in cancer surgery.
Most UK hospitals grossly underuse the alternatives to transfusion, even when cellsalvage machines are donated, as has been done by Jehovah's Witnesses near where I live (actually across the bridge in South Wales). I regularly meet with members of the medical profession and lecture to them on related matters so I have an interest in the issue of blood.

 

[Garry Anderson]

My mum has said "We told you so!"

Blood seems an obvious transport for ANY disease you have.

Perhaps you will be kind enough to ask the members of medical profession, if some people have been negligent in allowing this to happen.

 

[Mr Webname]

Perhaps you will be kind enough to ask the members of medical profession, if some people have been negligent in allowing this to happen.

Hah - you mean ask a doctor is he's wrong!

 

[Garry Anderson]

Mr Webname: "Hah - you mean ask a doctor is he's wrong!"

No sorry - I have not made myself clear.

I mean - were they given bad advice:

Given the possible very serious consequences - UK population dying from BSE type disease - shouldn't the medical advice from the top (government & experts) erred on the side of caution?

 

[Mr Webname]

In truth most doctors now realise that blood is bad medicine and try to avoid it where possible. However, just imagine the problems with declaring blood to be unsafe! Traditionally everyone is brought up to view blood as being equal to life - people talk about blood transfusions in hushed tones, treating them as almost "holy" - they do nt understand the true dangers involved with blood even leaving aside vCJD.
From the angle of practical use of alternatives, the trouble is the costs of alternatives (which can be lower than blood) it does not have a scheduled budget, for that reason it gets added to a department budget and that creates a problem - nobody wants to pay for it!
The NHS Executive Circular I refered to above encouraged the use of alternatives, so you could say that those "at the top" are trying to bring about change, but as long as the cost of equipment and consumables have to be met at Department level there will always be resistance. I suspect that the latest "scare" will mean that the need to conserve blood stocks will drive the progress in the use of alternatives.