It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

For Offenders Who Can’t Pay, It’s a Pint of Blood or Jail Time

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I find it hard to believe that with today's tech that they don't test all the blood before giving it to someone.




posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
I find it hard to believe that with today's tech that they don't test all the blood before giving it to someone.


Even if they did it's still not 100%.

How is this concept so hard to understand?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Well according to the Red Cross:




Blood donations are tested for the following:

ABO and Rh blood types.

Unexpected red blood cell antibodies that are a result of prior transfusion, pregnancy, or other factors.

Hepatitis B surface antigen, indicating a current infection (hepatitis) or carrier state for hepatitis B virus.

Antibody to hepatitis B core antigen, indicator of a present or past infection with the hepatitis B virus.

Antibody to hepatitis C virus, indicating a current or past infection with hepatitis C virus (most common cause of non-A/non-B hepatitis).

Antibody to HTLV-I/II, indicator of infection with a virus that may cause adult T-cell leukemia or neurological disease.

Nucleic Acid Test (NAT) for hepatitis C (HCV), hepatitis B (HBV) and HIV.

Screening test for antibodies to syphilis.

NAT for West Nile Virus (WNV).

Enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) test for Trypanosoma cruzi (Chagas Disease).

In addition, all platelet apheresis donations are tested for bacterial contamination.

Red Cross

Seems pretty comprehensive to me. I hear more about people finding out they have HIV/AIDS from GIVING blood than getting donated blood in the hospital these days.

Here are those risks, also from the Red Cross:




All donated blood is screened and tested for potential viruses, bacteria, and parasites. However, occasionally these agents can still infect a transfusion patient after the procedure.

The risk of catching a virus or any other blood-borne infection from a blood transfusion is very low.

HIV. All donated blood is thoroughly tested for HIV. There is a 1 in 2 million chance that donated blood will not only carry HIV but also infect a transfusion recipient.

Hepatitis B and C. The odds of catching hepatitis B from donated blood is about 1 in 300,000. While the risk with hepatitis C is 1 in 1.5 million.

West Nile Virus. The risk of catching West Nile Virus from a blood transfusion is approximately 1 in 350,000.


So, unless you want to store your own blood somewhere and pray it can be transported to you wherever you are when injured...



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

Keeping in mind that to err is human, i find lots of things hard to believe. Unfortunately it does not stop them happening.
edit on 20-10-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
I find it hard to believe that with today's tech that they don't test all the blood before giving it to someone.




www.medicinenet.com...

and parasites as well....


www.cdc.gov...

Technology.......



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Well according to the Red Cross:




Blood donations are tested for the following:

ABO and Rh blood types.

Unexpected red blood cell antibodies that are a result of prior transfusion, pregnancy, or other factors.

Hepatitis B surface antigen, indicating a current infection (hepatitis) or carrier state for hepatitis B virus.

Antibody to hepatitis B core antigen, indicator of a present or past infection with the hepatitis B virus.

Antibody to hepatitis C virus, indicating a current or past infection with hepatitis C virus (most common cause of non-A/non-B hepatitis).

Antibody to HTLV-I/II, indicator of infection with a virus that may cause adult T-cell leukemia or neurological disease.

Nucleic Acid Test (NAT) for hepatitis C (HCV), hepatitis B (HBV) and HIV.

Screening test for antibodies to syphilis.

NAT for West Nile Virus (WNV).

Enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) test for Trypanosoma cruzi (Chagas Disease).

In addition, all platelet apheresis donations are tested for bacterial contamination.

Red Cross

Seems pretty comprehensive to me. I hear more about people finding out they have HIV/AIDS from GIVING blood than getting donated blood in the hospital these days.

Here are those risks, also from the Red Cross:




All donated blood is screened and tested for potential viruses, bacteria, and parasites. However, occasionally these agents can still infect a transfusion patient after the procedure.

The risk of catching a virus or any other blood-borne infection from a blood transfusion is very low.

HIV. All donated blood is thoroughly tested for HIV. There is a 1 in 2 million chance that donated blood will not only carry HIV but also infect a transfusion recipient.

Hepatitis B and C. The odds of catching hepatitis B from donated blood is about 1 in 300,000. While the risk with hepatitis C is 1 in 1.5 million.

West Nile Virus. The risk of catching West Nile Virus from a blood transfusion is approximately 1 in 350,000.


So, unless you want to store your own blood somewhere and pray it can be transported to you wherever you are when injured...


If the blood is so carefully monitored and tested why can't gay men still not donate?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Tell me one thing in life that is 100% hell you can drown drinking water does that mean you won't drink it?

My argument is you claiming they only test a small percentage of blood and to think that the donates are going to tell the truth on their questioner but mystic has posted the link to the Red Cross have a look.


Anyway not to go to far from the op I'm still on the fence but leaning towards the not a big deal considering they had a choice plus they maybe helping someone who needs it.

I see it on ATS all the time on how people should be helping our brothers and sisters more and now that some judge gave people that choice to make a positive contribution to society we now have a problem with it, strange world we live in.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

The problem I have is some people had no choice.

Please answer my question of why gay men are still banned from giving blood if all blood is thoroughly processed.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Who didn't have a choice?

I can't answer a question about that I don't run the banks but with today's tech it's silly as all hell but how would they know your gay unless you told them?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Who didn't have a choice?


Anyone who is not allowed to give blood. There are many.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

Please answer my question of why gay men are still banned from giving blood if all blood is thoroughly processed.


Other countries have already lifted the ban on gay men donating blood.

The U.S. is lagging, but taking steps. No testing is 100% for anything. But, new testing is pretty accurate.

Health & Science FDA publishes draft of rules allowing gay men to give blood: www.washingtonpost.com... b4732caefe81_story.html



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Sorry but your wrong they were all given a choice.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Care to comment on gay men, HIV, HEP, and other diseased individuals not having a choice to "bleed the fine away"?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Sorry but your wrong they were all given a choice.


What choice did the gay men have? You can't give a choice to someone and deny that same choice another in an equal society.

Again.....not a hard concept to understand.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: Annee

Care to comment on gay men, HIV, HEP, and other diseased individuals not having a choice to "bleed the fine away"?



Your comment is confusing are you saying gay men have HIV, HEP?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys

Sorry but your wrong they were all given a choice.


What choice did the gay men have? You can't give a choice to someone and deny that same choice another in an equal society.

Again.....not a hard concept to understand.




They had the same choice as everyone else give blood or pay the fine that you would have paid if the blood bus didn't pull in.

Why is this concept so hard for you to understand?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: thesaneone

A gay man is denied ability to give blood.

Why am I talking to walls?



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys
a reply to: Annee

Care to comment on gay men, HIV, HEP, and other diseased individuals not having a choice to "bleed the fine away"?


We live in a society. There are rules. It is your responsibility not to break these rules.

You may, or may not be given an unusual opportunity to make amends.

YOU broke a rule. It's still on you.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I'd take the jail time.

Any extra burden on the system is a win in my book.



posted on Oct, 20 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
LMFAO!

First it was the Government forcing people to give blood. That was disproved.

Now it's if everybody can't do it nobody should be allowed to do it.




top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join