I’ve had a little of a debate with a commenter recently where they’ve argued that “donating” (selling, in their words, because you can get money for it) your blood plasma is a scam because it’s for-profit and you’re being exploited.
Now, I only have my German lense to look at this, but I’ve been under the impression that donating blood, plasma, thrombocytes, bone marrow, whatever, is a good thing because you can help an individual in need. I get that, in the case of blood plasma, the companies paying people for their donations must make some kind of profit off that, else they wouldn’t be able to afford paying around 25€ per donation. But I’m not sure if I’d call that a scam. People are all-around, usually, too selfish and self-centered to do things out of the goodness of their hearts, so offering some form of compensation seems like a good idea to me.
In the past, I’ve had my local hospital call me asking for a blood donation, for example, because of an upcoming surgery of a hospitalised kid that shares my blood group. I got money for that too.
What are your guys’ thoughts on the matter? Should it be on donation-basis only and cut out all incentives - monetary or otherwise? Is it fine to get some form of compensation for the donation?
Very curious to see what you think
You must log in or register to comment.
If you get paid it ain’t a donation. It is trading human body parts
So?
Just stating a fact.
Getting a flat rate compensation of expense isn’t really selling though. I think thats a bit too polemical.
Yeah, it’s technically illegal to sell blood and plasma but they get around this by paying you for your time instead. Gee, I wonder why this loophole doesn’t work for prostitution.
Donating blood/plasma is a good thing. Economic conditions in which poor people feel obligated to give blood just to make enough money, whilst rich people don’t feel this same pressure, are bad.
I don’t know how exactly private blood banks work (in plenty of countries blood banks are public and presumably non-profit), but regardless, I assume nobody can get blood transfusions if nobody donates. So until the political system is overhauled just keep donating? Your blood donations aren’t the root cause of capitalism
Maybe it should be like other charitable donations and there should be a set tax deduction per ml or better yet how about they take enough for donation and decanter a portion out an do blood testing both to make sure the blood is clean but alsoso the individual is aware of they are free of X. You could get like a qr code you can use to identify the results later.
better yet how about they take enough for donation and decanter a portion out an do blood testing both to make sure the blood is clean but alsoso the individual is aware of they are free of X
This is already how they do it here (India). They’ll test all donations for a number of infections, and you can give them your mobile number / e-mail / postal address to inform you if they find something.
You lack the cultural lens of America. About half of our country governs from the perspective of “why should I?” with the most negative and self-preserving mindset possible.
Why should I pay for others healthcare, even if it means they pay for mine? Why should I donate my blood if it doesn’t benefit me?
Solve that problem by giving you $25-100 for your “donations”
As someone from the US i always saw it as people can’t afford to take time off to donate, so compensating them for their time makes it so they can afford to donate.
A few states make it illegal to be monetarily compensated for your blood or plasma, but others it’s completely fine.
I’m sure.its a bit of that too, but I do feel like the ultimate reason is still, “well why are you taking time off to do something that isn’t only benefitting you?”
basically the same mindset that created this culture is what developed compensation for our time, as opposed to just taking the loss for the day to do a good thing.
That’s a fair assessment, and I can definitely agree with that
100% and I’m sure you know this too but just to add to your point, I believe the US government spends more money per capita on healthcare than anywhere in Europe, so even under the “Why should I?” lens, the current approach costs individuals more because they have to pay for it in taxes and then also in insurance premiums, copay etc.
It’s not just for the benefit of society as a whole, “you” as an individual would also be financially better off under a socialised system.
The important part is that the individual people spend more per capita for worse healthcare, too. You, private citizen reading this, are worse off and are paying more than you would be with socialized medicine in this country. Pretty much no matter what level you’re at, too.
Donating blood plasma is good as it helps people in need. Sure, it sucks that there is a company in the middle making a profit, but not donating is not the solution to that problem, as it hurts the people in need more than the corporation in the middle.
I think its kinda similar to the tipping situation. Yes it sucks that restaurants don’t pay their employees properly and that you have to tip to support the employees. But not tipping hurts the employees rather than the restaurant owner.
In both cases, if we want change, we need to change the legislation.
If they see it as a scam then they seem to expect certain financial gain from donating. In my opinion this is bad as donating life-saving goods should not be done just for the money.
You can’t be scammed if you are doing it for saving lifes (except if they sell the blood to some shady labs instead hospitals).
The US has laws that bans paying for blood, but they can pay for plasma. All healthcare in the US is a for profit venture.
If you donate blood in the US, you are the only one in that process who is making a donation. Every other organization in the chain between your donation and the patient who receives it will add a markup for their own profit.
Organ donations work the same way. If you get killed by a car, and your heart is used to save someone’s life, they will be charged nearly two million dollars for the operation. Not only does your next of kin not get a cut of that two million, your estate will still get a bill for whatever treatment failed to save your life.
I can think of little that is more unethical than being the only one donating. Plasma is better because the donors are paid. If healthcare is for profit, at minimum the profits should go both ways. Plasma is the one time it does.
I donate plasma regularly - at least once per month. It’s illegal to pay people for blood or plasma here in the Netherlands so I’m just in it for the good feels. I also like the downtime and relaxed chatting and joking with the people who work there.
The same worries exist here too though. The blood bank isn’t allowed to pay you for your plasma, but it’s absolutely a for-profit organisation that runs on selling your plasma to pharmaceutical companies.
I still believe it’s a good thing to donate, but sometimes it feels a little icky that there’s also a businessmodel around it
Man, the Netherlands sound pretty pleasant, overall.
People are getting paid to donate plasma?! The only scam here is that I’ve been giving it away for free!
I donate to the Red Cross here in America. Honestly, I’m happy to donate. I get to sit and relax for a couple hours, the Red Cross I go to has TVs attached to the chairs so I can watch a movie while I donate, and I get free drinks and snacks afterward.
They’re always hurting for plasma donations and you can donate every 28 days, so I visit frequently. I don’t really see how it could be a scam. They always tell me plasma is more important than blood donations. Blood goes bad quickly, but they can keep plasma for a long time. And pretty much everyone can use it. Unlike blood, which you need a compatible type to use.
I donate because I enjoy helping others. I’m not looking for a way to personally benefit from it, so I don’t really care if they offer to pay or not. I feel like that should be the default mindset going in. But I understand there are people who are hurting financially, and donating blood or plasma is an easy way to make a buck. So I’m fine with them offering to pay for donations.
Donating blood and donating blood plasma isn’t the same thing.
Where did he say this?
They didn’t say that, but the other commenter still speaks about a point that also caught my eye:
It doesn’t matter if donating blood or plasma is able to be longer stored. When you need one of them, you can’t substitute with the other. So the medical area still needs both. So you still need people donating both. If a medical institution is telling me they only collect plasma, I would question their motives, because both are needed for helping people.
Maybe the donating place just gave the short explanation and they meant, that for blood donations there are other better places, but it could also mean, they don’t earn enough money with that. And THAT is I think what the other commenter meant with their admittedly short comment.
I read it in the sense that they were hurting for plasma donations in particular, and that because they can store it for longer, a single donation has more potential impact, not that they only took plasma donations.
Yes, this is what I meant. The Red Cross said my blood type is rarely needed in my area so they don’t care about me donating blood. But they’re always needing plasma donations, and you can donate them more frequently than blood, so they recommend I do that instead.
Selling your body
The only way you’re getting blood out of me for any reason other than medical purposes is if you pay me or commit a crime. That goes for the plasma too.
That’s a terrible sword to live by. How do you expect to get blood, then? If you’re unconscious you can’t take it by force.
Anytime we ask questions about poor people doing things to make a buck, you probably won’t find me talking negatively or blaming the people with few to no options.
I’ve been in a financial situation where selling my blood plasma was an easy, safe, guaranteed amount of money that kept me from getting deeper into the hole. I’m not going to knock anyone who does it, only the shitty social services that fail people to the point they have to sell their plasma to survive.
I’ve been there myself too. I didn’t necessarily have to donate plasma twice a week for a couple months since I could have asked my parents for money, but I’m very reluctant when it comes to asking for money and want to do things independently, on my own as far as possible. So yea, while between jobs, I was reliant on this steady source of income to be able to afford rent. It sucks but that’s reality. And yea, I quite agree that this is an underlying systematic failure of the government and not necessarily a fault of the blood bank
deleted by creator
I’m not allowed to give blood since I’m gay and have an active sex life
It’s fucking discriminatory in my opinion and it has always made me uncomfortable filling out the blood donation paperwork.
We can reliably screen for HIV (all blood donations are) why the fuck are homosexuals discriminated against over this.
We can reliably screen for HIV (all blood donations are) why the fuck are homosexuals discriminated against over this.
except that the tests are (per cdc) up to 90 days late in detection. So you may get infected and spend 3 months testing negative.
And judging by OPs being german, where the rule (admittedly only since 2021) is “you may only have fucked one guy for the last 4 months”, this seems like being on the safe side, but not completely excessive to me.
bigotry exists in all forms; but it’s only the kind expressed by the uneducated & poor that gets rebuke and this one has been committed in plain sight since the 1980’s by the wealthy and educated.
I found out not long ago that I can’t donate blood in the US because I’m British and lived here during the 1990’s so could theoretically be carrying mad cow disease.
Do they not just… test the blood before they use it anyway? You’d think they’d want to do that regardless
In addition to what @LwL said - It has to do with how testing is done, and that some diseases can’t really be tested for. It is quite expensive, and is generally done on small samples from lots of people mixed together. If it is positive they split the batch and test again (look up binary search).
The lower the incidence rate of diseases, the larger batches can be done. Ditching certain denographics with significantly higher risks for certain diseases can make testing orders of magnitudes cheaper and faster. (Other groups, at least where I live, include people who recently changed partner, recently went abroad, have ever gotten a blood transfusion, have gone through a recent surgery, have recently been sick, etc. etc.)
tests have been available since the 1980’s; they just don’t want gays there.
They do, but HIV infections can take a while to turn up positive while already being transmittable.
That’s the worst thing. At this point, they shouldn’t even be allowed to even ask that
Which is fucking hilarious at this point since the overwhelming AIDS demographic is the straights
i bet that the people who made this decision were dealing with the AIDS epidemic
Blatantly false. “MSM [men who have sex with men] accounted for 67% (21,400) of the 31,800 estimated new HIV infections in 2022 and 87% of estimated infections among all males.”
When you consider that gay and bisexual men make up a small percentage of the overall population–under 5%–the fact that gay and bisexual men account for 87% of all HIV infections in men tells you just how alarming this is.
EDIT: For the people downvoting this - do you have statistics that you consider to be better, or more up-to-date? Do you want to refute them? Then post something and prove the CDC wrong. Downvoting because you don’t like things that are factually correct isn’t doing anything except making you look like a petulant child.
PS - wear a goddamn condom if you and your partner aren’t 100% monogamous. Yeah, no one likes them, I get it. But that’s a lot better than getting infected with HIV and needing to pay for expensive anti-retrovirals for the rest of your life.
I think that the commenter lives in a country with for-profit hospitals. In Europe hospitals get subsidized so they all make good money and aren’t driven to pursue profits. Prices are being kept low because of taxes and social health care. There are some for profit hospitals, but not many.
Yea, US
