Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

abcnews.go.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#11

Post by dbg31415 »

DanBC wrote: post #4
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #2

Although somewhat grotesque to many on the face of it, this seems like fundamentally a good thing. Poor people get money they need, and people with severe injuries get their lives saved. I find it unusual there always seems to be an aversion to companies making money on healthcare (the emphasis on for-profit). This is weird, because no one would suggest companies should only be allowed to make money on irrelevant or…

People desperate for money, who may not have blood suitable for donating, are incentivised to lie. Meanwhile, men can't donate if they've had sexual contact with men in the past 12 months. http://www.redcrossblood.org/donating-blood/eligibility-requ...

Before it can be distributed and used, the blood gets screened and tested. We shouldn't be too worried about people lying having any impact on the quality or safety of the blood supply.

* Blood Donor Screening || http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/BloodBloodProducts...

> FDA has progressively strengthened the overlapping safeguards that protect patients from unsuitable blood and blood products. Blood donors are asked specific questions about risk factors that could affect the safety of the donation and are deferred from donation if risk factors are acknowledged. FDA also requires blood centers to maintain lists of unsuitable donors to prevent further donations from these individuals. After donation, the blood is tested for several infectious agents. All tests must be negative before the blood is suitable for transfusion. In addition to these safeguards, FDA has significantly increased its oversight of the blood industry. The agency inspects all blood facilities at least every two years, and "problem" facilities are inspected more often. Blood establishments are now held to quality standards comparable to those expected of pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#12

Post by cloudsloth »

zaroth wrote: post #10
gech wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the share of the profit from this equitable though? Or do these companies take the lion's share?

Equitable? The raw material is a far cry from the final product which required perhaps hundred of millions in R&D. If people are willing the give a unit of plasma for $7.50 and supply is meeting demand, it seems precisely equitable. The key question is that donating so frequently must be safe for the donor. If there's long term health implications then the firms have to coordinate if necessary to ensure donations are…

Showing that people are willing to pay a price does not make it equitable. You have to account for power dynamics and market conditions. I believe the original question was whether there was a relatively even or fair split of 'profits' from the current setup. One could make a case for this being even, and also for it being somehow relational to investment (blood from the giver, r&d + logistics from the receiver). Your 'answer' glosses over all that.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#13

Post by cylinder »

dbg31415 wrote: post #9

I donate every 2 months. I also encourage everyone who can to donate as frequently as they can. It's an easy way for anyone to play it forward. * American Red Cross || http://www.redcrossblood.org/give/drive/driveSearch.jsp I had a family member in a near-fatal car accident a little over 12 years ago. It took a lot of blood to keep her alive, and I'm thankful for everyone who donated and made saving her life possible…

This is not about donating blood to the Red Cross, this is about the plasma donation industry, which is only for-profit in the US and supplies much of the world. Only a few companies operate in this space, I've studied it closely. Baxalta runs a big chain, BioLife, as does CSL.

If we accept that selling organs is prohibited and unethical then we should also accept the same for selling plasma.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#15

Post by kgwgk »

cylinder wrote: post #13
dbg31415 wrote: post #9

I donate every 2 months. I also encourage everyone who can to donate as frequently as they can. It's an easy way for anyone to play it forward. * American Red Cross || http://www.redcrossblood.org/give/drive/driveSearch.jsp I had a family member in a near-fatal car accident a little over 12 years ago. It took a lot of blood to keep her alive, and I'm thankful for everyone who donated and made saving her life possible…

This is not about donating blood to the Red Cross, this is about the plasma donation industry, which is only for-profit in the US and supplies much of the world. Only a few companies operate in this space, I've studied it closely. Baxalta runs a big chain, BioLife, as does CSL. If we accept that selling organs is prohibited and unethical then we should also accept the same for selling plasma.

What about hair, milk, sperm or oocytes?

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#16

Post by rtkwe »

cylinder wrote: post #13
dbg31415 wrote: post #9

I donate every 2 months. I also encourage everyone who can to donate as frequently as they can. It's an easy way for anyone to play it forward. * American Red Cross || http://www.redcrossblood.org/give/drive/driveSearch.jsp I had a family member in a near-fatal car accident a little over 12 years ago. It took a lot of blood to keep her alive, and I'm thankful for everyone who donated and made saving her life possible…

This is not about donating blood to the Red Cross, this is about the plasma donation industry, which is only for-profit in the US and supplies much of the world. Only a few companies operate in this space, I've studied it closely. Baxalta runs a big chain, BioLife, as does CSL. If we accept that selling organs is prohibited and unethical then we should also accept the same for selling plasma.

Except there's a huge difference between organs and blood plasma. Plasma donation is basically risk free, it regenerates, and has no long term health effects pretty much the exact opposite of any organ donation which are really risky and invasive and also leave the donor vulnerable to long term health risks. Equating them is pretty ridiculous.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#17

Post by njharman »

Is this really news, not known? I did it and so did most people I knew back in college (the ones who didn't were too heavy drug users). It was one of many sources for "minor money". Which when you have NO money, is pretty great.

It's one of a host of shitty things we force poor people to do cause as a society we have this stupid fucking idea that you have to work for everything, that you don't deserve the necessities of existence unless you spend 40+ hours making someone else rich.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#18

Post by x0137294744532 »

kgwgk wrote: post #15
cylinder wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about donating blood to the Red Cross, this is about the plasma donation industry, which is only for-profit in the US and supplies much of the world. Only a few companies operate in this space, I've studied it closely. Baxalta runs a big chain, BioLife, as does CSL. If we accept that selling organs is prohibited and unethical then we should also accept the same for selling plasma.

What about hair, milk, sperm or oocytes?

You can donate hair, milk, sperm or oocytes as frequently as you like without affecting your health. This is not the case for organs or plasma.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#19

Post by kgwgk »

x0137294744532 wrote: post #18
kgwgk wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about hair, milk, sperm or oocytes?

You can donate hair, milk, sperm or oocytes as frequently as you like without affecting your health. This is not the case for organs or plasma.

Could you donate sperm 100 times per day without affecting your health? I'm impressed! (Edit: assuming you're an sperm producing individual.(I was going to say 'man', but I don't want to risk offending anyone again.))

Seriously, egg donation seems to affect your health more than plasma donation. According to wikipedia:

Birth control pills are administered during the first few weeks of the egg donation process to synchronize the donor's cycle with the recipient's, followed by a series of injections which halt the normal functioning of the donor's ovaries. These injections may be self-administered on a daily basis for a period of one to three weeks. Next, follicle-stimulating hormones (FSH) are given to the donor to stimulate egg production and increases the number of mature eggs produced by the ovaries. Throughout the cycle the donor is monitored often by a physician using blood tests and ultrasound exams to determine the donor's reaction to the hormones and the progress of follicle growth.

Once the doctor decides the follicles are mature, he/she will establish the date and time for the egg retrieval procedure. Approximately 36 hours before retrieval, the donor must administer one last injection of HCG hormone to ensure that her eggs are ready to be harvested. The egg retrieval itself is a minimally invasive surgical procedure lasting 20–30 minutes, performed under sedation (but sometimes without any). A small ultrasound-guided needle is inserted through the vagina to aspirate the follicles in both ovaries, which extracts the eggs. After resting in a recovery room for an hour or two, the donor is released. Most donors resume regular activities by the next day.

Re: Thousands of Low-Income Americans 'Donate' Blood Plasma to For-Profit Centers

#20

Post by ThrustVectoring »

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #2

Although somewhat grotesque to many on the face of it, this seems like fundamentally a good thing. Poor people get money they need, and people with severe injuries get their lives saved. I find it unusual there always seems to be an aversion to companies making money on healthcare (the emphasis on for-profit). This is weird, because no one would suggest companies should only be allowed to make money on irrelevant or…

Relevant Churchill quote:

>Some years ago in London there was a toll bar on a bridge across the Thames, and all the working people who lived on the south side of the river had to pay a daily toll of one penny for going and returning from their work. The spectacle of these poor people thus mulcted of so large a proportion of their earnings offended the public con-science, and agitation was set on foot, municipal authorities were roused, and at the cost of the taxpayers, the bridge was freed and the toll removed. All those people who used the bridge were saved sixpence a week, but within a very short time rents on the south side of the river were found to have risen about sixpence a week, or the amount of the toll which had been remitted!

My inner cynical hardline communist says that this just gives rentiers more juice to squeeze from poor folks. If getting more stuff helps poor people, they'd have been helped by the mechanization of agriculture rather than continuing to get worked to the bone to barely survive. IMO what they need is negotiating power and better outside options to the exploitative traps they're in.

Post reply on HN