| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Life Extension Forum » International traffic in blood and blood products...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| ... |
 Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 1:14 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Hi,
I'd like to start a new thread. Suppose there was a jurisdiction that
was so incompetently run that a particular large subgroup was
prohibited from blood donation due to a "bad" immunilogical profile.
And suppose that one individual in that subgroup who was a doctor and
was able to change his immunilogical profile in an ethical manner.
Yet, the incompetent and criminal government of which he was subject
would not reconsider his plight. The global population is now 6.5
billions so that doctor's plight might be multiplied by a factor of
one million. There might be one million doctor's globally who found
themselves in an analogous situation. The bible says sarcastically,
"physician heal thyself". It is not so easily done, there is bias
against doctors. Such injustice might result in what might be at
present an unknown or "secret" level of international traffic in blood
and blood products. In the future this might not be such an
underground phenomenon but could become an embarrassment for world
governance. What do you think? Is this a plot line for a new Tom
Clancy novel? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 2:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Sorry, my previous post was unclear.
The personal benefits of phlebotomy, relative to life extension are
well known
Suppose there was a jurisdiction that was so incompetently run that a
particular large subgroup was prohibited from blood donation due to a
"bad" immunilogical profile. And suppose that one individual in that
subgroup who was a doctor and was able to change his immunilogical
profile in an ethical manner. Yet, the incompetent and criminal
government of which he was subject would not reconsider his plight.
The global population is now 6.5 billions so that doctor's plight
might be multiplied by a factor of one million. There might be one
million doctor's globally who found themselves in an analogous
situation. The bible says sarcastically, "physician heal thyself". It
is not so easily done, there is bias against doctors. Such injustice
might result in what might be at present an unknown or "secret" level
of international traffic in CONTRABAND blood and blood products. In
the future this might not be such an underground phenomenon but could
become an embarrassment for world governance. What do you think? Is
this a plot line for a new Tom Clancy novel? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:39 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 14, 8:31 pm, d.... at (no spam) hotmail.com wrote:
Quote: Sorry, my previous post was unclear.
The personal benefits of phlebotomy, relative to life extension are
well known
Suppose there was a jurisdiction that was so incompetently run that a
particular large subgroup was prohibited from blood donation due to a
"bad" immunilogical profile. .... (snip)
If you are referring to the practice of not using blood with overly
high hemoglobin levels, as occurs in such diseases as hemachromatosis
and polycythemia, this is justified on two grounds: first, the blood
is too thick and can not be directly transfused, Two, high hematocrit
can be indicative of a diseased state, thus the risks of using it for
transfusion can't be justified. Low hemoglobin levels are similarly
undesirable, and drawing blood could put the donor at risk.
Or are you talking about something else? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 7:21 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On May 15, 5:39 am, r... at (no spam) my-deja.com wrote:
Quote: On May 14, 8:31 pm, d.... at (no spam) hotmail.com wrote:
Sorry, my previous post was unclear.
The personal benefits of phlebotomy, relative to life extension are
well known
Suppose there was a jurisdiction that was so incompetently run that a
particular large subgroup was prohibited from blood donation due to a
"bad" immunilogical profile. .... (snip)
If you are referring to the practice of not using blood with overly
high hemoglobin levels, as occurs in such diseases as hemachromatosis
and polycythemia, this is justified on two grounds: first, the blood
is too thick and can not be directly transfused, Two, high hematocrit
can be indicative of a diseased state, thus the risks of using it for
transfusion can't be justified. Low hemoglobin levels are similarly
undesirable, and drawing blood could put the donor at risk.
Or are you talking about something else?
No, I was specifically refering to immunilogical profile not high
hemocrit. I was being extremely vague in order not to identify myself
and in order to appeal to the self interest of the widest audience. In
the case of too high hemocrit like in hemochromatosis or polychemia,
immediate phlebotomy is required to avoid prompt death. For them,
phlebotomy contributes to life extension on the short term. Iron is a
powerful catalyst of one electron oxidation and so reduction of iron
load will lead to life extension in all other subgroups. This should
be self evident to all doctors. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ... |
| Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 5:18 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <268a40a6-435c-456c-9ce9-689eac5b24e1 at (no spam) q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
<d.086 at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
Quote: On May 15, 5:39 am, r... at (no spam) my-deja.com wrote:
On May 14, 8:31 pm, d.... at (no spam) hotmail.com wrote:
Sorry, my previous post was unclear.
The personal benefits of phlebotomy, relative to life extension are
well known
Blood letting was very popular from medieval times into the 19th
century as a magical way to balance the so-called humors believed
to be responsible for all health and disease. Many sick people
were pushed further toward death by the practice. If you have
any evidence-based support for your claim, I wouldn't mind seeing
a few citation to respectable journals.
Quote: Suppose there was a jurisdiction that was so incompetently run that a
particular large subgroup was prohibited from blood donation due to a
"bad" immunilogical profile. .... (snip)
If you are referring to the practice of not using blood with overly
high hemoglobin levels, as occurs in such diseases as hemachromatosis
and polycythemia, this is justified on two grounds: first, the blood
is too thick and can not be directly transfused, Two, high hematocrit
can be indicative of a diseased state, thus the risks of using it for
transfusion can't be justified. Low hemoglobin levels are similarly
undesirable, and drawing blood could put the donor at risk.
Or are you talking about something else?
No, I was specifically refering to immunilogical profile not high
hemocrit. I was being extremely vague in order not to identify myself
and in order to appeal to the self interest of the widest audience. In
the case of too high hemocrit like in hemochromatosis or polychemia,
immediate phlebotomy is required to avoid prompt death. For them,
phlebotomy contributes to life extension on the short term. Iron is a
powerful catalyst of one electron oxidation and so reduction of iron
load will lead to life extension in all other subgroups. This should
be self evident to all doctors.
If I can interpret this, you tried to get the local blood transfusion
service to take your blood, but you tested positive on some test for
a disease that can be transmitted by blood, so they refused you. These
tests do have false positives, but blood services find it better to reject
such donors anyway. This is good practice -- it's important that the
blood supply be as safe as possible. They are thinking of the recipient
even if you are just thinking of yourself.
I hope you had the sense to seek medical assistance to determine whether
the test which caused your rejection was due to disease or false
positive. Several of the diseases checked for, like syphilis,
hepatitis B and AIDS, don't show serious symptoms until fairly late,
possibly too late to do much about them.
In the science fiction scenario in your previous post, about an
international cabal specializing in blood from people who have been
rejected because of positive tests for blood-transmitted disease, I
think you should ask yourself, why would anyone want to transfuse such
blood instead of blood that is much safer? It would make much more
sense to just throw it away to protect recipients.
If you believe that inducing anemia in yourself is good for you, you can
either take up an extremely limited low-iron diet, or bleed yourself by
by simple medieval methods like cutting into your flesh, or get a wide
bore hypodermic needle, and learn how to stick it into a vein. It's not
too hard -- junkies do it all the time. Note that you'll be at risk of
septicemia just like your medieval predecessors, a condition not conducive
to extended life. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:03 am
|
|