h a l f b a k e r y
Where life irritates science.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
Provide health insurance or a discount on same for those who regularly give blood.
Note that I have no clue as to how the health insurance industry runs, I merely have a perception that processed blood has a high monetary value to hospitals and there must be some way to utilize this to entice more of
the population to donate... perhaps throwing in organ donation as well would defray insurance costs enough to enable impoverished nations such as the United States reach the social services levels of places like... Canada.
Those with blood-borne illnesses are out of luck.
Can you give blood in the UK?
http://www.blood.co...lash_questions.html
probably not. [calum, Jan 26 2005]
[link]
|
| |
The screening tests for donors
probably parallels a lot of the pre-
insurance testing. |
|
| |
Id say that the presence of transfusable blood in the medical system keeps insurance companies from paying out more life insurance policies than they would if there was no blood. So I'm +'ing this. |
|
| |
The idea is so Halfbaked it might actually work. |
|
| |
//Those with blood-borne illnesses are out of luck.// |
|
| |
They’re not the only ones. I donated blood up until the time I received blood. Once you are a recipient, you can no longer donate, period. There’s something very wrong with that policy. Do they think that their screening process is so bad that they likely gave you an illness? And again so bad that they wouldn’t be able to detect it when you donated? This doesn’t inspire much confidence in the system. Also, I imagine that many recipients who were not donors would like to become donors, having seen the value of it first-hand. They can’t. Perhaps this policy is a leftover from the days when they knew they were missing things in the screening (hep c was it?), or when HIV was not well understood. What’s the problem now? I’d guess that you’re far more likely to contract a blood-borne illness from someplace other than a transfusion... |
|
| |
<stops prior to onset of rant mode - this makes my blood boil> |
|
| |
I've noticed that the US and UK systems for blood donation seem to be very different. Here in the UK, blood donation is from unpaid volunteers and is organised in places of work, schools, colleges and so forth, whereas in the US people seem to be paid for donating blood. Is this correct? It seems to be a good way of motivating people to fiddle the system if one is paid to give blood. |
|
| |
I don't think we have the same rule in the UK about recipients not giving blood, but i may be wrong. |
|
| |
We don't accept donations from anyone who has even visited the UK in the period 1980 -1996. There is now a proposed ban on donations from anyone who has lived in the US since the practice of offal feeding cattle began. Similar bans in place throughout much of Europe. |
|
| |
Nineteenthly, people are no longer paid for their blood as it attracts the "wrong" kind of people. Namely, those with levels of unwanted drugs in their bloodsteam. |
|
| |
The reason for the ban on people who came over here is presumably down to vCJD, but does it make sense if you were vegetarian when you came here? Is there actually a shortage of blood? |
|
| |
It always seemed crazy to pay people for donations anyway. |
|
| |
Yeah, its crazy to pay people for something they will give you for free. However, I wouldn't mind being paid for donating, if the pay was substantial enough. And it could be pretty substantial, especially in a private system because think about the economics: how much would a dying person be willing and able to pay for life saving blood? And how much would an insurance company be willing to pay to avoid doling out for another life insurance policy? Although, if my blood suddenly became valuable, especially if it were rare, it wouldn't be surprising if people with the same blood type started to get into strange blood-letting accidents. I think that's how vampires started, I can't be sure though. |
|
| |
In the US, _here_, one may be paid to donate plasma at regulated private plasmapheresis centers but the blood for a fee programs of thirty years ago have ceased to be. |
|
| |
Play your cards right, and you may get free movie tickets, a pizza, chicken dinners, or some stinkin cool t-shirts for your pint. |
|
| |
[+] good idea. I do give blood for free, but I know that after I donate it, someone else is going to be selling it through a system. |
|
| |
Hospitals need blood, just like they need lights & water. Why of all things, would the blood be free? |
|
| |
[calum], The transfusion question on that link makes perfect sense. Did you have a transfusion in the last 12 months? That allows ample time for anything you may have ‘received’ to be detectable (i.e. presence of HIV antibodies). Perhaps I’ll donate when I’m overseas. Oh, wait, the cow thing. |
|
| |
BTW [attis], I like the idea. |
|
| |
<how much would a dying person be willing and able to pay for life saving blood?> |
|
| |
A slippery slope. I have a dangerous addiction to video games and I'd hate to face the temptation of swapping blood & organs for scratch to feed my habit. I mean, the majority of people I know have no health insurance, yet how many livers has David Crosby been through? I think $$$ has too much influence over the quality of our healthcare as it is. |
|
| |
But I'm just a commie pinko. |
|
| |
I don't think health insurance companies would implement such a program, as one thinks there would be certain health risks to giving a pint of blood every eight weeks. I think it could be handled from the hospital end, i.e. hospitals give you a mini-insurance package for giving blood to them. |
|
| |
Just make sure you don't sign your blood away to a bloke in a red cape and suspicious growths on his head. |
|
| |