Talk to the doctors AT THAT HOSPITAL.
From the article YOU SUGGESTED I READ:
While the surgery itself did not require blood, Dr. Eleane Beadle determined that Alexander needed a blood transfusion the next day due to low hemoglobin levels.“Instead of waiting a few more days for the blood we had donated to be fully processed and available,” the doctor used blood from a general blood bank for the transfusion, Bly told Clary.<
Wikins has pointed out that Washington “had a 70% fully-vaccinated population by February 1, 2022, with 79% receiving at least one injection,” and so “there was a near 80% chance Alexander got vaxxed blood.”
The doctor “found the blood clot within a few hours after he got the transfusion,” Hertzler told Clary on Thursday.
Hertzler said that while previously, the doctors had told them that “blood clots are very rare” in a case like Alexander’s, after he got a blood clot, they said, “Well, this happens. But…it’s something a blood thinner can fix.”
“And the blood thinners — they had him on the highest dose they could give an infant. And it did nothing. [The clot] just kept growing really fast,” she went on.
Hertzler believes that if the clot had been “normal,” then blood thinners would have helped dissolve it. She said that, “given our understanding” of the findgs of abnormal clots in the vaxxed deceased, “we know that it’s not a normal blood clot.”
Got that? The blood clot wasn't during the second surgery.
The transfusion was given a day AFTER the surgery, due to low hemoglobin.
The clot came AFTER THE TRANSFUSION, not right after the surgery.
And to bolster that last point, the ATTENDING PHYSICIAN said *prior to the procedure* that blood clots were very low in a case like the now dead-baby's situation.
So again, it's not a case of "ignorant rube speaking like a medieval peasant about matters they don't know anything about".
It's a case of the attending doctors in the case (so you can't argue, well, physicians can shoot of their mouths, a remote commenter isn't really familiar with all the facts of the case) saying "blood clots are very rare".
And the clot happening not during or immediately after the procedure itself, but after the later transfusion.
Where the hospital pressured and lied to the parents it would be too difficult and too costly to use a directed donor.
Oh yeah, just to remind you again.
YOUR article, which YOU told me to read before commenting.
Troll.
This is the article presented
Acute blood loss anemia occurs in the perioperative period
We would need to know the hemoglobin and venous saturation of the baby at the time the decision of transfusion was made to assess if it were necessary.
Having personal knowledge of this procedure and having seen it done (congenital heart surgery and thoracic surgery) you are jumping to conclusions that are superficial.
So to clarify you are of the opinion that transfusion 24 hours post mediastinotomy and thoracotomy in a neonate may not be urgent 94 emergent? You believe this transfusion could have waited? I would life to understand the evidence around that statement.
Additionally you are telling me that the child has no clots prior to the transfusion. There is evidence of same? Perhaps understanding how the vascular tree is cannulared for structural heart surgery in addition to heparinization and protamine reversal will help you ask the proper questions
The really question of concern here is why was there MRSA on the thrombus.
You have all the right answers to All the wrong questions.