Problems Persist With Red Cross Blood Services

For 15 years, the American Red Cross has been under a federal court order to improve the way it collects and processes blood. Yet, despite $21 million in fines since 2003 and repeated promises to follow procedures intended to ensure the safety of the nation’s blood supply, it continues to fall short.

The situation has proved so frustrating that in January the commissioner of food and drugs attended a Red Cross board meeting — a first for a commissioner — and warned members that they could face criminal charges for their continued failure to bring about compliance, according to three Red Cross officials who attended the meeting and requested anonymity because Red Cross policy prohibits public discussion of its meetings with regulators.

“If fear is a motivator, we’re happy to help out in that way,” said Eric M. Blumberg, deputy general counsel at the Food and Drug Administration, though he declined to confirm what the commissioner, Andrew C. von Eschenbach, said at the meeting.

Some critics, including former Red Cross executives, have even suggested breaking off the blood services operations from the rest of the organization, as the Canadian Red Cross did a decade ago.

The problems, described in more than a dozen publicly available F.D.A. reports — some of which cite hundreds of lapses — include shortcomings in screening donors for possible exposure to diseases; failures to spend enough time swabbing arms before inserting needles; failures to test for syphilis; and failures to discard deficient blood.

In some cases, the lapses have put the recipients of blood at risk for diseases like hepatitis, malaria and syphilis. But according to the food and drug agency, the Red Cross has repeatedly failed to investigate the results of its mistakes, meaning there is no reliable record of whether recipients were harmed by...

Exactly...the Red Cross should know better, or at least be truthful about it; you ain’t gonna get an accurate reading.

All it is is an indicator of whether one should get further testing. Since the bias is probably to raise the cholestoerol rating, it might get more people with borderline cholesterol levels to get tested. The cholesterol reading apparently is important for the blood bank's own uses, because they can't separate and use plasma from blood that is too high in cholesterol.

When you consider my cholesterol reading at my most recent donation was 185, I don't think I'll worry about it, because it's probably slightly overstated anyway, and 185 is pretty good anyway in a fasting blood test, especially considering I take no drugs like Lipitor to control it.

keep your/our blood pure by knowing your doners...

I donate blood on a regular basis and every time I do, I have to answer a long list of questions including:

have you ever used needles to take drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by your doctor?

are you a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977?

have you ever taken money, drugs or other payment for sex since 1977

have you had sexual contact in the past 12 months with anyone described above?

have you received clotting factor concentrates for a bleeding disorder such as hemophilia?

were you born in, or lived in, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea,Gabon, Niger, or Nigeria, since 1977?

since 1977, have you received a blood transfusion or medical treatment with a blood product in any of these countries, or

have you had sex with anyone who, since 1977, was born in or lived in any of these countries?

There are also questions about whether you’ve lived in the UK and what other European counties you’ve lived in (Mad Cow disease), surgeries you’ve had, what medications you are currently taking, if you’ve had any tattoos or body piercing in the last 12 months or since you last donated. You have to sign a consent form to have your blood tested for HIV among several other diseases transmittable through blood products and consenting to be notified of the results.

At the end of answering all these confidential questions on a computer terminal in a private screened off area, you are given one last opportunity to confidentially check off a box on a form that no one at the donation center sees that is placed in a sealed envelope and attached to your donation bag, stating that you have reason to believe your donation should not be used. I presume this gives a person the opportunity, if they were too embarrassed or afraid that answers are not truly confidential, to back out without stating why and save themselves the embarrassment of being turned away.

It really takes more time and is more “painful” to go through all the questions and the screening process than making the donation.

From the article:

The Red Cross, which controls 43 percent of the nation’s blood supply, agrees that it has had quality-control problems and is working to fix them. Both its officials and the drug agency point out that none of the identified problems involve the most serious category of infractions. For instance, the Red Cross does a good job of testing for H.I.V. and hepatitis B, officials on all sides agree. And in general, Red Cross blood is regarded as some of the safest in the world.

All the times I’ve donated blood with the Red Cross, I’ve been very impressed with the professionalism and cleanliness of the operation, whether it’s been at a Red Cross center or at a mobile blood drive at my workplace or gym. My arm has always been swabbed down to the point of being drenched with antiseptics and I’ve always observed that the needle is from a new and sealed sterile package, that new gloves from a sealed sterile package are put on by the phlebotomist, etc. That’s not to say that there is not room for improvement (like making sure that all blood is properly tested and that old blood is discarded) but I certainly hope articles like this does not dissuade people from donating.

IMHO, donating blood is very safe and relatively painless for the donor and doesn’t take much time and that more people, especially heterosexual, clean living, healthy, conservative types, should get over any fear of needles they might have and donate. And if you have problems with the Red Cross, you can donate directly at your local hospital or through the military.

If you’ve ever had a loved one, in need of blood products, you will understand how important it is.

The blood you donate today could very well save the life of someone tomorrow.

I feel a special obligation to donate on a regular basis since my blood has tested to be negative for certain antibodies making it particularly useful for newborn and premature babies.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.