Fallen 0 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 Link to report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4595039.stmI just read and I was speech less. How or why could they have messed that? Aren't they supposed to test all the blodd they get? If they gave me blood that had the HIV virus, I would sue!!!! You could never imagin that would happen. I wonder what the CRC has to say. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaryAnne Der Esel 0 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 Oh my goodness! That's terrible! How in the world could they let so much tainted blood slip through the system and into the veins of patients? Imagine, the blood that was supposed to save your life was actually, in the end, what took it....I have much more confidence in the American Red Cross to supply safe blood, though. I know someone who has done an extensive research project about the safety of America's blood supply, as well as several people involved with blood donation, and I know about all the many precautions they take against gathering and distrubuting tainted blood. No plan is fool-proof, though. The scary possibility of contracting HIV or some other deadly blood disease will always exist as long as blood is being transfered from one person to another. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
serverph 0 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 it's a shame, really, to read that kind of news. i believe that comes as a result of inept people within the organization. and to think that this is two-decades behind already before an admission of guilt was squeezed out of the canadian red cross... estimates of passed contamination could be more than what is really acknowledged! heads will surely roll, an apology cannot be sufficient to assuage the pain and sufferings of the families involved in this tragedy. i just hope that within the two-decades that this has been "hidden" from the public, that measures have been taken to ensure that none of these will happen again, at least not to the scale at which this error has played out if nothing can be entirely fool-proof. but since it can be prevented in the future, a multiple-screening of blood should be in order to ensure the public of the safety of blood to be used. no money can match the value of lives lost. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rvovk 0 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 I am this is really teribble news. I don't know the fact about HIV in to the details, but blood donation is human deed. And you must ask yourself if you are correct doner. But nevertheless to put virus HIV to 1000 people and 20.000 of Hepatitis C. Omg, I don't have faith into health service anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rattler108 0 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 This is just terrible. They should have tried to help out the victims in a better way and admitted their guilt sooner instead of trying to deny the charges. Let's just hope that they never make a mistake like this one again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rvalkass 5 Report post Posted May 31, 2005 Its shocking to read information like this. How could people not notice when tests are carried out on the blood, or were the checks never performed in the first place?You generally go into hospitals to get a chance of survival or ease pain, but to go in and be condemmed to death is just awful. I am devastated at this news and would be more so if it happened to someone close to my heart. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Danieluchis 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2005 that's why i can't wait for the new plasma synthetic blood to come out! that's really awfull! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
