I used to donate blood from when I turned 18, it was a done thing in our Family, I went off to London for 5yrs and returned in 95 and again started to give blood, until there was a scare re mad cow's disease over in the UK and there was a ban put in place for anyone who lived for a yr or more in the UK from '80 to '96 as per attached.

http://www.giveblood.ie/Become_a_Don...ood_donors.pdf

What I can't understand, what about the UK, what "precautions" are taken to "screen" for mad cows if any on those that donate blood over there ?

Is this ban still necessary, I am sure there are plenty of folk like myself that would gladly donate if this ban was lifted.

Thoughts ?

The simple answer it that they would rather a person die due to lack of blood than accept the minuscule possibility that that person would survive, contract mad-cow, and sue them.

Given the freedom and frequency of travel between the two jurisdictions , I can't see the point in it . How many weren't resident , but regularly attended sporting and music events,did they abstain from eating the deadly burgers and pies .

I presume it's to ensure confidence in the blood bank? (Which I also assume is the reason for excluding men who have slept with men). I doubt if either can be justified on medical opinion.

UK could import more blood to counter BSE risk from transfusions | Society | guardian.co.uk

Ban was still in place in 09 in Uk

Originally Posted by Tin Foil Hat

The simple answer it that they would rather a person die due to lack of blood than accept the minuscule possibility that that person would survive, contract mad-cow, and sue them.

Any chance of a source for this emotive and apparently bitter comment???

To put my own cards on the 'table' though - I have given blood over 90 times to date so this restriction has not affected my ability to donate.

Originally Posted by Tin Foil Hat

The simple answer it that they would rather a person die due to lack of blood than accept the minuscule possibility that that person would survive, contract mad-cow, and sue them.

I think this is it in a nutshell.

I have a friend who used to work for the Blood Bank (or whatever they're calling themselves these days). She told me it was widely acknowledged among staff that their restrictions on doners were ridiculously strict, and that there was also an unreasonably high number ofl 'non-bleds' ie people who turn up hoping to donate but are turned away. That's happened to me on more than one occasion: reasons include having been in a (very borderline) 'malarial' area in the previous year or having had an (again very borderline) low iron content in my blood. My friend reckoned that everyone at the Blood Bank knew this was just over caution on their part. They're still reeling from the Hepatitis B scandal, and don't want anything of the type happening again.

Originally Posted by Gibby

Any chance of a source for this emotive and apparently bitter comment???

To put my own cards on the 'table' though - I have given blood over 90 times to date so this restriction has not affected my ability to donate.

Michael Noonan could probably fill you in on that one .

Turned away countless times myself due to travel, medication, and living in UK between the banned years.
Surely there are parts of the blood unaffected by the bugs, medication or burgers that could be used even for research into looking for a test for BSE/CJD.

I have often heard stories of operations cancelled due to lack of blood, Certan Death v million to one shot of potential death? Hmmmm no brainer really.

Mark it research or emergency only.

Originally Posted by Gibby

Any chance of a source for this emotive and apparently bitter comment???

Yea, It's in their mission statement
Of course I don't have a source. But this policy is quite obviously put in place by bean-counters.