venta

Yup, I failed the copper sulphate test last time I went, but passed the electronic one. I've never had problems in before, and I've been blood doning for a few years.

I've looked at egg donation - I'd be happy to give mine away, I've got no intention of using 'em myself - but was scared off by reports of it being incredibly painful. What's the cut-off age ? I've no idea if I'm anywhere near it.

(In case it wasn't obvious, Sysadmin #1 is Dave, btw :)

From:

lathany.livejournal.com

<searches google>

In the US it appears to be 32 whilst in the UK a slightly higher 35.

Should I choose to do it, I'll need to get a move on.

From:

kate-r.livejournal.com

Ph no your asking me to reacall info from a couple of weeks ago
:)
I think it's 35 which seems a little young to me. I've also heard that it's extremely painfull but it seemed a reasonable way round the 'I've just hit 60 and now regret not having kids' scenario without the actual requirement of having them. Then again from what I can tell there's a fair few donated eggs that never go on to be sproglet and are diverted to 'scientific research' use.

From:

bateleur.livejournal.com

35 is the age at which the odds of "interesting" things happening to a woman's beebies begins to increase sharply.

I'm guessing that's something people don't look for in their donated eggs.

From:

thegreenman.livejournal.com

I've got some eggs in the fridge. Any good?

From:

I'm sure you'll be fine - they're pretty fascist about those things, they're set way higher than the you-need-to-worry level.

I keep thinking about the bone marrow wossname thing, wonder if they'd accept mine. Or accept me onto their list rather. (They physically can't get much blood out of me, so I've never tried...)

From:

(They physically can't get much blood out of me, so I've never tried...)

According to the bumf, you have to be a blood donor to go on the Bone Marrow Register, and one of their main methods of taking stem cells is by taking blood from you.

And I know they're quite facist about it, so I doubt it's anything serious really. Just annoying.

From:

PS You win, Becky, you can spell fascist.

From:

wimble.livejournal.com

Yes, but can can spell many sillier words. Which didn't ought to be words at all.

From:

That's not the only thing they use the register for though is it? (Remembering tales of a friend who was a potential donor-for-a-relative)

From:

Um, the only thing they use the Bone Marrow Register for is registering potential Bone Marrow doners, as far as I know... If person A requires a donor, though, I believe they usually check among all willing close relatives first, before checking the register.

From:

No, I mean "taking stem cells from blood" vs "other ways of getting bone marrow etc out of you". (Like putting a huge big needle in your bones f'rinstance.

From:

Oh. Right. The info leaflet says they do both methods, but the lady talking to me about it gave me the impression they prefer to do the blood version.

Five days of drugs and dialysis, or huge needles in your hips and 48 hours in hospital. Hmm... why did I sign up for this ?

I guess it's always worth asking, though, if you want to know if you're eligible.

From:

It's a tough decision, isn't it? Can you face hospital food for five whole days?

From:

OK... you can't give blood, the Sysadmin can't give blood because of the American West Nile virus scare, and I can't give blood here because I lived in England.

Strange world. Maybe they just don't want American and English blood mixing.

From:

because I lived in England.

Really ? Is that a BSE thing ?

From:

Yep. They think my brain is rotting.

From:

And what do you think ?

From:

Ask me after exams. ;)

Man, am I panicked right now.

From:

Best of luck with them...

I'm sure you're only panicked because of your Virgoan nature, I'm sure you'll do fine :)

From:

My Virgoan nature is telling me that I really should have done more work this semester. I need to start channeling someone serious....

Ahh, the academic life. Why did I go back to it?

From:

Ahh, the academic life. Why did I go back to it?

Er, your Virgoan nature, I think :)

From:

As someone else who can't give blood (because of the quality - not the quantity - of my sexual partners - and I can tell you that really makes me angry), when I hear there is a blood shortage, the only thing I can say is, no bloody wonder.

I don't really think there is a shortage of people who would give blood. It's just that, for one reason or another, most people's blood apparently isn't good enough. Or their testing and screening regimes aren't good enough. Or whatever. Perhaps we really should be grateful for all those Jehova's Witnesses going aroung carrying their 'NO BLOOD' cards in their wallets.

From:

I appreciate that they have to be ultra-careful about the blood they take, but some of their rules on sexual partners do seem peculiarly draconian.

From:

lanfykins.livejournal.com

What, even if you test clear of everything?

Bloody discrimination...

From:

No - the last time I checked, the rule was *ever*

From:

bateleur.livejournal.com

because of the quality - not the quantity - of my sexual partners

Eh ? Not heard this one. So if the vampires don't fancy your girlfriend they won't take your blood ?!

From:

Gay men are not allowed to give blood, period. Even if they've been in a monogamous relationship for n years, where n can be as large as you like. But if you're straight, sleep around all you like and after a month or two the Blood Service will gladly take your armful.

Maybe 15 years ago this blanket ban was justified, but all blood donations are now screened for HIV (among many other things). I don't see how "gay" blood would hide the virus from the screening process.

From:

I don't see how "gay" blood would hide the virus from the screening process.

I believe the logic is not that gay blood hides it better, but just that the HIV screening isn't 100% reliable, and gay men are inherently more likely to be HIV+. Which is at least more logical, though I have no idea how accurate the theory is.

They don't only ignore the "monogamous for N years", a man can't give blood if he has ever had a homosexual encounter. If I were to sleep with a man who'd had one homosexual encounter in his past somewhere, however long ago, that would also mean I couldn't give blood for 12 months.

If they're going to maintain that level of paranoia, then they should also be asking questions about heterosexual habits as well.

From:

The full list of those ineligible is here (https://secure.blood.co.uk/c11_cant.asp). Alternatively, there are 25 questions you can answer here (http://www.blood.co.uk/pages/flash_questions.html) to check whether you are eligible - though at the end it still just says you may be allowed to donate - presumably it can still all be called off if they don't like the colour of your eyes.

And the current stock levels are here (http://www.blood.co.uk/pages/stocklevel.html). I couldn't find a link to say how long blood can be kept, so I don't know whether 9 days is a "maximum" or just what they have for the most common group.

I'm sure their rules are well-intentioned and the blanket ban (which also applies to prostitutes and intravenous drug users) allows for a very simple self-regulation on the part of donors, but I find it difficult to square that with the "we're desperate for your blood" line. Two of their questions are "Do you have or think you may have HIV/Hepatitis B/C?" - it seems to me, if they really were desperate for blood, that criteria would be sufficient. I imagine that statistically, one could probably prove that no-one should give blood, if one tried hard enough.

Of course, if I ever need a blood transfusion, I'll take it. I just expect there would be some patronising marketing about giving blood shortly afterwards, which could easily lead to an instance of "NHS Rage" on my part.

From: