Anaemia fears as 90,000 blood donors are contacted

mahoganygas · 11-02-2016 11:30AM #1

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/anaemia-fears-as-90000-regular-blood-donors-are-contacted-by-ibts-34409633.html

I received a letter from the IBTS today. I donated blood last year and not long afterwards my GP diagnosed me with anemia. It looks like the IBTS may have missed my low haemoglobin levels and I should never have been allowed to donate.

My friend also got the letter so he's heading off to his GP to get checked, as he's been feeling unwell for months.

It's scary to think that the faulty equipment was being used for so long.
In fairness the staff, nurses and doctors have always been very professional. But I have to admit that my confidence in IBTS has been shaken somewhat. I always expected incredibly strict procedures in blood donation clinics.

Would this put you off donating?
I wonder how many of the 90,000 should have been prevented from donating.

osarusan · 11-02-2016 11:38AM

I got the same letter. I wondered at the time about that new apparatus that had replaced the pin-prick test, but assumed it worked.

No, it won't put me off from donating.

I wonder how dangerous a transfusion from an anaemic person would be for the recipient - who is obviously going to be in less than perfect health in the first place.

That would be my main concern.

Cee-Jay-Cee · 11-02-2016 11:39AM

Why would it put anyone in fear of donating? It may cause concern to people receiving transfusions but it should have zero effect on the level of donations. You give your blood and it's up to the doctors/specialists to ensure its correct for the recipient. Your job is done.

Ok so they missed a low iron count but scare mongering isn't going to help anyone especially those in need of a transfusion.

mahoganygas · 11-02-2016 11:54AM

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

Why would it put anyone in fear of donating? It may cause concern to people receiving transfusions but it should have zero effect on the level of donations. You give your blood and it's up to the doctors/specialists to ensure its correct for the recipient. Your job is done.

Ok so they missed a low iron count but scare mongering isn't going to help anyone especially those in need of a transfusion.

Agreed. I'm still happy to donate but I am concerned with the fall down in standards within the organisation.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to scaremonger. But I think the IBTS should have explained exactly what went wrong and what they're doing to stop something similar happening again. The letter is very vague with the details and to be honest it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.

ted1 · 11-02-2016 11:56AM

mahoganygas wrote: »

Agreed. I'm still happy to donate but I am concerned with the fall down in standards within the organisation.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to scaremonger. But I think the IBTS should have explained exactly what went wrong and what they're doing to stop something similar happening again. The letter is very vague with the details and to be honest it doesn't instill a lot of confidence.

I taught it was quite clear

beertons · 11-02-2016 12:02PM

Ring them if you want more info. They already said if you need to see your doctor, send them the receipt and they'll reimburse you.

HeidiHeidi · 11-02-2016 12:06PM

ted1 wrote: »

I taught it was quite clear

So did I!

I've always understood that the blood-iron rule was to protect the donor, not the recipients of the blood (although I'm sure that would be a concern as well).

Although it makes them look a bit foolish, it would have zero effect on my decision to keep donating.

gctest50 · 11-02-2016 12:08PM

Always coming up with novel ways to f*ck something up

maudgonner · 11-02-2016 12:19PM

This was pretty well publicised while the restrictions on female donors were in place (I remember posting about it on Boards), so I think most people knew the situation. I'm surprised it's taken them so long to send out the letters though, maybe there were legal reasons.

As for worries about the patient receiving the donation - blood goes through a lot of screening and processing before it's given to a patient. Any problems should be picked up at that stage.

It wouldn't put me off donating in the slightest. In fact I'll be doing so on Sunday week

gctest50 · 11-02-2016 12:38PM

maudgonner wrote: »

As for worries about the patient receiving the donation - blood goes through a lot of screening and processing before it's given to a patient. Any problems should be picked up at that stage.

It wouldn't put me off donating in the slightest. In fact I'll be doing so on Sunday week

hmmmm

THE disclosure that several patients may have received HIV infected blood from the Blood Transfusion Service Board is the latest in a series of controversies to surround the BTSB. These include:

ANTI D WOMEN/HEPATITIS INFECTION:
The infection of women via the anti D immunoglobulin - now the subject of the hepatitis C inquiry - has its genesis in 1970 when the BTSB began making the blood product.

On November 8th, 1976, the BTSB began taking plasma from a woman known as patient X for the production of anti D, without her consent.

Eleven days later hospital records revealed she was suffering from infective hepatitis, despite an earlier negative test. A number of women, up to 10, were subsequently infected with hepatitis C.
In January 1994 Dr Joan Power, BTSB director in Cork, reported the identification of donors with hepatitis C, with no risk factors other than anti D. The following month the BTSB informed the Department of Health of evidence of a possible link between anti D and hepatitis C.
On February 21st, 1994, the then minister for health, Mr Brendan Howlin, announced a national blood screening programme for women who received the anti D blood product.
The setting up of a compensation tribunal was announced by Minister for Health, Mr Noonan, last December, to compensate all of those who contracted hepatitis C from the use of anti D, whole blood or other blood products.
The tribunal of inquiry, long demanded by those infected with the hepatitis C virus, was finally set up by Mr Noonan on October 8th this year after the death of Mrs Brigid McCole on October 2nd, just five days before a High Court case being taken by her against the State was due to begin.

RENAL PATIENTS:
Research conducted in 1990 into the prevalence of hepatitis C among renal patients revealed a higher prevalence of hepatitis C among kidney transplant and other renal patients in Ireland, than in other European countries.

HAEMOPHILIACS:
During the late 1980s a number of haemophiliacs were diagnosed as non hepatitis A and non hepatitis B. The precise nature of the virus, however, was not diagnosed.
In 1990 a test was developed for hepatitis C. Since then 210 haemophiliacs have been diagnosed as having hepatitis C and 103 have tested positive for HIV.

"However, counsel for the tribunal, Gerard Durcan, SC, said that the blood transfusion boards attitude ranged from the "leisurely" to "extreme urgency" during 1985 because there was a fear within the BTSB that they would be unable to have their blood products manufactured abroad as countries with mandatory AIDS-testing would not allow the importation of Irish blood."

http://health.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Tribunal-of-Inquiry-into-the-Infection-with-HIV-and-Hep-C-of-persons-with-Haemophilia-and-Related-Matters.pdf

maudgonner · 11-02-2016 12:40PM

mahoganygas wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/anaemia-fears-as-90000-regular-blood-donors-are-contacted-by-ibts-34409633.html

I received a letter from the IBTS today. I donated blood last year and not long afterwards my GP diagnosed me with anemia.

By the way anyone who feels unwell after donating should ring the IBTS to report it - for your safety and for the recipient's.

maudgonner · 11-02-2016 12:45PM

gctest50 wrote: »

hmmmm

I'm not defending what happened with the Hep C & HIV infections, but I believe that things have come a long way since then. Hell of a difference between HIV screening in the 80s and haemoglobin testing now. If you're suggesting that we should stop donating because of mistakes made in the past, then a hell of a lot of people who badly, badly need blood would be left in a bad way.

gctest50 · 11-02-2016 12:46PM

maudgonner wrote: »

As for worries about the patient receiving the donation - blood goes through a lot of screening and processing before it's given to a patient. Any problems should be picked up at that stage.

have haemophilia ? try some HIV - tis great altogether

Prof Temperley said he wrote to Armour in January 1987 seeking information on the batch. To his annoyance, he never got a satisfactory response.

Prof Temperley was also questioned about the infection of a patient with HIV in 1986 who was given heat-treated Factor 8 manufactured by the Armour pharmaceutical company. The batch, A28306, was only heat-treated at 60 degrees for 30 hours.

Prof Temperley said he thought at the time the UK was using 68 degrees for 72 hours but they were actually using 80 degrees.

HeidiHeidi · 11-02-2016 12:48PM

gctest50 wrote: »

hmmmm

http://health.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Tribunal-of-Inquiry-into-the-Infection-with-HIV-and-Hep-C-of-persons-with-Haemophilia-and-Related-Matters.pdf

That was 40 years ago!

It was tragic, awful, should never have happened, and they made a total hames of dealing with it - but I think things have probably moved on a lot since then.

ThisRegard · 11-02-2016 12:49PM

gctest50, we get it, you have an issue with the historical problems with the IBTS. We're all aware of them, but you're being a dick.

gctest50 · 11-02-2016 12:50PM

Didn't think it was that many 4500 +

maudgonner · 11-02-2016 12:51PM

gctest50 wrote: »

have haemophilia ? try some HIV - tis great altogether

As I said, what happened with HIV and HepC was shameful. But should haemophiliacs not be able to get transfusions at all now, because we decide to stop donating to be on the safe side?

I'd like haemophiliacs, cancer patients, accident victims etc etc to be able to receive safe blood products. Unless you have current evidence to the contrary, I believe that donating blood is the best way I can help to make that happen. I don't view the issues with haemoglobin level testing to be enough of a reason to withhold my donation.

(Btw I have no connection with IBTS, other than being a donor whenever I can)

mahoganygas · 11-02-2016 12:58PM

I don't think anybody would suggest that we scrap the blood donation program. It's clearly a hugely important part of modern medicine.

But the latest error could be interpreted as standards slipping again.
I think it should be a wake up call to IBTS to check and re-check the entire process from top to bottom on a regular basis. Something slipped through the cracks this time so they need to stop that from happening again.

I'm not familiar with their audit or quality control procedures. But they should come right out and explain what went wrong and what new checks will be brought in for new equipment.
In light of the tragic past issues, they are shooting themselves in the foot if they are anything but fully transparent on these issues.

kylith · 11-02-2016 01:07PM

I donated while the crappy apparatus was in use, and have donated again since with the standard pin-prick and my iron levels were fine so I'd assume the risks are pretty minor.

Penny Tration · 11-02-2016 01:21PM

Got the letter too, as did my sister.

I'm not getting checked out because my haemoglobin levels were always high enough (over 15, I think 12 was necessary?), and I feel absolutely fine, felt fine after each donation and don't think there's any point in having them refund €85 for a GP appointment and bloods that will more than likely show I'm fine.

No issues with continuing to donate.

One eyed Jack · 11-02-2016 01:58PM

I got the letter about two weeks back I think, but I'd already been into my doc for a check-up from the neck down, and apart from my cholesterol level being 6.5, I'm all good to continue donating blood.

This wouldn't put me off at all.

Capt'n Midnight · 12-02-2016 12:12AM

The scariest part of all this is that 97% of those eligible to donate blood don't.

maudgonner · 12-02-2016 12:18AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The scariest part of all this is that 97% of those eligible to donate blood don't.

This, despite the fact that you get to eat Taytos and drink Fanta guilt-free AND get a free pen. A free pen!

I wonder if they brought back the free Guinness would donations increase?

Hrududu · 12-02-2016 12:33AM

I got the letter too. Seemed pretty straight forward. Definitely wouldn't put me off donating. I doubt I'll go to the GP, the letter said that the next time you donate there will be an accurate reading so if you are anaemic that will be picked up then.

Shlippery · 12-02-2016 02:17PM

maudgonner wrote: »

This, despite the fact that you get to eat Taytos and drink Fanta guilt-free AND get a free pen. A free pen!

I wonder if they brought back the free Guinness would donations increase?

Aw ****, I donated yesterday for the first time and didn't get a free pen.

I'm gonna ring them and see if I can get my blood back - I feel so cheated!

maudgonner · 12-02-2016 02:49PM

Shlippery wrote: »

Aw ****, I donated yesterday for the first time and didn't get a free pen.

I'm gonna ring them and see if I can get my blood back - I feel so cheated!

What can I say, you lost out big time

(Normally there's a box of them where they have the refreshments and you can just help yourself. Pencils too!)

kylith · 12-02-2016 03:26PM

Shlippery wrote: »

Aw ****, I donated yesterday for the first time and didn't get a free pen.

I'm gonna ring them and see if I can get my blood back - I feel so cheated!

Good for you! I bet it wasn't as bad as you thought it'd be.

I love the laughing cow cheese spread. I don't buy it myself so it's my little treat when I donate. My most recent one was #20

Shlippery · 12-02-2016 04:06PM

kylith wrote: »

Good for you! I bet it wasn't as bad as you thought it'd be.

I love the laughing cow cheese spread. I don't buy it myself so it's my little treat when I donate. My most recent one was #20

Something I had been meaning to do for ages but just bit the bullet yesterday and went to D'Olier clinic on the way home from college!

Incredibly painless.-just a brief needle prick in the finger you wouldn't even feel.
And the the needle in the arm was barely noticeable.

There's more pain getting stabbed up in the arse with a compass in maths class.

No negative effects, dizziness or bruising! Would definitely do it again.

Couldn't get over how such a low % donates.

Quick procedure, snacks, friendliest staff in the world and potentially saving lives at no cost.

It's hard to find a reason not to donate really! (unless youre intelligible!)

cassid · 12-02-2016 04:49PM

I got 3 pints of donor blood after last baby, so thank you to those strangers who made a big difference to me. I used to donate but am not allowed now as I received a transfusion.

Trent Houseboat · 12-02-2016 05:15PM

I got the letter and it didn't bother me. In the years that I've donated I've never been warned about my iron level. I'd only be worried if my first donations were during the flawed testing or if I had been borderline anyway.

I imagine IBTS set the threshold for donation higher that anaemic levels. In that you couldn't just barely be above the iron level to not qualify as anaemic and still donate.
Belt and braces.

In relation to the people with haemophilia infected with HepC and HIV in the 1980s: was it not the case that donations were low and IBTS had to buy in blood for the US which was screened at a much lower standard?

In which case OP trying to scare donors and potential donors away from the service increases the likelihood of bought blood being used again.

conor222 · 12-02-2016 05:30PM

I did my first donation yesterday as well. Staff were lovely, was in and out in less than an hour with a nice can of fanta and a bag of crisps afterwards.
I'm easily bought :P

Anaemia fears as 90,000 blood donors are contacted

Comments