Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Administering of contaminated blood products - was it genocide?

  • 12-06-2019 3:05pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 4,352 ✭✭✭political analyst


    I remember the Lindsay Tribunal that investigated the administering of contaminated blood products in this country. The horror unfolded worldwide. A similar inquiry in the UK is ongoing.


    Would the infection of people - especially, but not confined to, haemophiliacs - by the administering of these products be regarded under international law as genocide?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ Zackary Creamy Nitwit


    As genocide is the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group, then no it would not be considered genocide.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Can I ask, are blood donations tested for signs of abnormal inflammation in the body somewhere?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,350 ✭✭✭corner of hells


    I remember the Lindsay Tribunal that investigated the administering of contaminated blood products in this country. The horror unfolded worldwide. A similar inquiry in the UK is ongoing.


    Would the infection of people - especially, but not confined to, haemophiliacs - by the administering of these products be regarded under international law as genocide?

    For the sake of the thread, I'm going to say yes , yes it would.

    P.S. in reality, I agree with Srameen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,440 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    I remember the Lindsay Tribunal that investigated the administering of contaminated blood products in this country. The horror unfolded worldwide. A similar inquiry in the UK is ongoing.


    Would the infection of people - especially, but not confined to, haemophiliacs - by the administering of these products be regarded under international law as genocide?

    No


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,566 ✭✭✭✭The Princess Bride


    Can I ask, are blood donations tested for signs of abnormal inflammation in the body somewhere?

    Yes.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Yes.

    That’s good. That’s really good. People could have undiagnosed serious diseases and I knew some tests were done but didn’t know if inflammation was checked for.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,352 ✭✭✭political analyst


    As genocide is the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group, then no it would not be considered genocide.


    Haemophiliacs constitute a large group of people with a genetic disorder - so how can knowingly letting them be infected via blood products not be genocide?


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,067 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    That’s good. That’s really good. People could have undiagnosed serious diseases and I knew some tests were done but didn’t know if inflammation was checked for.

    I don't think people are ever told. they just don't use the blood.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Grayson wrote: »
    I don't think people are ever told. they just don't use the blood.

    I wasn’t saying they were. I simply meant that it’s good that those blood products aren’t used.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,378 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    As genocide is the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group, then no it would not be considered genocide.


    Haemophiliacs constitute a large group of people with a genetic disorder - so how can knowingly letting them be infected via blood products not be genocide?
    They weren't knowingly infected.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,538 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Can I ask, are blood donations tested for signs of abnormal inflammation in the body somewhere?
    Kuru is a human disease that can have an incubation time of 56 years or more.

    And you can't store blood for that long.

    vCJD as in Mad Cow Disease is in the same class, so there could be other diseases out there we don't know to test for. Which is why it's so important to screen donor.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Kuru is a human disease that can have an incubation time of 56 years or more.

    And you can't store blood for that long.

    vCJD as in Mad Cow Disease is in the same class, so there could be other diseases out there we don't know to test for. Which is why it's so important to screen donor.

    Kuru is very rare, since people have pretty much stopped eating each other. Nearly non-existent, I should think.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 32,688 ✭✭✭✭ Zackary Creamy Nitwit


    Haemophiliacs constitute a large group of people with a genetic disorder - so how can knowingly letting them be infected via blood products not be genocide?

    And deliberately killed??


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,352 ✭✭✭political analyst


    And deliberately killed??


    Isn't that what giving someone blood that you know is contaminated is?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,421 ✭✭✭ToddyDoody


    The courts said no but I say yes.


Advertisement