# Could donating blood on a regular basis help control primary hypertension? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 29, 2004, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049 "2004-12-29T03:48:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![picunurse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@picunurse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/picunurse)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/21 "2005-01-02T11:00:06Z")
> [@Roland Deschain](#): > > The problem with the relying on casual observation is that is can miss the forest for the trees. Consider, that it is only recently that we have been able show that vitamin E supplementatoin above 200IU’s per day probably has negative consequences for cardiovascular health (perhaps indirectly by decreasing the effectiveness of statin drugs, but then again the incidence of all mortality was increased beyond this level). It was only meta analysis of multiple studies which made this conclusion possible. Compariable situations can be found with the COX-2 inhibitors (especially Celebrex which was considered safe by most doctors for many years). Another example of medical interventions thought safe, but now scrutinized are the administration of certain antidepressants in children. However, at least these issues were being studied consistently if not intensely. The same cannot be said with regard to the long term health effects of blood donation. > > What is more the above items are intended to treat disease (or in the case of Vitamin E forestall it). However, blood donation is done usually by healthy individuals to help others (or for money in the case of lower income individuals). Indeed, selling blood, and blood products from donars is a multimillion (billion?) dollar business. If it turned out that the procedure raised the risk of contracting certain conditions it would raise serious questions of exploitation. Perhaps, I feel stronger than most about this issue since my wife, myself, and mother in law all gave blood three times this month in part to “keep the lights on” until our student loans/grants come through in Jan (this was in addition to working of course). > > Without regard to the above I tend to believe that giving blood has either neutral or positive health ramifications. What bugs me is that I can cite no research to support this position. First, blood donation, at least in the US is always voluntary, never paid for. The exception being plasma, which is actually another process. The amount a reciepient or his insurance pays for a transfusion only covers the cost of processing and handling. US blood banks are non profit. I can’t speak to the practices in other countries. Your examples are exactly why blood donation is safe, since the use of Vit E as a CV protectant, and the release of Cox-2 inhibitors are recent. The number of effected individuals is minute compared to the millions who have donated blood since the first Blood Bank opened in the US in 1936. With your 2 examples, the anecdotal evidence became overwhelming in a couple years. If anything, even a subtle problems were generated from blood donations, it would be glaringly obvious after nearly 60 years. Also, there is data collected with blood donations. Most, of course, is focused on the blood, itself, but demographic information is gathered and can be cross referenced to the blood fairly easy. Much of what we know about blood borne illnesses has been gathered in the process of banking blood. ---
**Author:** ![Roland\_Deschain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/73ab20/32.png) [@Roland\_Deschain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roland_Deschain)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/22 "2005-01-02T12:26:59Z")
I don’t wish to debate in GQ, but everyone in my family got paid $20.00 per "shot"for blood not Plasma donation. The location was Aventis at somewhere around the 5500 block of East Washington Street in Indianapolis Indiana (they paid more for plasma, but we didn’t wish to do that since it takes longer). Also, here is an article [http://www.bloodbook.com/part-1.html](http://www.bloodbook.com/part-1.html) from the Philadelphia Inquireer that discusses how blood donation is anything, _but_ a non profit business in reality. There was another from the New York Times, but I cannot find the link right now. You say that problems (or benefits) from donation would be obvious, but is there even a centralized clearing center fo adverse reactions to blood donation (such as as exists for vaccines at the CDC). Also, if I develop cancer or heart disease ten years from now who would even consider that blood donations might play a role (not that I think they do)? ---
**Author:** ![picunurse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@picunurse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/picunurse)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/23 "2005-01-02T13:54:27Z")
> [@Roland Deschain](#): > > I don’t wish to debate in GQ, but everyone in my family got paid $20.00 per "shot"for blood not Plasma donation. The location was Aventis at somewhere around the 5500 block of East Washington Street in Indianapolis Indiana (they paid more for plasma, but we didn’t wish to do that since it takes longer). > > Also, here is an article [http://www.bloodbook.com/part-1.html](http://www.bloodbook.com/part-1.html) from the Philadelphia Inquireer that discusses how blood donation is anything, _but_ a non profit business in reality. There was another from the New York Times, but I cannot find the link right now. > > You say that problems (or benefits) from donation would be obvious, but is there even a centralized clearing center fo adverse reactions to blood donation (such as as exists for vaccines at the CDC). Also, if I develop cancer or heart disease ten years from now who would even consider that blood donations might play a role (not that I think they do)? I have to once again, apologize. I’ve only worked in states where blood is volunteer donor only. I find these states are actually in the minority. Also, The once non-profit status has indeed changed into big business. Now, On the upside… I found a [list](http://clinicaltrials.gov/search/intervention=blood+transfusion&recruiting=true) of studies about, or using blood bank data. ---
**Author:** ![muttrox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a8b319/32.png) [@muttrox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muttrox)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/24 "2005-01-02T14:11:59Z")
Gee, as a regular Red Cross donor, reading this thread’s links has been a bit depressing. Remember, many of the guidelines for blood donation have nothing to do with your own health, but have to do with the likelihood of donating “bad” blood. ---
**Author:** ![barbitu8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/839c29/32.png) [@barbitu8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/barbitu8)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/25 "2005-01-02T22:37:18Z")
> [@Roland Deschain](#): > > Consider, that it is only recently that we have been able show that vitamin E supplementatoin above 200IU’s per day probably has negative consequences for cardiovascular health (perhaps indirectly by decreasing the effectiveness of statin drugs, but then again the incidence of all mortality was increased beyond this level). How can a megastudy “show” that above 200 IUs per day of vitamin E supplementation “probably” has negative consequences for cardiovascular health. Either it shows it or it just indicates the probabability. Anyway, I thought that applied only to those with preexisting heart conditions. Do you have a cite? ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049/26 "2005-01-02T23:13:57Z")
> [@barbitu8](#): > > How can a megastudy “show” that above 200 IUs per day of vitamin E supplementation “probably” has negative consequences for cardiovascular health. Either it shows it or it just indicates the probabability. Anyway, I thought that applied only to those with preexisting heart conditions. Do you have a cite? Perhaps he was referring to this: > [@](#): > > Miller, Edgar R. III MD, PhD; Pastor-Barriuso, Roberto PhD; Dalal, Darshan MD, MPH; Riemersma, Rudolph A. PhD, FRCPE; Appel, Lawrence J. MD, MPH; Guallar, Eliseo MD, DrPH > > From The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and The Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland; National Center for Epidemiology, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain; University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom; and University of Tromso, Tromso, Norway. > Meta-Analysis: High-Dosage Vitamin E Supplementation May Increase All-Cause Mortality. > Annals of Internal Medicine. 142(1):37-46, January 4, 2005. > > Abstract > > Background: Experimental models and observational studies suggest that vitamin E supplementation may prevent cardiovascular disease and cancer. However, several trials of high-dosage vitamin E supplementation showed non-statistically significant increases in total mortality. > > Purpose: To perform a meta-analysis of the dose-response relationship between vitamin E supplementation and total mortality by using data from randomized, controlled trials. > > Patients: 135 967 participants in 19 clinical trials. Of these trials, 9 tested vitamin E alone and 10 tested vitamin E combined with other vitamins or minerals. The dosages of vitamin E ranged from 16.5 to 2000 IU/d (median, 400 IU/d). > > Data Sources: PubMed search from 1966 through August 2004, complemented by a search of the Cochrane Clinical Trials Database and review of citations of published reviews and meta-analyses. No language restrictions were applied. > > Data Extraction: 3 investigators independently abstracted study reports. The investigators of the original publications were contacted if required information was not available. > > Data Synthesis: 9 of 11 trials testing high-dosage vitamin E (\>=400 IU/d) showed increased risk (risk difference \> 0) for all-cause mortality in comparisons of vitamin E versus control. The pooled all-cause mortality risk difference in high-dosage vitamin E trials was 39 per 10 000 persons (95% CI, 3 to 74 per 10 000 persons; P = 0.035). For low-dosage vitamin E trials, the risk difference was -16 per 10 000 persons (CI, -41 to 10 per 10 000 persons; P \> 0.2). A dose-response analysis showed a statistically significant relationship between vitamin E dosage and all-cause mortality, with increased risk of dosages greater than 150 IU/d. > > Limitations: High-dosage (\>=400 IU/d) trials were often small and were performed in patients with chronic diseases. The generalizability of the findings to healthy adults is uncertain. Precise estimation of the threshold at which risk increases is difficult. > > Conclusion: High-dosage (\>=400 IU/d) vitamin E supplements may increase all-cause mortality and should be avoided. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-donating-blood-on-a-regular-basis-help-control-primary-hypertension/282049.md?page=1)