The Red Cross threads in MPSIMS and the Pit made me wonder just how many people care ineligible to give blood. I often hear that 5% of eligible donors donate, but never what percentage of the overall population are eligible.
I did a board search, a quick internet search, and hit teh Red Cross site and didn’t see anything that looked helpful.
I would imagine that the number of ineligible donors is not insignificant. For instance, I conducted a (highly unscientific) survey in my head. There are 107 people that work in my building. By my count 14 (about 13%) would be ineligible for a variety of reasons. Also, I don’t know everyone in the building nor have I inquired about private sexual behaviors. Conceivably, the total could be higher.
Has anyone heard of or knows where to finds stats on this?
Yeah. A good way to start would be to compile a list of everything that would preclude one from donating blood. It would be much easier to find statistics for each thing individually.
There are a lot of things out there that could make you ineligible to donate blood.
From Dr. Koop dot com:
Blood and components are tested to eliminate units that may carry HTLV-I, HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C, as well as those that are positive for syphilis. About 2 to 10 percent of whole blood units donated are discarded due to positive tests.
I’ve donated over 8 gallons over the years. I know that anyone under 110 pounds won’t be accepted. The HIV worry makes donation centers turn down gay men and straight men who admit to being with prostitutes. You’ll be turned down if you’ve been tattooed or pearced in the last year.
As for private sexual behaviors, you don’t have to tell. In my center you’ll be given a couple of coded stickers to apply to one of their forms. If you feel your blood shouldn’t be accepted you quietly apply the stamp that reflects that.
I’m certain there are stats on the percentage of people ineligible, but they don’t seem to appear in the literature or on the sites I’ve visited.
Depends on what they test for. I always assumed they looked for pot and threw that blood out, so at any given time a fair number of people would be ineligible becuase of that.
There are things not on the questionaire or the diseases listed by Doug Bowe (above) that can cause you to be rejected.
For instance, there’s a blood component called ALT that’s given off by the liver. Before they developed the blood test for Hepatitis C, having a high level of ALT was an indirect indicator of that disease and blood with it was rejected. However, it’s possible to have high ALT and not have Hep C. And even though there’s now a direct test for Hep C, they still reject blood with high ALT even if it tests negative.
I had an unusually high ALT level two donations in a row a few years ago. Because of that, the blood center asked that I not donated for a year. When I came back, it tested normal again. But now I have to mention that high ALT period every time I donate.
I was a company donor for many years, then the blood donation people deided to exclude those who lived in the UK for more than 6 months since 1980. Worry about mad-cow, BSE, CJ (all nearly the same thing). This disturbed me because I have a not-so-rare but definitely wanted B+ blood type. Can no one in the UK donate blood? Talk about a manufactured catastrophe!
I think the percentage who are theoretically eligible is around 60%. I think I got that from the Red Cross, highly suspect organization though it may be on the boards…
I guess the other 40% are people who are under 17, under 118 pounds (or whatever the limit is), pregnant, hookers, gay, on malaria medication, etc. They are ineligible according to Red Cross standards, highly suspect as those are…
Short of obtaining the actual Red cross statistics we may try to calculate the numbers, but still it will be only an estimate. Percentages of HIV+ people are available, but how many are under 110lbs or with elevated ALT? What’s absolutely clear, is that only a tiny fraction of suitable donors become actual donors.
Straycat, get your priorities straight! What would you say if cases of MCD or CJ disease here were traced to donors who lived in England? No blood test is available. Exluding a tiny fraction of donors ain’t “a manufactured catastrophe”. Better talk about 95% of eligible donors who refuse to donate blood for no reason at all!
I always get a slightly freaky look when I donate. I’m O-neg, which is only 8% of the population and the universal donor type. I get the feeling that they’d like to hook me up permanently. :eek: :eek: :eek:
There are different questions here; being ineligible temporaily (pregnant, low iron, pierced w/i the last year, etc.) and permanently ineligible (for example, a positive TB or Hep test will get you banned forever, even a false positive).
"I always get a slightly freaky look when I donate. I’m O-neg, which is only 8% of the population and the universal donor type. I get the feeling that they’d like to hook me up permanently. "
I know what you mean. I am O-negative as well (as is my wife and all but one of my kids). I often hear for calls for O-neg blood. Unfortunately I am no longer eligible to donate as I had a non-negative test result for HTLV-1. After being notified I went to my doctor for further tests and learned that I am in fact not infected with this virus. But, since I got that one bad result I am blacklisted for life. Too bad since I liked donating and they always seem to want my type.
Just because I like to pick nits, I want to point out a lack of specificity in the OP. The tread title asks about people who are “eligible to give blood.” I am, but no one will ever, ever use it.
I have a VSD, a hole between the ventricles of my heart. This means that some of my non-oxygenated blood goes around for a second trip without getting to make a pit-stop in the lungs. This is, my doctors have assured me, no big deal.
But, when I go to give blood, they tell me that I can give if I want, and they will label it as from a VSD Donor then stick it in the back of the freezer. Forever.
There is no real reason; there isn’t any danger. But, with the blood supply as healthy as it currently is, why use anything but high-octane?
So, I am eligible to give blood, but nobody will take it. I don’t even bother donating anymore; my blood aint’ red enough for 'em.
I haven’t given blood for over four years becasue of this. I had high ALT one time and they asked me to take 6 months (a year?) off and come back. I did and failed the ALT test again. I believe that I was asked to never come back. Of course I am A+ so maybe they didn’t feel as though they’re losing much.
There is still the condition put in back in the 1980’s as the AIDS epidemic first started that states that potential donors must answer the question whether or not they have had any homosexual relations. If so, no blood can be taken.
That easily eliminates ten percent of the population.