• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To register, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Blood Products Advisory Committee Meeting Announcement (BPAC) December 14-15, 2010

guest

Guest
Messages
320
Here is a part of the webinar on youtube.

[video=youtube;By3V9oXCFxg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By3V9oXCFxg[/video]
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
Okay this is slightly off-topic, but all the talk about culture takes too long, etc begs a much bigger question in my view: How is it that the blood supply continues to be "screened" by a combo of self-reporting by donors (?!) and a handful of lab tests for a few known pathogens? Why on earth has the FDA not scrambled to approve, or created funding to immediately develop, a device like Cerus INTERCEPT that effectively filters the blood on the spot? I remember reading in an article about INTERCEPT that the FDA declined to approve the device, stating "the blood supply is safe." Hello?

It occurs to me that a device like this could actually have a second very useful purpose: after filtering a cohort of PWCs blood, take the filter matrix and use it to look at all the pathogens it has extracted. You are now examining a concentrate of litres of blood, as opposed to trying to find it in a vial or a drop....Okay I'm not a scientist but for heaven's sake these people are not acting like scientists either! Time not only to think outside the box, but to come out of denial about how "safe" the frakking blood supply is! :Retro mad:
 

Jemal

Senior Member
Messages
1,031
I think they deem the risk low, most people who get blood transfusions don't seem to be badly affected by it. Additional measures will add complexity and will probably cost a lot.

When I read that 4 people in the UK died of mad cow disease after a blood transfusion, I was getting a bit worried. They admitted that they don't (even can't?) screen for such pathogens. But on millions of transfusions, what's the death of 4 people? (obviously if you were that person or friend or family, it would matter).

The same goes for vaccinations: it apparently has been proven you can get a nasty disease, but this only happens once in a million times or something. So it does far more good than bad and it looks like the chance of contracting something nasty is extremely low. So why bother with additional measures?
 

leela

Senior Member
Messages
3,290
Well, what makes me fume is when I think that suddenly, in seventy-odd american airports (and growing), bajillions of dollars and man-hours are being spent irradiating and groping innocent travelers in a "screening" process propelled by fear generated by one insane guy with some explosive crap down his pants...but the FDA can't try to approve/find a device that could universally filter pathogens (known and unknown) from the blood supply?
I know a woman who contracted HIV from a transfusion in the eighties. It wasn't until her second child was born sick that they found out she and her kids were HIV+ (and the baby had AIDS.) THe FDA was certain the blood supply was "safe" then, too...
 
Messages
13,774
When I read that 4 people in the UK died of mad cow disease after a blood transfusion, I was getting a bit worried. They admitted that they don't (even can't?) screen for such pathogens. But on millions of transfusions, what's the death of 4 people? (obviously if you were that person or friend or family, it would matter).

The terrible way that those who suffered from CJD, and their families, were treated is a useful reminder that even if it is found CFS is caused by XMRV or similar there will be no accountability, and no justice.
 

Ecoclimber

Senior Member
Messages
1,011
The Blood XMRV Virus Scientific Research Working Group: Mission, Progress, Plans

The Blood Xenotropic Murine Leukemia VirusRelated Virus Scientific Research Working Group: mission, progress, and plans

Graham Simmons, Simone A. Glynn, Jerry A. Holmberg, John M. Coffin, Indira K. Hewlett,
Shyh-Ching Lo, Judy A. Mikovits,William M. Switzer, Jeffrey M. Linnen, and Michael P. Busch for the Blood XMRV Scientific ResearchWorking Group

See Attached Article:




 

free at last

Senior Member
Messages
697
The Blood Xenotropic Murine Leukemia Virus–Related Virus Scientific Research Working Group: mission, progress, and plans

Graham Simmons, Simone A. Glynn, Jerry A. Holmberg, John M. Coffin, Indira K. Hewlett,
Shyh-Ching Lo, Judy A. Mikovits,William M. Switzer, Jeffrey M. Linnen, and Michael P. Busch for the Blood XMRV Scientific ResearchWorking Group

See Attached Article:




Thanks for the link, just reading it now, surely we are going to learn some things this time around, with more samples being tested, Just read Alters samples are being tested too. this is going to be interesting.