The dark truth is that the kind of people who are desperate for that money are also much more likely to have tainted blood from illegal drugs, dirty needles, and STDs.

The bureaucracy plays it safe by just banning payment, even though people like James aren't in that risk category.

Better to import it from poorer countries right? Or would you wanna make it illegal to import it too which would result in many dead people?

But every country that bans payment turns around and buys plasma from countries that don’t. So it doesn’t make their plasma supply one bit safer. All it does is make plasma-derived products rarer and more expensive.

Might be a demographic difference that explains it. I donated materials when I was a broke college student, wouldn't surprise me if the bulk came from people in similar situations

This is correct, and is also true for healthy volunteers in clinical trials. I did them when I was a young broke college student, 100% of the healthy volunteers were where what I would consider to be quite poor.

My understanding is all of these cases are tested for. A lifelong blood donor could still get XYZ after donating for 10 years.

Now if you are talking about undetectable or uncommon I could understand, but that just shows a fault in the testing process.

It's been a while since I last donated blood, but last time I checked some conditions are hard to reliably check for especially in the earlier stages. For example, if I remember correct HIV is hard to reliably detect for the first ~6 months or so, as is Hepatitis B and some other conditions.

This is why you get a questionary every time asking whether you had unprotected sex, recently had a tattoo, etc.

Those tests are faster now, however what remains entirely untested is simple sickness like colds. That's why you're supposed to call them if you get a cold within a few days of donating, they have no other way of knowing.

The US already has plasma 'donation' clinics that pay you per donation. It just doesn't exist for blood.

I made an extra $100/mo that way in uni and it paid for a lot of beer (or 1/5th of a uni textbook).

As others have said, all countries pay. There are ways we could compensate people for the fair market value of their blood that would be resistant to abuse and risky donors. Paid vacation seems to be a good option, or a refundable tax credit that that's not realized for a year.

As a lifelong donor, 10+ gallons, I don't think we should be paid for blood. It takes just a lil bit of time. Banning payment avoids a ton of issues and overhead.

Downside is less people donate, but I don't think $10 would change that much.

In Germany you get to eat from a tasty assortment of food after donating. When going with friends it makes for a nice little event. Fair deal

I tend to donate at churches and community centers because the food is more often homemade. Chatting with them old ladies is great.

The red cross also has their "rewards" program but it's nonsense stuff like water bottles. I think you can exchange points for Amazon gift cards. Like $15/year.

When I previously donated blood at the DRK, not only did I always get a Bockwurst&Brötchen along with a selection of beverages (water, cola, coffee, tea, etc.) but also a little gift bag containing a variety of little food and drink items, like a banana, an apple, little bottles/packets of fruit juice, (fruit/chocolate/etc.) joghurt cups, all in all maybe ~5-7€ worth.

In Norway we get wine glasses or Moomin cups. Most homes I've been in have a sizeable collection of those cups.

Oh wow I had no idea what moomin cups were. They're pretty adorable. That's fun.

Seems incredibly unethical to exploit starving people by feeding them for selling their body. Horrible stuff. But from the nation that brought us our greatest human experimentation regimen, hardly surprising.

> But from the nation that brought us our greatest human experimentation regimen, hardly surprising.

This is not a fair judgement in this situation. I think money is a far more perverse incentive for donating blood than snacks. Also the snacks are more about helping people increase their blood sugar after giving blood than incentivizing them.

Lol it's cookies and juice. Calm down. Nobody is donating blood trying to stay fed.

> But from the nation that brought us our greatest human experimentation regimen, hardly surprising.

To assume good faith here I'd have to assume wherever you are you've never donated blood?

When you donate blood you've lost a pint of fluids. They give you something to drink to work on rehydrating.

The sugar in the juice and the sugary snacks are to help give you a bit of energy since... you just lost a pint of blood.

Which is to say this is pretty standard everywhere. It's not payment. The ice pack after my vasectomy wasn't "payment for population control". It's healthcare.

I like that! Seems very reasonable and fun too.

Any downsides?

One time they didn't get the needle in smoothly and it hurt a little bit, but it really wasn't too bad

That's the case in Australia too although the quality of the food varies.

Here too, it's also to get your nutrients and blood pressure back up afaik. Not just as a reward.

In Brazil you get a day off work every year to donate. Which I think is a good compromise.

I think the issue is the difference between positive and negative reinforcement. positive reinforcement with money may attract tainted blood, but negative might not, unless you count blood borne diseases which predispose to suicide.

Suppose you were to legalize euthanasia for blood donors. i.e. you could earn the right to assisted suicide after 5 years of regular donations, no questions asked. That way the religious lobby gets shut up because the blood is maintaining the population rate and the chronic mentally ill like myself can have a comfortable exit.

A 0.1% reduction on annual taxes would be great and dissuade most who just need a quick dollar