Asklemmy
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
I think it's fine to pay some for it.
I don't know how your healthcare system is structured. But let's assume there is a profit motive in getting you to donate blood. Let's also assume profit is a problem. So we want to reduce profits.
-
If you get €25 per donation that is €25 less profit for them per donation.
-
The demand for blood is going to stay the same. No one will decline a live saving surgery because it's a bit expensive and will pay anything to get it. Increasing supply will decrease profit margins.
I've donated blood and plasma and each time I've been offered rewards but don't bother claiming them. I do it to help others. My job pays me enough to live on.
How could selling something you naturally produce be a scam? I can see how easily you could get ripped off on the price, but in the end you're still making money and automatically replacing the plasma lost. Even if they're not actually using the plasma for their stated purpose, I'd still argue the donator is not the one getting scammed. I guess it really comes down to your definition of "scam".
Donating blood/plasma is a good thing. Economic conditions in which poor people feel obligated to give blood just to make enough money, whilst rich people don't feel this same pressure, are bad.
I don't know how exactly private blood banks work (in plenty of countries blood banks are public and presumably non-profit), but regardless, I assume nobody can get blood transfusions if nobody donates. So until the political system is overhauled just keep donating? Your blood donations aren't the root cause of capitalism
I donate plasma regularly - at least once per month. It’s illegal to pay people for blood or plasma here in the Netherlands so I’m just in it for the good feels. I also like the downtime and relaxed chatting and joking with the people who work there.
The same worries exist here too though. The blood bank isn't allowed to pay you for your plasma, but it's absolutely a for-profit organisation that runs on selling your plasma to pharmaceutical companies.
I still believe it's a good thing to donate, but sometimes it feels a little icky that there's also a businessmodel around it
Man, the Netherlands sound pretty pleasant, overall.
I've donated plenty of times, because it makes sense that there is no other way to save lives than to donate.
On the other hand, I've been wondering for years, that while I've been told a million times that "blood reserves are low - donate blood now!", I've not ever heard that a single person died due to lack of available blood.
Why would something like that not be reported if you want to motivate people to donate?
My personal guess is that this comes because "lack of avaiable blood donations" isn't a valid cause of death, the cause of death is whatever else (gun shot wound, knife severed artery / complication during surgery etc), thus it's hard to pinpoint. Also Doctors may try to "save" blood, when they know little is available, and people may die that may have lived if they had gotten (more) blood, but also they may not have and it is hard to tell.
Well, that's a new thought. Donating blood is necessary, so we get paid by the Red Cross to do it, in money or a small meal. But the Red Cross then immediately upsells that blood to the hospitals that need it. In a sense, we are exploited workers without a contract.
The real reason donating blood is unethical is because we cannot unionize.
I wouldn’t mind it for that reason. The Red Cross do good work that need to be financed.
Here in the Netherlands they do that by contracting out volunteers for first aid services to events like fairs and runs. The volunteer donates their time, gets trained for free, the Red Cross gets paid by the organiser and makes money for their mission and an small army of experienced first aid people and EMTs to help out when disaster strikes.
I’m such a volunteer and it’s a great distraction from my normal job. I also get to use my skills outside of the Red Cross, e.g. as an action medic at protests.
Cool sidenote: there’s this network any CPR certified person can join to get alerted by emergency dispatch when CPR is needed close to your home or work. This has helped massively to get CPR started within 6 minutes mostly anywhere in the country, even when ambulances can’t get there that quickly.
You lack the cultural lens of America. About half of our country governs from the perspective of "why should I?" with the most negative and self-preserving mindset possible.
Why should I pay for others healthcare, even if it means they pay for mine? Why should I donate my blood if it doesn't benefit me?
Solve that problem by giving you $25-100 for your "donations"
As someone from the US i always saw it as people can't afford to take time off to donate, so compensating them for their time makes it so they can afford to donate.
A few states make it illegal to be monetarily compensated for your blood or plasma, but others it's completely fine.
I'm sure.its a bit of that too, but I do feel like the ultimate reason is still, "well why are you taking time off to do something that isn't only benefitting you?"
basically the same mindset that created this culture is what developed compensation for our time, as opposed to just taking the loss for the day to do a good thing.
That's a fair assessment, and I can definitely agree with that
100% and I'm sure you know this too but just to add to your point, I believe the US government spends more money per capita on healthcare than anywhere in Europe, so even under the "Why should I?" lens, the current approach costs individuals more because they have to pay for it in taxes and then also in insurance premiums, copay etc.
It's not just for the benefit of society as a whole, "you" as an individual would also be financially better off under a socialised system.
The important part is that the individual people spend more per capita for worse healthcare, too. You, private citizen reading this, are worse off and are paying more than you would be with socialized medicine in this country. Pretty much no matter what level you're at, too.