Do You Donate Blood?

bemybubble on 31/08/2021 - 19:04
Last edited 07/09/2021 - 11:08 by 1 other user

Did my 15th donation the other day and Thought I’d ask if anyone else in the OzB community give blood and if so, how many donations do far?

Mod Note: Visit Australian Red Cross Lifeblood for more information.

edit

Hi All,

Truly inspired by how many OzBargainers give, or are willing to give blood.

I have created a lifeblood team for those who are interested. Always wanted to be part of a team but could never convince the office the participate (for various reasons).

If you login to your lifeblood account, simply search for the team called 'OzBargain'. Really hoping we can rally the troops on this and see how many donations we can achieve together!

Poll Options

402
Yes
405
No

Health & Beauty

Comments

- - - sarahlump on 01/09/2021 - 15:54
      
      i've donated plasma 33 times. At first I thought sitting in a room with 5 nurses being asked invasive questions for an hour wasn't so bad, because I was helping people. (profanity) it straight people blood is good enough for me if I'm ever in an accident but I'm not interested in going through that anymore.
      - iridiumstem on 01/09/2021 - 16:07
        
        @sarahlump: Sorry to hear that you went through that kind of experience :S
    - cfuse on 01/09/2021 - 22:41
      
      The whole stereotype of HIV and homosexual men.
      
      You might want to consider why that stereotype existed before you use it as an objection here.
      
      I think it's stupid. Regardless of your sexual orientation, you could be doing something risky in bed.
      
      The problem with risk is that it compounds. You certainly can try to replicate the risk of a gay man if you aren't one, but you'll have to work at it. This isn't like with straight people where you have the reluctance of women to contend with, this is an environment where entire subcultures are basically one giant (profanity) fest of high risk sex (and with a fair bit of caution impairing drug use thrown in for good measure).
      
      PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis to HIV) is one of the worst things that has happened to the gay community in the last few years (along with indifference to HIV, which is very much a thing). A lot of gay men are using PrEP to facilitate unsafe sex on the grounds it will stop them getting HIV. Obviously it doesn't stop other STDs, and gay men are happily acting as the petri dish for antibiotic resistant STDs as we speak. Whether it is an old friend getting upgrades via mutation or some novel disease the reality is that it will likely come from the gay community.
      
      Ignoring blood donation, I wish I could talk more sense into other gay people when it comes to sexual practices.
      - iridiumstem on 01/09/2021 - 22:57
        
        @cfuse: I guess my objection to the stereotype is that time changes, people change, there are different people out there. Brushing people in one big stroke is never the bestest ideas.
        
        As with homosexual communities and what's happening in them, I feel like I am not in the position to answer that without sounding completely ignorant. I probably did sound very ignorant in some places, which was not my intention. I would like to apologise if I have offended you.
        
        One thing that I was kinda hinting at was this.
        
        Is stigmatisation of homosexuals as group of people who will indulge in unsafe, high risk sex something that's going to help with the current situation? I have to put a question mark on that. Is it detrimental even? If we use homosexuals and people who enjoy unsafe, high risk sex synonymously, are we ending up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy? If unsafe, high risk sex is the problem, I feel like what we need to work on is bring that onto the table. By focussing on the sexual orientation, I feel like the focus becomes detached from the actual issue of unsafe, risky sex. It probably is easier said than done.
        
        From what I have read from your above comment as well, it probably was the easiest one to implement and it probably was out of safety concerns. From ideological perspective though, I will object to what Red Cross is doing. Whatever the Red Cross stands for, using a stereotype to reject people in one big stroke, probably isn't one.
        
        placard on 02/09/2021 - 07:49
        
        -1
        
        @iridiumstem: That's what I was getting at too. Yes I'm sure there is this higher occurrence of risk taking in the gay community, but it is tarring everyone with the same brush.
        
        There are still many gay couples who are monogamous for years yet are thrown in the same category.
        
        cfuse on 02/09/2021 - 14:16
        
        +8
        
        @iridiumstem: I understand why this can be upsetting to people, but it is not about orientation but risk. They don't ask you if you're gay on the forms, they ask you if you've had sex with other men. Those two cases are not the same. One is about orientation and identity, the other is about behaviour.
        
        I'm gay and I meet the criteria for donation (thanks to my sad sex life). I can walk into the Red Cross tomorrow and tell them I'm gay and still be able to donate. Unlike some other jurisdictions, we don't have a blanket prohibition on gay men donating.
        
        Epidemiology is nothing more than medical actuary. Some people are sitting down in an office with a bunch of data about disease rates per cohort and plugging it into a ginormous spreadsheet that spits out risk percentages. This is not personal, no matter how personal it might feel to some people.
        
        I look at the issue of blood donation as an indicator of just how good gay people have it now. If this is the biggest problem you have navigating society as a gay person then you've won. That's what a lot of people don't understand: we are being treated exactly the same as everyone else is here - by risk - and not by our class membership. That is equality (because equality isn't just about rights, it's also about responsibilities. In this case, the responsibility to behave prosocially and not donate blood).
        
        iridiumstem on 02/09/2021 - 14:25
        
        @cfuse: The risks associated with gay people is like saying risk associated with heterosexual man because there are people who are into chemsex. Wife swapping, anal sex among heterosexuals, drug abuses within heterosexuals, etc etc there are still risks in heterosexuals. There are idiots on the both side. Yet, we are asked questions of whether we engage in risky sex, drug uses etc etc, not whether we are heterosexuals.
        
        If Red Cross doesn't give a clear reason why they screen people with homosexuality, with supports from continuous risk assessments and continued evidence that it is detrimental, I have no reasons to withdraw my statements above. I stand by everything I have said, because I believe it is wrong.
        
        I am arguing that they are not doing enough. They are creating a label, and sticking to it. They could move away from that label, they could assess the risks seperately and redact all the blanket statements, they are not.
        
        Tell them to diffuse that label, tell them to make it so that they are targetting only those who have risky, unprotected sex. Until then, if they continue to use that label and sticking that kind of connotations on it, I stand by my comments.
        
        Other on 03/09/2021 - 00:21
        
        +2
        
        @iridiumstem: They do give clear reasons. Here is 1,500 words on the subject.
        https://www.redcrossblood.org/donate-blood/how-to-donate/eli…
        
        Also they seem to have no problems with Lesbians,so probably not anti-queer/gay/etc.
        
        Perhaps its all down to risks…..
        
        iridiumstem on 03/09/2021 - 08:41
        
        @Other: I still hate the concept, and reading upon the articles "we are following a non-binding FDA recommendation" is, while I accept the ideas behind it, I am not entirely convinced.
        
        Also it's not 1500 words, the section on that is just something shy of a few paragraph and it's based on Red Cross US. Red Cross across the world have different rules on who they collect the blood from, i.e. someone who was able to donate blood in one country might not be in another for awhile. Also it's based on HIV, which would basically go back to what I mentioned few paragraphs up.
        
        I will, however, happily accept that they are moving forward and it is based on some kind of risk assessment at least, and I will eat my words on those. I am genuinely happy that I was wrong about lack of acknowledgments from Red Cross. If FDA is doing something about the screening process and if Red Cross in US is doing something about that to suppot that, I am happy to say I was wrong on that.
        
        As with anti-LGBTQI+ and whatever, my concern wasn't because of it was just those. I am miffed about the principle behind labelling a group as something and not tackling the problem. I don't care if that labelling is coming from sex orientation, gender, race, beliefs, whatever. I would've been equally pissed off if it meant
        
        bobbified on 06/09/2021 - 21:05
        
        @Other:
        
        https://www.redcrossblood.org/donate-blood/how-to-donate/eli…
        
        This Q&A is a really weird one:
        
        I am a trans woman, and I have not been eligible to donate because my assigned sex at birth was male, and I had sex with a man. Can I donate blood?
        
        Individuals who identify as female and have sex with a man, may be eligible to donate blood, if all other blood donation eligibility criteria are applicable. If an individual was previously deferred from donating blood due to MSM, that person will need to call the Donor and Client Support Center at 1-866-236-3276 to confirm eligibility before coming to donate. Additional eligibility questions may also be answered through the Donor and Client Support Center.
        
        Not sure if I'm reading this right. A man who has had sex with another man isn't eligible to donate for three months, but if that person identifies as a woman and has had sex with a man, they may be eligible. How does that work?
        
        Other on 07/09/2021 - 02:27
        
        @bobbified: Perhaps they mean Transsexual woman (the term trans and transexual can be and is used interchangeably according to Wikipedia).
        In which case they would have a vagina.
        Perhaps they are worried about risky sex thats why both sex workers and men who have sex with men (MSM) are banned.
        
        bobbified on 07/09/2021 - 08:48
        
        @Other:
        
        Perhaps they mean Transsexual woman (the term trans and transexual can be and is used interchangeably according to Wikipedia).
        In which case they would have a vagina.
        
        No doubt it's about risk sex more than anything else. I read the text a few times and I saw that in the question itself, it says "my assigned sex at birth was male". Unless they mean a person born a man who's since had surgery to become a trans-woman (in which case, it'll probably then be vaginal sex)?
        
        cfuse on 03/09/2021 - 14:30
        
        +1
        
        @iridiumstem: I am not against your right to your ideological stance, but I think it is important to make a distinction between sexual orientation and sex acts. Objecting to a why that isn't actually happening doesn't do anyone any favours here.
        
        The criteria is right there in black and white on their website: https://www.lifeblood.com.au/blood/eligibility/sexual-activi…
        
        I will repeat the point that I am gay and I can happily donate because I pass their criteria. They'll gladly take my blood because it is unlikely to be contaminated blood. They aren't worried about anyone catching the gay, they're worried about people getting HIV (et al.).
        
        The great irony here is that thanks to the covid lockdowns more gay people than ever will be eligible to donate blood.
        
        If Red Cross doesn't give a clear reason why they screen people with homosexuality, with supports from continuous risk assessments and continued evidence that it is detrimental, I have no reasons to withdraw my statements above. I stand by everything I have said, because I believe it is wrong.
        
        Except they do exactly that on that page I've directed you to.
        
        They do not exclude by orientation, but by behaviour and risk. All the straight but high risk groups you've cited are also excluded thanks to what they do. Where's the discrimination here? That's the irony: it's not discrimination here, it's actually equal treatment. You do risky things and you're excluded, you don't do them and you're not.
        
        they could assess the risks seperately and redact all the blanket statements, they are not.
        
        They did exactly that. That's what epidemiology is.
        
        There is no safe blood ever, only blood that is more or less risky. All epidemology is is sitting down with your spreadsheet and getting the risk percentage below agreed thresholds. This isn't sociology or politics, it's maths.
        
        Tell them to diffuse that label, tell them to make it so that they are targetting only those who have risky, unprotected sex.
        
        Anal sex is inherently risky. Condoms reduce risk, but anal sex is still always going to be more risky than vaginal sex. I don't know where people are getting their sex education from if they believe otherwise.
        
        iridiumstem on 03/09/2021 - 14:50
        
        @cfuse: I think I will reiterate what I have mentioned and add bit more.
        
        I simply don't see "had oral or anal sex with another man, even ‘safer sex’ using a condom (if you’re a man)?" as a fair question.
        If I were to use the report that I have seen from above, I feel that this is like "are you South-Eastern Asian?". The stats seem to support that, since undiagnosed HIV is higher in South-Eastern Asian, this makes some sense.
        
        I see this as a label that they are asking. I genuinely feel like they should be asking for unsafe sex practices from everyone. It's not homosexuality or South Eastern Asian that somehow creates HIV. By focussing on the sexual orientation, I feel like the focus becomes detached from the actual issue of unsafe, risky sex.
        
        I deal with stats, I am not an epidemiologist, but I am from a social science/science background. I am not arguing from some kind of SJW perspective if that is what you are concerned with constantly talking about stats. I have mentioned this before, I am dissatisfied that they are following something from US. FDA's non-binding recommendation I think isn't as strong as something that is based in Australia, studies on Australian population and by an Australian Authority, but, in the end, it is a valid reasoning and I have said that I will walk back on my comments a little.
        
        You are saying it's maths, whereas I see it as a lack of research and a lack of update. I am arguing that they are not doing enough. I think I mentioned this before, society and people change. We constantly need to reassess and study the behaviours of the community, I just didn't see this happening. I have mentioned this before, I am willing to eat my words, and while I feel it's very, almost shameful that Red Cross Australia doesn't seem to be involved, I am happy that FDA and Red Cross US is doing something.
        
        I guess one last thing I will add is while I don't believe what they are doing is idealistic, that doesn't mean that I believe we shouldn't donate blood. Donating blood saves lives. I just want to see a move towards, with assessments and studies of course, somewhere better.
        
        I think we've been circling in our talk, that said, I do respect what you have said and I thank you very much for telling me what you have told me. I hope I didn't sound negative towards your experiences and your opinions. I have enjoyed talking with you on this topic and it has given me a lot to think about as well.
        
        cfuse on 04/09/2021 - 17:49
        
        +1
        
        @iridiumstem: Sex acts are not sexual orientations. As I said, I'm gay and I can donate any time I like because I'm not sleeping with anyone. I am the evidence that this is about epidemiology and not (unwarranted) discrimination.
        
        STDs are notifiable conditions (https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/men-women/male-health/conten…). Your doctor is going to report your infection, and you'll be followed up to ensure your sexual contacts are traced and accounted for. So we have concrete metrics here to input into the actuarial calculations..
        
        Australia does our own epidemiological calculations. The RC saying they have considered other's epidemiological stances is just a part of doing business. STDs don't stop at national borders.
        
        I can understand why you might be unhappy with a lack of transparency, but this is one of those situations where I could show you a spreadsheet and make the whole situation worse. The information and decision making you want exists, it's just very difficult to parse. You are getting the easy to read version on the RC's public facing site, if you want to go deeper than that the datasets are public and you can run your own epidemiological modelling on them.
        
        I've worked with an actuary and it's difficult to communicate just how much data is being crunched here. You have to take every single data point you have and turn it into a multiple decimal place precision percentage upon which decisions can be made. The most critical part of that operation is being able to check and justify every single calculation that got you to that percentage. That is a level of complexity that most people will never have to deal with.
        
        From my perspective the only direction policy could go based on further scrutiny is to become more restrictive, not less. Those coming at this disgruntled over what they perceive as discrimination will only be more upset by that.
        
        What I'd like to see is the dataset run through a recurrent neural network to see what it comes up with. Whilst NN is completely opaque it can often come up with novel solutions to existing problems that rival current approaches. At the very least that would be something we've not yet tried (at least to my knowledge).
        
        iridiumstem on 04/09/2021 - 19:00
        
        @cfuse: I genuinely feel like I have mentioned everything I wanted to mention, so I am going to stop, except sharing the bits that made me at least admit that US is doing something.
        
        This is what RC in America is saying https://www.redcrossblood.org/donate-blood/how-to-donate/eli….
        
        The Red Cross recognizes the hurt this policy has caused to many in the LGBTQ+ community and believes blood donation eligibility should not be determined by methods that are based upon sexual orientation. We are committed to working with partners toward achieving this goal.
        
        In order to gather data related to the possibility of using an individual risk assessment behavior-based health history questionnaire in the U.S., the Red Cross, along with One Blood, Vitalant and partner LGBTQ+ community health centers, are participating in a pilot study funded by the FDA in select cities that could potentially lead to changes for blood donor eligibility criteria for gay and bisexual men. The study is focused on evaluating alternatives to determining donor eligibility.
        
        They are at least trying. I see no efforts from RC Australia. I am dissatisfied by that. Those two paragraphs alone made me go, OK, Red Cross in US is at least doing something and I will eat my words on those.
        
        If they have a reasoning that they cannot share and I cannot access that reasoning, all I can genuinely hope for is that they are doing the right thing and are moving forward. Be that forward more restrictions, less restrictions, same restrictions as long as it is backed by a solid reasoning.
    - Zachary on 02/09/2021 - 17:18
      
      -1
      
      Oh, stereotype, and here I was thinking there was a deeper meaning underneath…..like getting blood from a gay person will turn you gay afterwards or something which not everyone would be happy about. lol
      - iridiumstem on 04/09/2021 - 14:01
        
        @Zachary: I don't think there would be something like that? I don't think anyone who've gotten my blood would suddenly become more straight so to speak. I think current body of understanding is that there are genetics (biological), environment, and epigenetic (interactions with genes and environments) factors on the sexual orientation.
        
        This reminds me of my talk with my dad at some point. My dad is a reasonably educated person, with a university degree. When I was in university, one of the accommodations option I was looking at was LGBTQI+ friendly with roommates who belonged in that group. My dad told me his concerns that he was worried that my brother would become a homosexual if we moved there.
        
        This shocked me to no end, since I wasn't expecting that kind of misconception from my dad with his education level. I had to have a chat with my dad, to which he said, no one told me that before.
        
        Anyways, I upvoted your comment since I think it was just a bit of misconception and I think accepting that you had bit of misunderstanding is not something to be condemned for.
        
        Zachary on 21/09/2021 - 19:27
        
        -1
        
        @iridiumstem: Well, your dad wanted your brother to be a straight man, not a gay man(unless you brother doesn't mind being gay…) and you mentioned environment as a factor; so maybe being around a lot of gays will turn your once straight mind into gay too?
- ahly92 on 03/09/2021 - 16:03
  
  good - hope they never change it!
TheBilly on 31/08/2021 - 19:42

-7

I used to donate as a healthy athletic young adult until I started working in a career, bought a house, got married, kids, investing. Now I’d feel bad subjecting somebody to my lifestyle choices resulting in stress, overweight, nicotine, coffee, alcohol infected blood. Just doesn’t seem right to pass on.
- banana365 on 02/09/2021 - 15:11
  
  +2
  
  You don't pass on an unhealthy lifestyle. You might have, for example, dangerously high cholesterol levels that put you at high risk long term but "long term" is not what blood transfusions are for. They're primarily for acute situations where donated blood is required to get the recipient back to a state where their own body has produced enough of their own.
  
  Stress etc. isn't an infection. Your post may, however, just have been a crap joke that fell flat.
  - TheBilly on 02/09/2021 - 20:56
    
    -1
    
    Your post may, however, just have been a crap joke that fell flat.
    
    Lol You smart cookie. Thanks for the explanation. I’m still not donating blood though.
jjjaar on 31/08/2021 - 19:45

+2

I want to but my fear of needles wouldn’t allow me. It takes ages for me to get a blood test just because I have to psych myself up and lay down etc. Really freaking out about my covid vax…

And I know a lot of people who donate blood to conquer the fear. Ive tried. Ive made appointments and even gone there and had panic attacks.
- iridiumstem on 31/08/2021 - 19:48
  
  +3
  
  I know this probably won't help much, but the pfizer one I had was done in under a minute, and it was not much different from other vaccines I had to take.
  
  I hope you are doing OK and good luck with your vaccination.
  - jjjaar on 31/08/2021 - 19:58
    
    +2
    
    Thank you!
    
    My anxiety is awful, but I always know its good to get it done. It’s just an internal battle.
    - placard on 01/09/2021 - 10:59
      
      +2
      
      I get you. I nearly passed out in my last blood test because the lady was struggling to find the vein and I also hate needles. The fact that a blood test happens inside the arm means I find it harder to look away.
      
      When I got my pfizer I just refused to look at the nurse tray area and needle and just tried to distract myself until it was in. Barely felt it. Definitely is mind over matter and I know that doesn't make it any more easier.
      
      Thing is though, I was so nervous about my first Pfizer working myself up over the needle, but the second one was a lot easier - it must be the longer it's been since my previous needle the worse my anxiety is.
- bemybubble on 31/08/2021 - 20:02
  
  +5
  
  Know the feeling.
  
  You’d think after 15 donations I’d be ok with needles. I’m not lol. But soldier on as best I can
  - cfuse on 01/09/2021 - 22:44
    
    +1
    
    I had a scan the other day and they literally had to ultrasound me to find a vein.
    
    I hope that's a one off because it's going to be really inconvenient if it's like this moving forwards.
- azngamer on 31/08/2021 - 20:56
  
  +2
  
  Give it another shot when you think you are ready. I still get panic attacks when I haven't donated in a while.
  
  What helped me was letting them know I can't see the needle prior and seeing blood move (blood in tube is fine since I can't see movement but bag swishing is not alright). They do their best to accommodate and get you to look away.
  
  Good luck
  - jjjaar on 31/08/2021 - 21:29
    
    +2
    
    Give it another shot
    
    Nice.
    
    My biggest issue is knowing it’s in there. Needles I’m better at than blood tests. The length of time is what makes it worse. I mean, I hate the feeling of the needle too, but the duration is awful.
- imurgod on 01/09/2021 - 12:09
  
  +1
  
  You're not alone. I have the same problem with needles. It's embarrassing and really makes getting needles a challenge.
  I wish there was a way to just get past it!!!
- [Deactivated] on 01/09/2021 - 13:17
  
  +2
  
  Good on you for trying.
  
  The covid vax needle (I had Pfizer) was such a small, light one that I had to ask the nurse if she'd done it afterwards for my first one. Second one I felt lightly, but less than any other needle I've ever had (and I've had a lot). I did have a dead arm later on, but it just felt like I'd done too many weights at the gym the day before.
  - imurgod on 01/09/2021 - 18:26
    
    +1
    
    Thanks for sharing your experience. I hope it helps others.
    
    It's what I would have loved to have read before I went for mine.
- Alexxx on 02/09/2021 - 09:22
  
  One if the reasons I give blood is to get over my fear of needles after I fainted once in a doctor's office. Since then I've given blood about 8 times and each time has been getting a little better but I still can't look at the needle and the beeping when the donation finishes catches me off guard.
  I always tell the staff that I'm scared of needles and I'm not trying to ignore them but I'm going to distract myself during the donation.
  As soon as I'm sitting down I start reading my kindle while looking away from the needle then concentrate on my breathing and tensing my legs every few seconds. Even though I'm still nervous about it I barely feel the needle and it seems to be over quite quickly.
Phlume on 31/08/2021 - 19:59

+2

Started giving blood since year 10 in highschool when they had the blood drive bus at our school. Given 5 times since then. You get a nice message when your blood is used to help someone which always brightens my day. Been hesitant during COVID but should I really should continue.
Quantumcat on 31/08/2021 - 20:02

+5

Yes, I have a plasma appointment for the 10th September. Have donated 9 times so far. I quite enjoy it, the staff are nice, I get to listen to podcasts and relax, and get free food (the best kind of food). I've also figured out how to play Switch while donating - disconnect one joycon to hold with the arm that has the tube. After the first 2 or 3 times it doesn't hurt anymore, you get used to it.
- azngamer on 31/08/2021 - 20:43
  
  +2
  
  Genius! I do plasma as well and been wanting to kill time with switch
- AnneThrope on 31/08/2021 - 20:54
  
  +4
  
  I've donated plasma more than 200 times.
  
  You're quite right, it's only mildly uncomfortable nowadays, unlike the old both arm "crucifixion"-style machines ;-)
- AustriaBargain on 02/09/2021 - 17:18
  
  Do you have to eat the cookie after, is it to replace blood sugar or whatever?
  - Quantumcat on 02/09/2021 - 17:22
    
    Yeah you need extra energy to replace the lost blood cells - maybe you don't need to eat with plasma but they encourage you to anyway.
kanmen on 31/08/2021 - 20:06

+12

My dad gave his 100th donation last year, over 30 years of being in the country. He also regularly takes groups of people to donate throughout COVID as well. Despite this I've never been and he's never encouraged me to, probably because I'm on the petite side and at some stages don't meet the weigh criteria.

If I could I would
- suzley on 01/09/2021 - 12:25
  
  +1
  
  Depending on your "petiteness", you might be able to donate plasma.
  - kanmen on 01/09/2021 - 13:39
    
    +1
    
    Thank you for your comment here and below, I will look into this and donate if I'm able to! Gained a bit of COVID weight so that should help haha
    - sarahlump on 01/09/2021 - 15:57
      
      I don't wanna dash your hopes but they'll likely still say no. Plasma has a no return risk resulting in similar blood loss to a whole blood donation so they won't risk it.
Haydos90 on 31/08/2021 - 20:08

+1

Tried donating about 10 years ago. Didn't go too well and after spending 4 hours at the centre then having them give me a cab charge to get home, I was told not to try again for at least several years.
mskeggs on 31/08/2021 - 20:17

I did regularly for years, but the admin got more involved and the last few times I did it the wait and processing times really blew out so it took over 2 hours.

Last time I went was after they exposed a heap of people's personal details on the web (which they tried to play down), but I went to a mobile blood bank which was much quicker.

The trade off with the mobile one is they have so few slots you need to book 6 months ahead, which can be hard to schedule so far in advance.
- sarahlump on 01/09/2021 - 15:57
  
  the mobile blood van at uni you just need to schedule a day in advance
  - mskeggs on 01/09/2021 - 18:23
    
    +1
    
    The one near where I live is always booked out far in advance.
loulou1 on 31/08/2021 - 20:21

I donate as often as I can to the mobile van when it is near me. If I forget to book I always get a call asking me to donate soon enough.
The staff are always lovely. A few times I have been turned away as my iron levels are on the low side but most times donations proceeds without a hitch.
I too like the free snacks pre and post donation, along with the feel good message when my blood has been used.
morse on 31/08/2021 - 20:23

Yes I have done, but not recently due to health reasons.

Unfortunately last time I tried to make an appointment it was quite difficult to fit in with other commitments. I would probably try to turn up at a drop in type thing next time.
sa5ha on 31/08/2021 - 20:25

I've donated around 10 times in the past but haven't for the past 4 years or so as I've been pregnant (2018 and 2020) and breastfeeding which excludes you from donating. I plan to once I'm eligible again.
dizzle on 31/08/2021 - 20:33

I used to, but they changed the rules so that anyone that lived in England between certain years could no longer donate, because of mad cow disease.

The funny thing is, even though they knew about the change, they asked me to come in one last time :)
- TimOfEastBNE on 31/08/2021 - 22:23
  
  yep, me too.
- [Deactivated] on 01/09/2021 - 13:19
  
  +1
  
  Yes, I'm a potential mad-cow too unfortunately. I did see some information that they're reviewing that given the low number of cases and the time that's since passed. So we may be allowed to give blood again soon.
  - dizzle on 01/09/2021 - 19:15
    
    +1
    
    I posted, half hoping someone would correct me and say that rule ended years ago. At least that gives me some hope.
- charl-mw on 03/09/2021 - 22:16
  
  Yep. I'm a potential mad cow, too. I've never donated because of this.
azngamer on 31/08/2021 - 20:40

+4

Odd. Had my 15th donation recently as well. I don't do much community service but I feel this is something I can do. Plasma donation but only issue is that it can take up to 2 hours from start to finish
kerfuffle on 31/08/2021 - 20:52

+8

Don't weigh enough in order to be able to donate …
- mskeggs on 31/08/2021 - 21:57
  
  +19
  
  KFC deal is on the front page.
- SydneySwan on 01/09/2021 - 08:31
  
  India allows blood donors of minimum 45 Kg rather than here which is 50 Kg.
  - suzley on 01/09/2021 - 12:27
    
    +1
    
    I used to donate plasma when I was under 45kg.
mickyb80 on 31/08/2021 - 20:52

+1

Do mozzies count?

🦟🦟🦟

Have, but not for years. Prob could again… Might consider.
this is us on 31/08/2021 - 21:09

I did years ago, overseas, but here they don't want it.
wekimekigugudan on 31/08/2021 - 21:13

I'm ineligible to.
lost in transit on 31/08/2021 - 21:23

+34

I would like the opportunity to thank those members that do donate. Two years ago i came down with CIDP out of the blue.It hit me hard and the recovery has been a tough road but I’m around 95% better and stable.
I require blood plasma every 5 weeks and takes around 7 hours.

It’s important that you know you make a real difference to people’s lives.

Thankyou 🙏
- squidz on 01/09/2021 - 22:08
  
  wow, that's mad…
  when im complaining about plasma takes an hour to donate…it takes 7 hours to put in? (O.o)
  - lost in transit on 01/09/2021 - 23:05
    
    I’m on a pretty high dose mate, I’m usually the longest patient there for the day, If they pump it in at the highest rate i feel crap, but it saves an hour but it’s not worth it too me so i stay around seven 😀
    Patients can divide it into two days also but i prefer to get it over an done with.😀
    
    Thanks again for your efforts it takes thousands of donors like you for what i need 😀😉
sien on 31/08/2021 - 21:29

+23

It's surprising more Ozbargainers don't donate. Free drink and food!

I'm 150+ donations now.

My job allows it on job time. We have a team that goes for the local shield or whatever.

But I've only had this one that did which I've been in for about 5 years. Go in, read and chill out while giving plasma.
- lost in transit on 31/08/2021 - 21:38
  
  +2
  
  Fantastic effort mate
  All the best 😀😉
- Oneguyinmelb on 01/09/2021 - 15:57
  
  +3
  
  I was surprised most seemed to have only donated 10-20 times too.
  
  I'm currently at 78 donations, and also have work comfortable with me donating on company time….we have a registered company lifeblood team that have made nearly 700 donations this year alone.
  
  I'm so glad the sausage rolls are back after the COVID hiatus.
sharkyoz on 31/08/2021 - 22:21

no, because somewhere down the line i contracted hep C, even tho i dont do drugs
have had full course of treatment and am 3yrs clear…
..but, because they use the most basic detection it shows the dna of hep C, even though it has been eliminated
a full blood test shows I dont have hep C, but the cost of them doing this is prohibitive
I wish I could donate like I did before
onetwothreefour on 31/08/2021 - 23:02

+1

I grew up in the UK so I'm not eligible.

Racists.
- banana365 on 02/09/2021 - 15:23
  
  +1
  
  Nah, it's bovine-ist! I'm in the same boat. 🐮
ChocStrawberries on 31/08/2021 - 23:09

+1

I'm not allowed to give blood (iron too low), but have received it regularly over the years in the form of blood transfusions and iron infusions, so thank you to everyone who does!! It's appreciated more than you know. :)
AussieDaddy on 01/09/2021 - 00:33

I was diagnosed with Leukaemia a year ago so that rules me out, unfortunately.
- Other on 03/09/2021 - 00:34
  
  +1
  
  Sorry to hear (well, technically, read).
  Really hope your getting better.
  - AussieDaddy on 03/09/2021 - 02:05
    
    +1
    
    Thanks. Yeah, responding really well to the treatment. I was lucky they found it by accident while doing a blood test for unrelated stuff and it was the early stages. Almost zero now just after 12 months of medication (it's capsules for blood cancers these days, and not chemo and radiation like back in the days).
    - Other on 03/09/2021 - 03:03
      
      +1
      
      Awesome to hear your responding very well. & glad to hear they picked up early! funny how things like that happen.
      
      & what a change in treatment too! No idea it had changed, thought it was still the bad old days (burn & cut as the only treatment).
      So glad its at zero.
      I guess it certainly would feel a weight has lifted compared to 12 months ago. And hopefully a lot less stress too at least, even though covid ._. … sigh.
      Well as they say "when it rains…" Hopefully only sunshine now (do buy sunscreen, at discount -> 0zBer for Life ;-) ).
      - AussieDaddy on 03/09/2021 - 14:43
        
        +1
        
        @Other: Absolutely, the latest results made me feel a lot better. And you're right, I am member of a FB group of folks who have blood cancer and almost all of them say it was diagnosed when doing unrelated blood test. To be honest, I was somewhat skeptical initially as I didn't have any of the symptoms of the illness, but eventually realized I was lucky and all I have to do is to take a couple of capsules a day twice (which costs $40 a month, thanks to the government's subsidization, whereas it would have costed over $3000 every month without the subsidy). Fingers crossed I'll be one of the lucky 25% who'll go into remission after a number of years taking the drug, and get off it completely.
Out24q on 01/09/2021 - 07:43

+16

i try and donate Plasma every few weeks.
Just had my 162nd donation 3 weeks ago. Next one is this Sunday.
Ade99 on 01/09/2021 - 07:46

I sweat it at work but am banned as I had some beef burgers in the UK way back in the 1980's.
Aureliia on 01/09/2021 - 07:57

I am currently breastfeeding so not allowed, but hope to be able to do so again in the coming months.

In saying that I've been rejected more times than I've been allowed to donate and it's super disheartening when that happens.
They even rejected me one time, because I had a swollen ankle!
- Trekky on 01/09/2021 - 20:26
  
  I've been rejected once due to high blood pressure and then once for a too low iron level (and I had to get a letter from the doctor and wait 6 months, that time). It feels terrible to be there and not be able to donate.
SydneySwan on 01/09/2021 - 08:24

+2

I donated 13 times in the early 1980s. I then went back to UK for a few years and so I am now banned from donating due to the tiny threat of Mad Cow disease. Obviously UK don't have same rules or they would have no donors.
- bemybubble on 01/09/2021 - 08:38
  
  We don't hear a lot about MCD anymore - I wonder how much of it is still around to pose such a risk?
  - SydneySwan on 01/09/2021 - 08:59
    
    One or two people a year in the UK are diagnosed with vCJD so the risk is very very low but it is enough for Australia to refuse blood and organ donations from people resident in the UK for 6 months between 1980 - 1996.
    - Wampus on 01/09/2021 - 11:41
      
      Unfortunately this is the reason I can't donate either
    - stumo on 01/09/2021 - 15:03
      
      Ahh bugger I didnt know it covered organ donations too. I lived in the UK for 9 months in 1981. So my blood is no good. But how would that work for organs if I'm dead how would they know?
      - SydneySwan on 01/09/2021 - 16:41
        
        @stumo: Your next of kin will be asked. Your medical history is thoroughly reviewed. They don’t take chances. My partner works in this field.
    - Brianqpr on 01/09/2021 - 16:13
      
      The words Astra and Zeneca spring to mind.
daanish on 01/09/2021 - 08:50

+25

I donate plasma as that's the best thing for me to give for my blood type (B+). I donate every two weeks like clockwork.

I find the 90min or so to be a super relaxing time to just mentally checkout from the world and de-stress/chill out. I'm booked for my 168th donation on Monday.
- Quantumcat on 01/09/2021 - 09:21
  
  +2
  
  You are lucky to be B+, you can say, "my motto is like my blood type". I just have boring A+.
  
  Congrats on 168 donations!!
  - uppitt on 01/09/2021 - 09:43
    
    +4
    
    You know there is no blood type that is anymore important than another (well maybe only O negative being the universal blood type). Just because A+ is a common blood type, that means there's lots of need for it, so it's as important as a rare blood type.
- uppitt on 01/09/2021 - 09:33
  
  +1
  
  You couldn't have said it better, I go to chill out and it's the best feel good moment.
zrmx on 01/09/2021 - 08:50

+4

Should include another option in the poll: "I can't but I want to"
DazMon on 01/09/2021 - 09:04

+3

I'm up to 18, I did my first 15 between 1986-92, and it was becoming too painful by then, they changed the methods used.
Then I restarted this year because of a smug colleague and found the methods were quite bearable.
Also I beat him by miles all 3 visits this year in terms of time taken to fill the bag.
ECE on 01/09/2021 - 09:04 Comment score below threshold.
- DazMon on 01/09/2021 - 10:42
  
  For real?
  - ECE on 01/09/2021 - 10:51
    
    -1
    
    Yes

Do You Donate Blood?

Poll Options

Comments

New Forum Topics