To safeguard public health and personal choice, this policy establishes a separate blood donation and transfusion protocol for unvaccinated individuals. Any unvaccinated individual requiring a blood transfusion will receive blood exclusively from a designated unvaccinated blood bank.
This system ensures compatibility with personal preferences or concerns surrounding vaccinated blood. Unvaccinated donors will be required to register, undergo the standard screening process, and have their blood categorized accordingly. The unvaccinated blood bank will operate under the same rigorous safety and ethical standards as traditional blood banks.
While respecting individual autonomy, this policy prioritizes both transparency and the equitable allocation of medical resources. Observation
Blood from donors vaccinated with any type of vaccine is considered safe for transfusion. There is no evidence that donations from vaccinated donors will transmit any risk of infection or thrombosis to patients receiving blood.
Cutting very close to eugenics here. What other criteria do you think you should apply? The list could be endlessā¦ Youāre making a political statement. If you are afraid of being ācontaminatedā bank your own blood or refuse transfusions. Unless the person was recently vaccinated (rendering them ineligible for donation) you would only be receiving the antibodies their body created, not products of the vaccine itself. Same as if the person has contracted and recovered from the virus/bacteria.
Asbestos, DDT, Lead, Mercury, Lawn Darts, Leaded Gas, Cigarettes, and the list goes on of things that were āsafeā until they were declared āunsafeā. Just because there is no evidence today does not mean you will not discover something tomorrow that will make it unsafe. California Proposition 65, also known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, is a law designed to protect the public from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm by requiring warnings on products containing such substances. It currently lists over 1000 chemicals that were safe until they werenāt.
I think what you said applied to real vaccines, where they give you a shot of dead or almost dead virus and then your body makes the antibodies etc. Buuuuut the recent āvaccinesā arenāt vaccines in that sense. Theyāre mrna gene therapy. I canāt remember all the labels of everything involved and Iām not going to go read up on it again, but the basic idea is that the shot sends stuff in to latch onto a gene and hijack it, forcing the gene into making spike proteins. I donāt understand how thatās supposed to be beneficial as spike proteins are what damages people I thought. Anyhow, point being, people without said āvaccinesā donāt want vaccinated blood and vaccinated people likely donāt want unvaccinated blood. So it would be wonderful to keep them separate.
Maybe just have a policy of keeping them separate instead of one side or the other needing to register etc, or else people may stop donating blood.
While what you say is true, I donāt want to live my life fearful of anything and everything, including water. You can choose to live in fear and avoid everything remotely possible of infecting you, or you can use the current science and knowledge to choose how to proceed. I choose the latter. There is nothing wrong with you choosing the former and being overly cautious, however. And I see how the current state of blood services does not allow you to do that. But I canāt support designing the blood supply system based on fear and conjecture vs. science.
I think you may want to add āCovid vaccine or mRNA vaccineā to differentiate which vaccine you are referring to, if that is what you are referring to.
Agree . Iāve had vaccines that were created before they changed the definition to include the MRNA changing treatments. I was told by my doctors back in 2003 never to have a flu vaccine again due to my dangerous reaction. I believe that year they began changing the adjuvants to try to address SARS.
An honest question here: presuming only from the fact that you didnāt go through a formal vaccination process that you are not affected by the mRNA (or any other possible ābill gatesāās āremediesā) while you could be bitten by a gen-modified mosquito, or eat a lot of Costco/Walmart/Target āproduceā or some fast-food āhappy mealsā ā all and any of those, and many other factors, could have you already silently affected with an mRNA treatmentā¦ HOW would you know it?
There is no tests, not readily, and affordably anyway, available, which you could reliable say after āIām pure blood 100%ā.
For all we know, we ALL are at risk of āgetting oneā till all those gateses and faucis and all with them are prevented from continuing doing what they still do all over the world, including the U.S.
I have worked in Blood Bank my entire professional career - a total of 15 years. And this is by far the worst thing you could possibly do to the blood supply. We have far too many blood shortages as it is and the logistics of this would be an absolute nightmare for so many different reasons. Most people are unaware, but blood is considered a drug and a biologic so we fall into a very unique position. You must havea doctor prescribe a unit of blood or blood product, and you have to sign an informed consent that notifies you of the potential for acquiring a blood bourne pathogen. You have every right to deny a transfusion unless it is emergent.
Iām sure the amount of unvaxxed to the vaxxed blood is far less. Those who have been jabbed should only supply to those in kind and vice versa. Period!! I wouldnāt want someoneās tainted Mnra blood in me; thatāll kill me quicker! IDC if itās my own motherās blood!! They made the choice to have an untested āvaccineā injected in them; while others did not. Not trying to sound cruel to the low blood supply but maybe give someone who has been vaccinated the blood of a donor who has not. NEVER the reverse!
Or only the vaccinated can recieve vaccinated blood. And only unvaccinated can recieve unvaccinated blood. I donāt want unvaccinated blood going to the vaccinated.
There is evidence that clotting disorders are being found in vaccinated blood. Persons receiving this blood have contracted the blood clot disorder and/or had side effects.
This statement lacks knowledge of reality. Not all things are researched. Research costs a lot of money. In addition, your statement claims that all vaccines are actually researched and proven to be safe for transfusion. Please show us that research that specifically showed safety for transfusion.
Definitely āvaccinesā or genetic therapies which were experimental and given out in an emergency order would not qualify as safe for transfusion.
Well I have not had that experience !
I have now lost 2 family members to tainted blood one 30 years ago from hepatitis never was checked until autopsy, she was tested for everything but what finally killed her ! The other was my Dad unvaxxed and because I wanted to have unvaxxed blood if neededā¦ of course I told them if they couldnāt do that then no blood transfusion for my Dad guess what happened yah they denied my wishes and Iām pretty sure because o was anti vax they put a 1/2 pint just to spite me ā¦ no one ever needs a 1/2 a pint of blood ever !!! He died 8 months later with severe nerve damage and sepsis and raging infections that could not be controlled my Dad probably died of VAIDS .
The blood supply needs to be addressed. I have been contacted to give blood. When I ask if they are separating vax blood from non-vaxed blood. They always say no. I wonāt donate until they get this changed.