Reply
Thu 11 Mar, 2004 05:40 pm
I heard a story on NPR this morning that piqued my interest. Please feel free to correct my telling of the story.
Researchers have developed "artificial blood," or, more precisely, a substance that approximates red-blood cells. It is still in the experimental phase on animals but is getting close to human trial. The scientific aspects are not all that relevant to this discussion.
The situation that might warrant use of this substance would be an accident victim who is losing blood at a rapid rate. The Rescue Squad could provide this product and the hospital emergency room could use it until the patient is stabilized.
Here is the issue: researchers cannot use "experimental" procedures on a patient without prior consent from the patient. If you are lying beside the road with a severed arm and the EMS want to use this, they can't, unless you give them clear permission.
The researchers and the federal government came up with a plan. The researchers would meet with any civic/religious/political/etc group and make their case. They did, from groups ranging from six to six hundred.
(I thought I heard that Denver was one of the places, but Diane and Bob may know more).
What they got was something called "Community Consensus" that this should go forward. Anyone who did not want to participate, and this is where it gets wierd, could opt out by wearing a color-coded bracelet.
I work in the shadow of one of the better research hospitals in the US and our Rescue Squad is great. I thought this whole thing made sense.
But I got slammed by some of my employees this morning when I told them the story.
Any thoughts? Thanks, rjb
Huh, interesting. Bookmarking.
Quote:IMO, before the product is approved, it should only be used when a patient or his health care proxy gives consent, or if there is absolutely no other option, and it is a life or death situation for the patient.
This could very well be the case for a rare blood type at a small hospital. The idea does make me uneasy, though.
This story hit the news here in Boston a few weeks ago because, as it turns out, the company making this blood substuitute is from the Boston area and several of the hospitals and emergency services units in the area were using it unbeknownst to the patients involved.
Seems to me they are working it backwards. Make the people that agree to let them use it wear the bracelets.
If this is a topic y'all are interested in, PLEASE go to Npr.org and see it in its entirety rather than relying on my telling of the story. Hell, I can't even spell "weird" right! -rjb-
rjb- Don't feel bad. Weird is one of the only words that never looks correctly spelled to me. I always have to check to see if I got it right!
So let me get this right, every morning when getting dressed, a person must don this bracelet just in case of an accident. For how long?
I'm familiar with the company and the product, which seems to have stalled on it's journey to the general market.
I would not advise anyone to use the substitute, until more quality control procedures have been carried.
By the way, the company recently terminated 30% of it's employees. Is this some sort of a warning sign concerning the future of the product in question?
fishin' wrote:This story hit the news here in Boston a few weeks ago because, as it turns out, the company making this blood substuitute is from the Boston area and several of the hospitals and emergency services units in the area were using it unbeknownst to the patients involved.
Seems to me they are working it backwards. Make the people that agree to let them use it wear the bracelets.
How could they be using the blood product in the ER? I don't think it has received full FDA approval. If you're correct, I'd stay away from ERs in the Boston area!!!
Miller wrote: How could they be using the blood product in the ER? I don't think it has received full FDA approval. If you're correct, I'd stay away from ERs in the Boston area!!!
That's the whole point of the discussion here. They've been using this blood substitute as a part of their clinical trials on unsuspecting accident victims without their prior consent.