BBC Panaroma TV - Contaminated Blood: The Search for the Truth

darkspilver

FYI

BBC Panaroma TV - Contaminated Blood: The Search for the Truth

10 May 2017

It has been called the worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS. More than 2,000 people died and thousands more were infected with HIV and Hepatitis C after being treated with contaminated blood products. All the victims were infected over 25 years ago, but even now new cases are still being diagnosed. Survivors and their families are trying once more to persuade the government to hold a UK public inquiry.
Panorama examines recently released documents, and asks if the government could have done more to save lives. The film hears the heartbreaking testimony of some of the victims and their families and explores the dilemmas of doctors who had to carry on treating their patients through the unfolding crisis.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08qhmhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5W56h8bqUA

BBC Breakfast News: The Tainted Blood Scandal

10 May 2017 - prior to Panaroma TV broadcast, Adrian Goodyear was interviewed on the BBC Breakfast News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI3MViy-oXo

Victoria Derbyshire Show - The Tainted Blood Scandal

10 May 2017 - prior to the Panaroma TV broadcast, Victoria Derbyshire interviews Andy Evans, Andy Burnham MP and Michelle Tolley

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7_gK5p3XE0

Ruby456

Hey just commented on another thread

i think blood medicine will be replaced pretty soon- hopefully sooner than later

stuckinarut2

Witnesses used to condemn the Panorama show for being "biased journalism" back when it exposed the child abuse issue amongst the society!

Now Witnesses will praise the show as being "enlightening proof".....

Landy

i think blood medicine will be replaced pretty soon- hopefully sooner than later

That's a very bold claim - care to back it up?

Blood is a very scarce and expensive resource (at least in the U.K.) and its use isn't taken lightly when there are viable alternatives.

TheWonderofYou

So JW did us all by resisting and forcing in the research of blood reduction a yet much greater favour.

JW backed the right horse. Is this only explainable by human efforts of a handful of JW - protagonists who convinced the medical society to shift the paradigma from blood transfusion to blood management?

Or wasnt it not much more a bit of Jehovah's spirit behind the human efforts that in our decade such a progress could be achieved? Only asking...

Ruby456

sure Landy - here is what I replied to orphancrow on the other thread

certainly
firstly what I mean is that JWS won't compromise on this issue so it will be a good thing for them when blood transfusions are replaced by other medicine/methods. I think this will happen eventually because medicine seeks to acheive less and less risks in the medicines used even if those risks are very very low and even if so low as to be almost insignificant. In other words jws won't change the world will have to change. unfortunately they made blood transfusions taboo when it wasn't that popular - now they have to live with or die for their taboo. Taboos re blood go back a long long way in human memory - I mean a rule regarding blood will reach parts not open to rational or irrational thought it will just carry a charge that will act like a force
meanwhile here is what is being offered to those refusing or reacting badly to blood transfusion
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/206885-treatment
https://www.stgeorges.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Blood-transfusion-alternatives-_2_.pdf Link

pale.emperor

So JW did us all by resisting and forcing in the research of blood reduction a yet much greater favour.
JW backed the right horse. Is this only explainable by human efforts of a handful of JW - protagonists convinced the medical society to shift the paradigma from blood transfusion to blood management?
Wasnt it much more Jehovas spirit ?

Hardly. Medical science is advancing all the time. How many JW's donated blood to be used in blood fractions? How many funded scientific research into non blood?

BioMed Central (written by doctors for doctors and those studying medicine) states:

The use of cell salvage techniques in vascular surgery has the potential to prevent the use of homologous blood transfusions, but in reality that does not appear to occur. The risk for transmission of disease by blood transfusions is sufficiently low that the use of the Cell Saver does not appear to have an impact on the individual patient. Cost savings only occur when there is a high blood loss and a high RBC salvage rate. If the surgeon is concerned, the reservoir is the optimal method to use in cases that have the potential for high blood loss, and if excessive blood loss does occur then the cell salvage device can be activated.

https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/cc2409

TheWonderofYou

Thats the other thread, where my question have been already answered.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4882693948964864/bbc-programme-re-contaminated-blood-dub-blinkers

My question was provocative. But it is difficult to get "the truth" about the subject, the whole picture, really difficult as layman.

bluesbrother: this happened decades ago. A solution was quickly found and the problem should have been minimised . The scandal is the slowness of remedial action and the cover-up.

crow:
And about that "boom in technologies". The technology that the so-called bloodless industry relies on would not exist if not for blood transfusion technology. The entire bloodless industry is built on the back of existing blood technology - without blood transfusions, there would be no bloodless surgery.

The Searcher

Medical authorities in the U.K. view blood transfusions as a cause for concern, as well as being beneficial.

https://www.shotuk.org/

BBC Panaroma TV - Contaminated Blood: The Search for the Truth

Share this