- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 3,406
- Reaction score
- 6
Trancelucent1 said:That's absolutely disgusting and I think those execs should be punished other than a fine! That's sad and absolutely sick!
TheAverageGuy said:I'll agree. This is absolutely repulsive.
yatzek said:wow, this should be bigger news
bananaface said:HIV was discovered in 1983 and there wasn't much blood supply testing until 1985. That people got HIV from blood products in 1984 is not in the least surprising.
I wonder if the heated product was available overseas or not.
bananaface said:The way I look at the ethical issue is this:
If the heat treated version was not available overseas these patients were choosing between a fatal bleeding episode and potentially contaminated blood product. That risk is acceptable if no alternatives are available to the patient.
If the heat treated and non-heat treated versions were both available overseas, and patients or their medical providers chose the latter, they chose to assume the increased risk.
I guess what is in question is does the FDA's decision to pull a drug from the US market for safety purposes mean that it should not be sold overseas.
That's absolutely disgusting and I think those execs should be punished other than a fine! That's sad and absolutely sick!