give blood

[Dr. Pink]

" pro•cre•ation /prkrien; NAmE pro/ noun : They believe that sex is primarily for procreation."

 

You're completely missing DV's point. And although I should enlighten you I will refrain.

 

What you are saying isn't ridiculous. What she meant was that we have Ridiculously gone too far off topic. You are more then welcome to make a separate topic for the politics and ethics of Veganism and all of that but this discussion really doesn't belong on this topic.

[VeganEssentials]

This is like watching a train wreck - I just cannot turn away.

 

Exactly. I just can't believe that it took me nearly a week to stumble on this hidden gem of hodgepodged ideas on cannibalism, honey and other things unrelated to the true reasons for giving blood.

 

These kinds of off-track things that contain rants on individual bizarre interpretations of what veganism is about are definitely the sort of threads that the anti-vegans will post links to elsewhere and say "Look, I told you those vegans are freakin' insane!"

 

Give blood, even though one person seems to think that it's similar to eating parts of another human's body

[DV]

Thank You Dr. Pink and VeganEssentials!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dr. Pink]

Of course. Now let's get back to blood discussions

 

How long does blood last anyways? I remember some talk about saving ones own blood for future use. How long does that usually last? A month? A year?

 

It seems interesting and it would probably be the best decision( What better to get over a major blood lose then ones own blood? One would recover faster I think )

 

Although I would still take someone elses blood if I was dying. Just seems like an interesting blood related topic.

[DV]

Red Blood Cells last 42 days; Platelets last 5 days; Plasma can be frozen and stored for one year. Other components last for varying amounts of time. However, packed red blood cells at day one are MUCH better than those at day 40.

[Im Your Man]

Well, it doesn't matter when a thread is going "off-topic", there's a reason for everything in life. But if you insist, I'll open a cannibalistic thread or a thread about vampires. It's "modern cannibalism" and it's being so well accepted by society that it's been trivialized. I didn't even want to talk that much about cannibalism, I just said it and then someone didn't understand and asked questions. PINK, I didn't miss DV's point, she's saying that I should consider semen entering another person's body as a cannibalistic act. Personally I don't think so because it is the action to sow, not to cannibalize. It's a fluid that have a specific biological purpose, to reproduce, and when it's done in a natural way it just goes to ovum, the rest is rejected and don't stay in the body or in the bloodstream. But if someone wants to try convincing me it is cannibalism, fine, I don't care, it's gonna be that person's words not mine!

 

These kinds of off-track things that contain rants on individual bizarre interpretations of what veganism is about are definitely the sort of threads that the anti-vegans will post links to elsewhere and say "Look, I told you those vegans are freakin' insane!"

 

Give blood, even though one person seems to think that it's similar to eating parts of another human's body

Well, I don't care what simple minds have to say about what I say, especially anti-vegans simple minds, as if what they might have to say could be intelligent. And if someone like this say "Look, I told you those vegans are freakin' insane!", I can find in milliseconds thousands of texts written by omnis and anti-vegans that would make them look more insane than the posts here... That being said, I agree, give blood even though I find that blood transfusion is cannibalism (but I never said to give the blood is cannibalism) -- although for your information I'm certainly not the only person on Earth that thinks like that -- actually I've read it in a fascinating book written by a very intelligent vegan woman, one American should make the effort to translate her books in English, they could learn some very interesting facts about our culture. Perhaps in a few milleniums from now, when (if we're lucky) all mankind will be vegan, peaceful and more spiritually evolved, they will look back at this book and my posts and say: "those two prehistoric humans were far ahead on their time!". Just like we look at ancient medecine methods of middle-ages and Renaissance such as blood drains used for all purposes and now find this barbaric.

[tuc]

I don't mind if someone "cannibalizes" my blood after I have given it away and don't need it anymore.

 

The blood is used to save lives and no one gets hurt during any part of the process. I do realize why some people have something against it for personal or spiritual reasons but it's the only way to save lifes of many innocent people and I think people should be encouraged to donate blood, not judge them. Even if some people are against it it's not wise to say it out loud because there is a reason to donate blood and no spiritual reason can argue with reason as long as no one gets hurt for that.

[Im Your Man]

I don't mind if someone "cannibalizes" my blood after I have given it away and don't need it anymore.

 

The blood is used to save lives and no one gets hurt during any part of the process. I do realize why some people have something against it for personal or spiritual reasons but it's the only way to save lifes of many innocent people and I think people should be encouraged to donate blood, not judge them. Even if some people are against it it's not wise to say it out loud because there is a reason to donate blood and no spiritual reason can argue with reason as long as no one gets hurt for that.

I fully agree. I'm for blood donations and even blood transfusions because it saves lifes. But I'm a bit against it because it's cannibalism. I'm still more For it than against it. I even donated blood once and I will do it at least once or twice in the future. All I'm saying is that it's cannibalism, if it's good cannibalism then fine! I never judge anybody. "it's not wise to say it out loud"... yeah, we should silence the truth...

[FormicaLinoleum]

I know that vegans eat not only plants but all varieties of foods in the vegetal kingdom. But you seemed not to be awared of that blood is from animals therefore not vegan, exccept if you begin to transform definitions of everything. What I'm saying is that drinking human blood or get a transfusion is cannibalism, it's not vegan, just like eating sausage which contain blood of pigs ain't vegan. To know wheter or not if donate blood is vegan, why do you want me to answer this since anyway you seem to stick to your own definitions of things. But to donate your blood for your own potential future need, that would be fine, since it wouldn't be the blood of someone else but your own blood. Unfortunately the blood cannot be stored enough long to do this. Otherwise you can be sure I would donate my blood in case I need it later.

I know that I shouldn't argue with you, but you are accusing me of making up my own definitions of veganism.

 

Of course I know blood is from animals--I'm not an idiot! However, it does not follow that human blood is non-vegan.

 

I'm sure you understood my point, but I will reiterate it. Although vegans avoid eating and using animal products, and humans are animals, human products are generally not seen as non-vegan. This is not me just twisting things and making up my own definitions. Most vegans agree with this. As you can see, most (maybe all, but I won't make that claim as I haven't looked at the thread that carefully) people in this thread are saying exactly that.

 

Vegans don't wear animal products, right? If I wore a sweater made of wool, that would be non-vegan. What if my girlfriend cut off a lock of her hair, put it in a locket, and gave it to me? If I accepted it and wore it around my neck, would that be non-vegan of me? After all, it would technically be wearing animal hair, just like wearing a wool sweater is, right? If you don't distinguish between freely-given human products and other animal products, then these two sitations become equally non-vegan. And that's just plain silly.

[tuc]

OK, I kinda missed the point here... I should have read it more carefully.

 

BTW, what makes you think it's bad because it's cannibalism? Is all cannibalism automatically bad? I don't think so. Eating parts of dead people is bad but breastfeeding isn't. And if I had to feed my child (if I ever will have one) by taking blood out of me and feed it to the child to save his/her life I'd do it and I wouldn't think it's bad because it's not socially acceptable.

[Im Your Man]

let's continue this in the cannibalism thread since there is one now please. So we can keep the thread here more positive.

[FormicaLinoleum]

A discussion of whether or not receiving a blood transfusion is vegan seems on-topic for this discussion. Although, I guess this is about giving blood. But if receiving blood were non-vegan, then giving it would not really be a vegan activity, either, would it?

 

Anyway, my opinion is certainly that giving (or receiving) blood is not at all non-vegan and that it's a good thing to do.

[markc7]

Implied consent for organ donation is being debated in Ontario again. I know this will probably not pass anytime soon, but I strongly support this bill.

[medman]

Implied consent for organ donation is being debated in Ontario again. I know this will probably not pass anytime soon, but I strongly support this bill.

 

I wish the Ontario government was actually forward-thinking enough to pass this. It's hard to put any kind of faith into our politicians, though. I'm still upset that we don't have proportional representation of any kind.

[markc7]

Implied consent for organ donation is being debated in Ontario again. I know this will probably not pass anytime soon, but I strongly support this bill.

 

I wish the Ontario government was actually forward-thinking enough to pass this. It's hard to put any kind of faith into our politicians, though. I'm still upset that we don't have proportional representation of any kind.

 

Yeah, how much support did the PR referendum get last year? 20%? It was such a joke. But at least implied consent is being discussed, and maybe someday enough people will pay attention.

[DV]

I love the idea of implied consent for donation! Even if you have a donor card in the U.S. we still need to get family consent - unless things have changed. I've heard so many people say that they won't donate, yet they would certainly want an organ if one of their loved ones (or themselves) needed one. Such hypocrisy! And there is still such misinformation surrounding the requirement of brain death (or full-out cardiac death) before donation. I've worked in a neurosurg ICU taking care of brain dead patients before they're off to the OR for procurement and I can tell you that a brain dead patient is DEAD. The heart still beats but you have to use carefully titrated drugs to take care of so many things that the brain used to do, such as regulating urine and temperature and blood pressure. It is really hard work. And then in the OR, it's even more difficult. The only thing that makes it worth all the work is the knowledge that 1 or more people will have a chance at life.

[medman]

I agree completely. It should take a strong stance against organ donation to prevent it, while right now it takes a strong stance for it to give it the go-ahead, and next-of-kin can still veto it. When it comes to a life-saving procedure, it really makes sense for it to be standard, with only people with strong objections opting out.

 

And markc7, the PR referendum was a joke. Most voters didn't even hear about it or understand it, so it didn't stand a chance. In its suggested incarnation, it wouldn't have even done all that much except to open the door for further implementation (which would have been great of course...we need it, especially at the federal level!).