"At the time, the only way to donate marrow was to basically have someone drill holes in your bones and drain your skeleton, which kind of terrified me. Nowadays, of course, most donations require nothing more than sitting still for a few hours with an IV watching television."
That actually isn't really true. Marrow donations still require anesthesia and a surgical procedure. In the interest of providing full information:
PBSC donation is a non-surgical procedure done in an outpatient clinic. PBSC donors receive daily injections of a drug called filgrastim for five days, to increase the number of blood-forming cells in the bloodstream. Then, through a process called apheresis, a donor's blood is removed through a needle in one arm and passed through a machine that separates out the blood-forming cells. The remaining blood is returned to the donor through the other arm.
Speaking to the marrow.org representative, she said that these days it's about 75% PBSC (sitting in a chair watching TV), 25% outpatient surgery (which is easier now than it was 16 years ago, but still daunting).
Yes...you're quoting from the section to which I linked, and that's why I linked to it. I'm not trying to hide anything.
I'm also not trying to disagree that people should donate...it's just that you really do have to have a surgical procedure if you're donating marrow. Moreover, PBSC involves a five-day injection drug regimen (filgrastim) that you need to undergo before you get to sit in the chair (http://marrow.org/Registry_Members/Donation/Donation_FAQs.as...). Either way, it's a far more involved procedure than (say) donating plasma -- which is how your post made it sound.
The FAQ also says that PBSC donation is considered "investigational" (http://marrow.org/Registry_Members/Donation/Donation_FAQs.as...), though who knows what that means. I just think people should be able to read the answers so that they know what they're doing.
From what I've heard, the long term consequences of the "filgrastim" stuff is unknown. It's a pretty intense drugs (it's basically causing your marrow to be release into your blood stream)
> What are the chances of catching a disease from previous donor during this procedure?
Effectively zero, as onemoreact says.
The chance of becoming infected due to unsterile conditions or opportunistic infections is higher than zero, however. This page is the best I've been able to find so far:
That page says you're taking about a 1 in 370 chance of serious complications:
> life-threatening complications for all marrow donors have been rare; there were 13 reported in 4,800 [0.27%, or one in 370] analyzed marrow donations.
edit: I found a small-n study that is very positive:
edit 2: I omitted the small-n study, because I found a much bigger one:
> The experience at a single institution in harvesting marrow for allogeneic transplantation on 1,270 occasions from 1,160 normal donors is presented in detail, together with an analysis of all the donor complications... Hospitalization time was three days or less for 99% of the procedures. Six donors had life-threatening complications; three of a cardiopulmonary and two of an infectious nature, and one cerebrovascular embolic episode. Significant operative site morbidity, usually transient neuropathies, occurred in ten procedures.
You have vary close to zero risk from prior donor's. Sterilization tools are incredibly effective, and for hard to sterilize things like needles they just dispose of them.
Now reviving a donating is still risky, but usually it's a choice between death and some lessor risks.
I actually am currently in the process of donation. I had been scheduled but the patient became too sick and I'm basically in a holding pattern at this point. I can confirm that the process for me involved no surgery or anesthesia and would not in the future either. It's a possibility but it's unlikely and you get to know which situation it is up front and can always opt-out at absolutely any step of the process.
Because it's spreading misinformation that could prevent people from becoming marrow donors.
It might prevent people from becoming donors, sure, but it's not misinformation. You may think that the risks are small relative to the benefit provided, but you shouldn't pretend (or try to convince others) that there are none.
Take five of your minutes and give them to somebody that needs them.
It takes five minutes to register. It clearly takes more than that to actually donate. You're not doing anyone a service attempting to conceal this fact.
I think you're confused about a couple of things here.
1) I'm saying to take five minutes and register as a potential donor. If you're found as a match, you're not required to donate. You then get to chose if you want to donate more of your minutes.
2) You're vastly overstating the liklihood that you'd have to undergo surgery to donate bone marrow. This is typically referred to as FUD, and is generally considered a bad thing to do.
That actually isn't really true. Marrow donations still require anesthesia and a surgical procedure. In the interest of providing full information:
http://marrow.org/Registry_Members/Donation/Donation_FAQs.as...
http://marrow.org/Registry_Members/Donation/Donation_FAQs.as...
(Edit: c'mon folks...why in the world would you vote this down? It's important information to know if you're going to be a donor.)