Friday, April 1, 2016

F.D.A. Clears Use of New Test to Screen Blood Donations for Zika

Estelle Kelty
AP Biology
Current Event 16


Louis, Catherine Saint. "F.D.A. Clears Use of New Test to Screen Blood Donations for Zika." The New York Times. The New York Times, 30 Mar. 2016. Web. 01 Apr. 2016.


In the article, "F.D.A. Clears Use of New Test to Screen Blood Donations for Zika,” the author, Catherine Saint Louis discusses the recent breakthroughs regarding the Zika virus. Announced Wednesday by the Food and Drug Administration, experimental tests will be allowed to test blood donations for the Zika virus to allow the donated blood to be put to use. Because the dangerous virus has the potential to be passed through blood, the donations of blood to others had been halted because of the possible spread of this virus. However, this lead to issues because this blood was needed, “Every day, roughly 36,000 units of red blood cells are required for patients with cancer, transplant recipients and accident victims nationwide, according to AABB, the group that represents most blood donation groups stateside,” (Louis). Thankfully a screening test has been passed to verify of the donated blood is contaminated by the Zika virus. This virus, “has been linked to temporary paralysis in adults and brain damage in infants born to infected mothers. The pathogen can also be sexually transmitted,” (Louis). Without this screening blood banks as a whole had to be shut down due to the lack of knowledge if the virus was being transmitted or not. This new breakthrough, which tests blood relatively efficiently, have been creating safer blood banks to prevent the transmission of these or other harmful diseases through blood donations.    

Today one of the most talked about and frightening viruses is the Zika virus. It is relatively new and not much is known about it or how to cure it. Because of this we must take extra precautions to avoid possibly infecting any more people with this kind of virus. People of all kinds of backgrounds, and situations require blood donations and because of this the new technology to make this process safer can help everyone. Without this the blood given to many people would not have been previously checked and could possibly be harmful. Due to it’s relevance to all people, this new scanning technique could help save many from becoming infected.

Although this article was educational and interesting to read it had a few weaknesses. The entire article was based on this new screening technology however, the actual test was never fully explained. In addition, the article did not explain what exactly the Zika virus was or any other background that would have made the article easier to read. However, this article did address the real world problems that this situation could have and made the situation more real. Overall a good article to read and review!   

1 comment:

  1. I thought Estelle did a great job reviewing this article. First, I liked how she went into depth describing why blood donations were stopped, stating that “because the dangerous virus has the potential to be passed through blood, the donations of blood to others had been halted because of the possible spread of this virus”. I also enjoyed her use of statistics. Hearing that 36,000 units of red blood cells are needed per day really put into perspective how much we really need blood. Lastly, I enjoyed how kept the mood of the review positive throughout. This was a very hopeful article that talked about how we were solving issues, not just running into new ones, and it definitely brightened my day..
    One thing that I would have liked to see was how the screening process worked, as in what the mechanisms were. I would also like to have more background on the Zika virus, as she never really addressed what was bad about it.
    This article really made me happy. Knowing that there are new screening techniques in order to keep blood donations flowing is very much comforting. In the future, I will rest easily knowing that there is blood in case I need it.

    ReplyDelete