National blood policy

The National Blood Policy, effective from November 2013, is yet to bring about any change for the better in the country's state of blood collection and transfusion. One surely does not expect that the proposed national blood centre would be established within this short period. That Tk 10 million has been allocated for the purpose is evidence enough that the intent is not quite lacking. But then the seriousness with which this issue had to be pursued is somewhat missing. The site of the blood centre could not be selected and even if it is done, it will take sometime for construction of the building and furnishing it with machines and equipment. Should the policy be left unimplemented until then? Its functions could get going provisionally, preferably, in a rented house or any other building such as government hospitals. If the blood centre has to wait long for bringing order in this vital area of healthcare, it may wreak havoc of unimaginable proportion in the entire health sector.
Gone are the days when transfusion of whole blood was the norm. The majority of people in this country are not even aware that blood components rather than whole blood are safer for the purpose. Facilities for blood fractionation are a key requirement here and because of their absence, only 15 per cent patients of wealthy class use blood components, courtesy of the more advanced private hospitals in large cities. Public hospitals in cities and healthcare facilities elsewhere hardly bother about routine blood screening, separation and fractionation - methods deemed important for safe blood transfusion and use of blood components only. There are obviously risks of getting diseases or compromising with the immune system if whole blood is used randomly. In a country, where drug addicts turn professional blood donors in order to collect money for drugs, the risk assumes the proportion of health disaster. One of the purposes of establishing a national blood centre was to monitor, supervise and control the entire exercise in relation to blood collection and its safe transfusion. A blood fractionation plant operating under it could certainly guarantee the use of blood components, instead of whole blood.
The moot point here is to do away with the chaos and anarchy prevailing in blood donation/collection, preservation and its end-use. Irregularities and ill management at many of the so-called blood banks have often made screaming headlines. Drive against such illegal facilities alone will not be enough. People in desperation for rare blood or blood components must have easy choice for better alternatives. When there is no central authority to look after the matter, such illegal operation cannot be ruled out. It is because of this compulsion, the national blood centre should start functioning no matter if it is in a temporary building. Some of the onerous duty, such as fractionation of blood by arrangement with the available facilities in the city at reduced rates, performed by it from such a place will indeed justify the framing of the national blood policy. There is no point of its remaining an exercise on paper only.