Because imagine this: it's not ethical to give people synthetic goo that may or may not help them when you've got real blood lying around that you KNOW will help them. At least, not without their consent.
What's a little strange is the study design in general, which seems to have, somehow, somewhere, skipped a few stages, unless I'm just totally missing the point here. Seems like that you could test synthetic blood on somebody other than people that are getting ready to die and prove clinical efficacy. Being as this is a CNN article and I'm tired, I might be behind the times on Polyheme. Polyheme, according to Wikipedia, is a solution of chemically modified human hemoglobin which simultaneously restores lost blood volume and hemoglobin levels and is designed for rapid, massive infusion.
God knows it'd kick ass if this stuff worked out, and it probably will (sometime in the next 20 years, hopefully sooner than later).
And then all the sinners will have to find something else to do instead of donating blood to make them feel better about their wretched lives.
According to its website:
PolyHeme’s characteristics include:
- Simultaneously restores lost blood volume and hemoglobin levels
- Universally compatible (does not require typing or cross-matching before infusion)
- Immediately available
- Has not caused transfusion reactions
- Has extended shelf life in excess of 12 months
- Is manufactured from human red blood cells using steps to reduce the risk of viral transmission.
Cool shit. And notice that the info linked at Wikipedia is directly from the Northfield Labs site. Wiki-abuse anyone?