Arts & Photography
Audio CDs
Audiocassettes
Biographies & Memoirs
Business & Investing
Children's Books
Christianity
Comics & Graphic Novels
Computers & Internet
Cooking, Food & Wine
Entertainment
Gay & Lesbian
Health, Mind & Body
History
Home & Garden
Horror
Literature & Fiction
Mystery & Thrillers
Nonfiction
Outdoors & Nature
Parenting & Families
Professional & Technical
Reference
Religion & Spirituality
Romance
Science
Science Fiction & Fantasy
Sports
Teens
Travel
Women's Fiction
|
|
Bad Blood |
List Price: $16.95
Your Price: |
|
|
|
Product Info |
Reviews |
<< 1 >>
Rating: Summary: Awsome! Review: A young man wanted to donate blood to a Palo Alto Blood Bank but they rejected him for having a super low t-cell count. His blood was later accepted by a Red Cross facility and his bad blood caused a recipient to get AIDs. This book is filled with similar horror stories as well as details about this one. The American Red Cross cut corners every chance possible and then fought like pitt balls to avoid taking any responsibility. The Ford Pinto and Dalkon Shield two famous product liability cases left a black mark on corporate America but the irresponsibilty of The American Red Cross is a black mark against all of Christianity. A corporation that specializes in blood and relies on people's donations and uses the cross to engender peoples trust owes more then any car or iud maker. They owe nothing short of their blood because the Christian cross symbolizes Christ's blood on the cross. They sinned against God. The American Red Cross has been immortalized as one of the most greedy and ruthless corporations to ever exist!
Rating: Summary: Very Educational and Interesting. Review: Judith Reitman obviously put a lot of work and research into writing this book. All of the information provided is well researched and documented. I would recommend this book to anyone, because it warns us not only about the Red Cross, but it makes us aware about how other non-profit organizations can cut corners to save money as well. It also makes us realize that there are a lot of changes that need to be made to regulate organizations and businesses of any kind for the protection of all of us. I don't think people realize how much one decision can impact other people's lives. Reitman provides a lot of examples in the form of true stories which really makes this book that much more interesting.
Rating: Summary: Lots of accusations; where are the facts Review: The author concludes that because Red Cross makes a LOT of money on blood and because a terrible thing - AIDS- happened to patients, then the Red Cross must have profited from these terrible things. Well, that may be true (and there are Red Cross employees who did jail time in Canada, France, Japan, etc. to suggest there is something to that) but there are no facts here to support the connection. There has been no investigative journalism done here. This approach will appeal to conspiracy theorists, but for a well-researched history that comes alive, and for supported facts, you'd be much better off with BLOOD: an epic history by Douglas Starr, ISBN 0688176496
Rating: Summary: overlooked Review: The author of this book states her opion of the red cross and seems to find the people of wich were infected by hiv and aids and tell their stories but, did she forget the hundred of thousands this instituition helps every day with the blood porducts they collect. I wonder if she her self has ever donated blood.Lets not forget that the red cross is monitored very closly by both the CDC and the FDA. I encorage people to rent the movie "And the band played on" it explains alot about the aids epademic. and remember when you point a finger at someone(the red cross) you have 4 pointing back at youself.
Rating: Summary: Poor 'tabloid' journalism Review: This book is an example of poor jounalism that creates a satire of life. This book only critises the American Red Cross, with poor reinforcement with data. It almost seems that the author just critises this organization for the heck of it. It conveys a terrible message to the public, scaring them no to "Give blood". To my knowledge, other blood banks too, have the same problem with testing, etc. at the time, but the American Red Cross, in this case, is targeted because it is the largest blood bank in the US. Is it right to direct all this attention when the author should have done a "big picture" approach rather than using the American Red Cross as a focal point?
<< 1 >>
|
|
|
|