Why does it not matter if you are infected with common viruses when donating blood?

Because everyone has common viruses, all the time

well that was quick…

Honestly though, seems like begging the question.

When I used to give blood in the UK, they asked you not to donate if you had a cold, and to call them if you developed and symptoms shortly after donation.

They’ve promise to tell me when I am considered safe to donate blood again. I lived in London for 13 months in the late 1980s.

By they way, they won’t let you donate blood when you have shingles.

So people that are receiving blood donations are also receiving the donors infections?

tauto said:

So people that are receiving blood donations are also receiving the donors infections?

the ones they don’t identify

wookiemeister said:

tauto said:

So people that are receiving blood donations are also receiving the donors infections?

the ones they don’t identify

—

Does the recepient also acquire the donors antibodies?

tauto said:

wookiemeister said:

tauto said:

So people that are receiving blood donations are also receiving the donors infections?

the ones they don’t identify

—

Does the recepient also acquire the donors antibodies?

Interesting question, my guess is no, or if so they don’t work as they should.

So you could be very sick and require a blood transfusion, then you are infected?

tauto said:

So you could be very sick and require a blood transfusion, then you are infected?

With another infection? yes, spose so.

tauto said:

So you could be very sick and require a blood transfusion, then you are infected?

Who were the religious nutters who were against blood tranfusions? perhaps they were right after all?

bob(from black rock) said:

tauto said:

So you could be very sick and require a blood transfusion, then you are infected?

With another infection? yes, spose so.

—-

Doesn’t seem right. Surely if you have a patient in critical care then you would not risk an infection on them.

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

wookiemeister said:

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

hang on , I don’t know what I’m talking about

disregard that

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

hang on , I don’t know what I’m talking about

disregard that

That sounded quite reasonable to me

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK142990/

Screening Donated Blood for Transfusion-Transmissible Infections: Recommendations

http://www.donateblood.com.au/faq/the-donation-process/what-tests-do-the-blood-service-perform-on-donated-blood

bob(from black rock) said:

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

hang on , I don’t know what I’m talking about

disregard that

That sounded quite reasonable to me

I thought it could be made artificially – its not its donated

JudgeMental said:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK142990/

Screening Donated Blood for Transfusion-Transmissible Infections: Recommendations

http://www.donateblood.com.au/faq/the-donation-process/what-tests-do-the-blood-service-perform-on-donated-blood

—-

After donation, all blood is tested at every donation for blood type, the presence of red cell antibodies and for the following infections: HIV1 & 2, hepatitis B & C, HTLV I & II and syphilis. Some donations are also tested for malaria depending on the donor’s answers to the questions on the donor questionnaire.

Thanks boris, at least some expert takes questions seriously.

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

hang on , I don’t know what I’m talking about

disregard that

Well there’s a tricky paradox.

If you always disregard everything wookie says,
and he tells you to disregard what he just said,
what are you to do?

The Rev Dodgson said:

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

you can give plasma, that’s safer but its only for certain situations

hang on , I don’t know what I’m talking about

disregard that

Well there’s a tricky paradox.

If you always disregard everything wookie says,
and he tells you to disregard what he just said,
what are you to do?

aye there’s the rub

wookiemeister said:

I thought it could be made artificially – its not its donated

It IS extracted from donated blood.

During WW2 in the Pacific, US Army and Marine medics found that the clear ‘milk’ from a green coconut made an effective plasma-substitute, when nothing else was available.

captain_spalding said:

wookiemeister said:

I thought it could be made artificially – its not its donated

It IS extracted from donated blood.

During WW2 in the Pacific, US Army and Marine medics found that the clear ‘milk’ from a green coconut made an effective plasma-substitute, when nothing else was available.

that’s what surprised me, I was under the impression that plasma was made from everything but blood ie it was essentially a filler that could be made cheaper and safer by not using blood as its source.

wookiemeister said:

captain_spalding said:

wookiemeister said:

I thought it could be made artificially – its not its donated

It IS extracted from donated blood.

During WW2 in the Pacific, US Army and Marine medics found that the clear ‘milk’ from a green coconut made an effective plasma-substitute, when nothing else was available.

that’s what surprised me, I was under the impression that plasma was made from everything but blood ie it was essentially a filler that could be made cheaper and safer by not using blood as its source.

You’re probably thinking of simulated body fluids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulated_body_fluid

tauto said:

JudgeMental said:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK142990/

Screening Donated Blood for Transfusion-Transmissible Infections: Recommendations

http://www.donateblood.com.au/faq/the-donation-process/what-tests-do-the-blood-service-perform-on-donated-blood

—-

After donation, all blood is tested at every donation for blood type, the presence of red cell antibodies and for the following infections: HIV1 & 2, hepatitis B & C, HTLV I & II and syphilis. Some donations are also tested for malaria depending on the donor’s answers to the questions on the donor questionnaire.

Thanks boris, at least some expert takes questions seriously.

i do know that within a certain community in Tas, they give blood regularly as it is essentially a free blood test

stumpy_seahorse said:

tauto said:

JudgeMental said:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK142990/

Screening Donated Blood for Transfusion-Transmissible Infections: Recommendations

http://www.donateblood.com.au/faq/the-donation-process/what-tests-do-the-blood-service-perform-on-donated-blood

—-

After donation, all blood is tested at every donation for blood type, the presence of red cell antibodies and for the following infections: HIV1 & 2, hepatitis B & C, HTLV I & II and syphilis. Some donations are also tested for malaria depending on the donor’s answers to the questions on the donor questionnaire.

Thanks boris, at least some expert takes questions seriously.

i do know that within a certain community in Tas, they give blood regularly as it is essentially a free blood test

—

Why?

tauto said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

tauto said:

—-

After donation, all blood is tested at every donation for blood type, the presence of red cell antibodies and for the following infections: HIV1 & 2, hepatitis B & C, HTLV I & II and syphilis. Some donations are also tested for malaria depending on the donor’s answers to the questions on the donor questionnaire.

Thanks boris, at least some expert takes questions seriously.

i do know that within a certain community in Tas, they give blood regularly as it is essentially a free blood test

—

Why?

re: your last post and what they test for.
you get all this screened for at no cost

Stumpy, do you only have to give 900 mL?

sibeen said:

Stumpy, do you only have to give 900 mL?

Used to be a pint in the old money from memory, that’s what, 600ml?

sibeen said:

Stumpy, do you only have to give 900 mL?

no idea, it’s been years since i gave blood, used to be a group blood drive when i was in scouts, haven’t donated since then.
Mrs SS will be home soon, i’ll ask her

I hope to be able to give blood again soon. I got Ross River Virus last year. I called them, and they’ve delayed my blood-giving for several months.

It’s a pity, because my blood was quite special. I have never been exposed to Epstein-Barr virus (unlike almost all of the population), and so my blood was safe for babies. I don’t know whether that applies now I’ve had Ross River virus.

:(

stumpy_seahorse said:

tauto said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

i do know that within a certain community in Tas, they give blood regularly as it is essentially a free blood test

—

Why?

re: your last post and what they test for.
you get all this screened for at no cost

—

Ah, the car is away from the maddening crowd ;)

stumpy_seahorse said:

sibeen said:

Stumpy, do you only have to give 900 mL?

no idea, it’s been years since i gave blood, used to be a group blood drive when i was in scouts, haven’t donated since then.
Mrs SS will be home soon, i’ll ask her

I thought it was 500ml that they take these days – that looked to be the size of the bags they use.

Look-up on the Red Cross website says a ‘donation unit’ is actually 470 ml.

captain_spalding said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

sibeen said:

Stumpy, do you only have to give 900 mL?

no idea, it’s been years since i gave blood, used to be a group blood drive when i was in scouts, haven’t donated since then.
Mrs SS will be home soon, i’ll ask her

I thought it was 500ml that they take these days – that looked to be the size of the bags they use.

Look-up on the Red Cross website says a ‘donation unit’ is actually 470 ml.

Of which pt gets 450mL.

Amazingly, like MV, I’m EBV and CMV-free.

All you need to know about blood donation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC1-Mrlm3TU

(Also discover where the lead nurse on Call the Midwife found the model for her performance)

The Rev Dodgson said:

All you need to know about blood donation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC1-Mrlm3TU

(Also discover where the lead nurse on Call the Midwife found the model for her performance)

Possibly from my wife’s mother, who did precisely what the TV series portrays: cycling about the bomb-shattered streets of post-WW2 East London at all hours, delivering babies in peoples’ bedrooms.

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

All you need to know about blood donation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC1-Mrlm3TU

(Also discover where the lead nurse on Call the Midwife found the model for her performance)

Possibly from my wife’s mother, who did precisely what the TV series portrays: cycling about the bomb-shattered streets of post-WW2 East London at all hours, delivering babies in peoples’ bedrooms.

your wife’s mum is Mrs SS?

:P

stumpy_seahorse said:

captain_spalding said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

All you need to know about blood donation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC1-Mrlm3TU

(Also discover where the lead nurse on Call the Midwife found the model for her performance)

Possibly from my wife’s mother, who did precisely what the TV series portrays: cycling about the bomb-shattered streets of post-WW2 East London at all hours, delivering babies in peoples’ bedrooms.

your wife’s mum is Mrs SS?

:P

No, but she might have shared digs with her.

OCDC said:

captain_spalding said:

stumpy_seahorse said:

no idea, it’s been years since i gave blood, used to be a group blood drive when i was in scouts, haven’t donated since then.
Mrs SS will be home soon, i’ll ask her

I thought it was 500ml that they take these days – that looked to be the size of the bags they use.

Look-up on the Red Cross website says a ‘donation unit’ is actually 470 ml.

Of which pt gets 450mL.

Amazingly, like MV, I’m EBV and CMV-free.

The other 20mL is for testing…?

Divine Angel said:

OCDC said:

captain_spalding said:

I thought it was 500ml that they take these days – that looked to be the size of the bags they use.

Look-up on the Red Cross website says a ‘donation unit’ is actually 470 ml.

Of which pt gets 450mL.

Amazingly, like MV, I’m EBV and CMV-free.

The other 20mL is for testing…?

Yep.

tauto said:

After donation, all blood is tested at every donation for blood type, the presence of red cell antibodies and for the following infections: HIV1 & 2, hepatitis B & C, HTLV I & II and syphilis. Some donations are also tested for malaria depending on the donor’s answers to the questions on the donor questionnaire.

Yes I found this online too but it does not answer your question in the OP.

Why does it not matter if you are infected with common viruses when donating blood?

My guess is that it would depend on the blood supplies/stores which are typically available. If stores are low then a decision is made about whether blood infected with a common virus is better for the recipients than no blood at all. The only other scenario I can think of is that common “temporary” viruses do not survive storage as well as the more serious infections which are tested for.

bob(from black rock) said:

tauto said:

So you could be very sick and require a blood transfusion, then you are infected?

Who were the religious nutters who were against blood tranfusions? perhaps they were right after all?

They would be the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They prefer the use of volume expanders such as saline. Each to their own, I suppose, but these people kill their own children for their misguided beliefs :(

Last year I had a young pt who was a JW and exsanguinated to death, over the course of days, with full family support. Heart-breaking.

OCDC said:

Last year I had a young pt who was a JW and exsanguinated to death, over the course of days, with full family support. Heart-breaking.

Preventable death with transfusion?

Divine Angel said:

OCDC said:

Last year I had a young pt who was a JW and exsanguinated to death, over the course of days, with full family support. Heart-breaking.

Preventable death with transfusion?

Yes, with blood or blood products such as clotting factors. I ended up calling my consultant and the harmatologist in the wee sma’s to see if there was anything at all we could do (tried some things which didn’t help).

OCDC said:

Divine Angel said:

OCDC said:

Last year I had a young pt who was a JW and exsanguinated to death, over the course of days, with full family support. Heart-breaking.

Preventable death with transfusion?

Yes, with blood or blood products such as clotting factors. I ended up calling my consultant and the harmatologist in the wee sma’s to see if there was anything at all we could do (tried some things which didn’t help).

Fucking idiots.

sibeen said:

OCDC said:

Divine Angel said:

Preventable death with transfusion?

Yes, with blood or blood products such as clotting factors. I ended up calling my consultant and the harmatologist in the wee sma’s to see if there was anything at all we could do (tried some things which didn’t help).

Fucking idiots.

+1

i think if you go to a normal hospital then your personal views on treatment should be left at the door. start your own health service if you want to want non-normal treatment. why should the staff be put through crap like this.

delete a to want from the last post.

JudgeMental said:

i think if you go to a normal hospital then your personal views on treatment should be left at the door. start your own health service if you want to want non-normal treatment. why should the staff be put through crap like this.

Agreed. I guess JW-only hospitals wouldn’t last very long.

‘u’r’ right, people shouldn’t be allowed to refuse parts of their treatment,

JudgeMental said:

i think if you go to a normal hospital then your personal views on treatment should be left at the door. start your own health service if you want to want non-normal treatment. why should the staff be put through crap like this.

Doctors have a duty to make the care of patients their first concern and to practise medicine safely and effectively. They must be ethical and trustworthy.

but

Good medical practice is patient-centred. It involves doctors understanding that each patient is unique, and working in partnership with their atients, adapting what they do to address the needs and reasonable expectations of each patient. This includes cultural awareness: being aware of their own culture and beliefs and respectful of the beliefs and cultures of others, recognising that these cultural differences may impact on the doctor–patient relationship and on the delivery of health services.

From http://www.medicalboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-Policies.aspx

Contradictory?

SCIENCE said:

’u‘r’ right, people shouldn’t be allowed to refuse parts of their treatment,

IKR

I don’t think it’s contradictory. Part of the doctor’s ethics is recognising that a patient has the right to refuse treatment based on beliefs.

// Contradictory?

Probably just way too politically correct.

What am “ethic”?

Divine Angel said:

I don’t think it’s contradictory. Part of the doctor’s ethics is recognising that a patient has the right to refuse treatment based on beliefs.

Is the doctor permitted to say that without this treatment you will probably die?

Tamb said:

Divine Angel said:

I don’t think it’s contradictory. Part of the doctor’s ethics is recognising that a patient has the right to refuse treatment based on beliefs.

Is the doctor permitted to say that without this treatment you will probably die?

Yes.

OCDC said:

What am “ethic”?

Someone from another country. Oh, wait, that’s ethnic.

/*
// Is the doctor permitted to say that without this treatment you will probably die?

Yes. */

Hmm, yeah, ‘u’d hope they’re allowed to tell the truth as they see it.

Tamb said:

OCDC said:

What am “ethic”?

Someone from another country. Oh, wait, that’s ethnic.

Or someone who can put themselves into someone else’s shoes. Hang on, that’s empathetic.

People are weird. For example, Mr Mutant’s grandmother has secondary liver cancer (they can’t find the primary). She’s been told to have chemo and she’s refused because right now, she feels just fine. No one can get through to her that once she doesn’t feel fine, it’s a major problem… But at the moment she’s refusing treatment, and it’s not based on any religious beliefs.

Speedy said:

Tamb said:

OCDC said:

What am “ethic”?

Someone from another country. Oh, wait, that’s ethnic.

Or someone who can put themselves into someone else’s shoes. Hang on, that’s empathetic.

DA. Oh wait, that’s thick.

Not as thick as some.

/* People are weird. For example, Mr Mutant’s grandmother has secondary liver cancer (they can’t find the primary). She’s been told to have chemo and she’s refused because right now, she feels just fine. No one can get through to her that once she doesn’t feel fine, it’s a major problem… But at the moment she’s refusing treatment, and it’s not based on any religious beliefs. */

Remind them about immunisation,

OCDC said:

Tamb said:

Divine Angel said:

I don’t think it’s contradictory. Part of the doctor’s ethics is recognising that a patient has the right to refuse treatment based on beliefs.

Is the doctor permitted to say that without this treatment you will probably die?

Yes.

Makes me wonder how many JWs then choose the transfusions afterall. Seeing your child dying must be one of the most desperate situations that you are ever likely to experience.

// Not as thick as some.

Blood is thicker than water?

Divine Angel said:

People are weird. For example, Mr Mutant’s grandmother has secondary liver cancer (they can’t find the primary). She’s been told to have chemo and she’s refused because right now, she feels just fine. No one can get through to her that once she doesn’t feel fine, it’s a major problem… But at the moment she’s refusing treatment, and it’s not based on any religious beliefs.

With about a 15% survival rate maybe she’s just using common sense.

// Makes me wonder how many JWs then choose the transfusions afterall.

1/10

Tamb said:

Divine Angel said:

People are weird. For example, Mr Mutant’s grandmother has secondary liver cancer (they can’t find the primary). She’s been told to have chemo and she’s refused because right now, she feels just fine. No one can get through to her that once she doesn’t feel fine, it’s a major problem… But at the moment she’s refusing treatment, and it’s not based on any religious beliefs.

With about a 15% survival rate maybe she’s just using common sense.

My mum works in a hospital and sees many cancer patients. She says that if she was diagnosed now (she’s 68), she wouldn’t have chemo.

SCIENCE said:

// Makes me wonder how many JWs then choose the transfusions afterall.

1/10

So 9/10 will not choose the transfusion when told that this choice is likely to lead to death?

It’s God’s will for the person to die.

Found this online, just for ‘u guys

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15339766

.

/* A total of 61 patients were identified. Of these,

39.3% agreed to accept a variety of donated blood products,

9.8% would accept donated packed red blood cells, and

50.1% would accept neither from a homologous donor.

With respect to nonstored autologous blood, 55% of respondents would accept either intraoperative normovolemic hemodilution or transfusion of their own blood obtained by a cell salvage system. No significant differences in responses were noted for any of the above-mentioned variables. */

Don’t want to derail the thread too much, but are your opinions on people who refuse blood transfusions and chemo the same for people who chose to have a DNR order?

Just curious

Hannah Jones refused a heart transplant aged 13, but changed her mind at 18. Luckily, she still had time.

SCIENCE said:

/* A total of 61 patients were identified. Of these,

39.3% agreed to accept a variety of donated blood products,

9.8% would accept donated packed red blood cells, and

50.1% would accept neither from a homologous donor.

With respect to nonstored autologous blood, 55% of respondents would accept either intraoperative normovolemic hemodilution or transfusion of their own blood obtained by a cell salvage system. No significant differences in responses were noted for any of the above-mentioned variables. */

So about half would accept the blood products. Assuming that the use of these products was not essential at the time the patients were questioned, this percentage would likely be higher given a serious situation. Seems it’s only the nutter purists who refuse this treatment to the end and hopefully they are scarcer than we think. If only they were sterile.

Sorry, aged 14 she changed her mind.

/* Don’t want to derail the thread too much, but are your opinions on people who refuse blood transfusions and chemo the same for people who chose to have a DNR order? */

Me?

‘fc’rs’!

People ‘r’ people.

No, this one was very different for me – such a belief in God that they are prepared to die.

Generally other things eg chemo, NFR orders (or another contentious one – not actively resuscitating very pre-term babies), are for “reasonable” (to me) reasons.

Eg Granny was transfusion dependent for the last couple years of her life. Probably bowel ca, but not investigating was reasonable.

Letting a young adult because their God didn’t want them to use want safe and readily available blood products, to me, is not reasonable. But we did it anyway.

stumpy_seahorse said:

Don’t want to derail the thread too much, but are your opinions on people who refuse blood transfusions and chemo the same for people who chose to have a DNR order?

Just curious

I think with blood transfusions the patient is likely to have a much better outcome. This is not often the case when people are refusing chemo and resuscitation.

Is the disease status of blood dependant on the honesty of the donor, or do they test all donated blood for disease and other defects?

The latter.

OCDC said:

The latter.

Good to know.

If a donor had a genetic defect, could this be passed to the recipient? If not blood could any implant affect the recipient’s DNA?

PermeateFree said:

If a donor had a genetic defect, could this be passed to the recipient? If not blood could any implant affect the recipient’s DNA?

Sort of like if a top pianist who accidentally lost his hands in an accident had a murderer’s hands grafted on and found himself committing macabre acts…?

Neophyte said:

PermeateFree said:

If a donor had a genetic defect, could this be passed to the recipient? If not blood could any implant affect the recipient’s DNA?

Sort of like if a top pianist who accidentally lost his hands in an accident had a murderer’s hands grafted on and found himself committing macabre acts…?

Not quite the direction I had hoped my question would stimulate. No, you have the DNA of two people working together in the same body, to protect and affect body function. Would these two different living tissues affect each other at the cell level?

PermeateFree said:

Neophyte said:

PermeateFree said:

If a donor had a genetic defect, could this be passed to the recipient? If not blood could any implant affect the recipient’s DNA?

Sort of like if a top pianist who accidentally lost his hands in an accident had a murderer’s hands grafted on and found himself committing macabre acts…?

Not quite the direction I had hoped my question would stimulate. No, you have the DNA of two people working together in the same body, to protect and affect body function. Would these two different living tissues affect each other at the cell level?

To answer my question, the following two replies on https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080722190756AA3AwEN seem to the job.

>>The transplanted organ will have the dna of the donor, while the rest of the body has its own dna. This is why transplant patients have to remain on immunosuppression, so that the immune system doesnt attack the new organ. This is behind the reason why patients still have graft v host disease.

I am a stem cell transplant patient, as in bone marrow transplant. My donor was unrelated. My bone marrow and blood carry the dna of donor, while the rest of my body has my own dna. My blood type also changed. Before transplant I was o+ and now am a+.

This situation is featured on many crime shows such as Law and Order and CSI. The criminal is a stem cell transplant patient, so the blood evidence they left at the scene does not match the cheeck swab they took to compare. Most people think that is just tv, but it is infact real.
Source:
I do know that transfused blood dies so that is not an issue, as I cant even count the number of blood products I have had during the transplant and previous 2 years of acute leukemia.

I also believe that this is not an issue with skin grafts, but I could be wrong there. <<

>>Here are some background tidbits:
1. Each person’s DNA is slightly different.
2. The main function of a cell is to produce protein.
3. You are made out of protein and since your DNA is different from others, the proteins you’re made out of are slightly different from others.
4. Viruses and bacteria are also made out of protein.
5. Your body responds to foreign proteins (such as bacteria, viruses and someone else’s organ) by making chemicals called antibodies (actually enzymes) that destroy the foreign proteins. This is the function of your auto-immune system.

The result of all of that is that when a person gets an organ transplant, the new organ’s cells continues to make the same proteins they always made and your body will make antibodies to destroy the new organ. Therefore, the recipient of an organ transplant must take anti-rejection drugs (called cyclosporins).

The donor organ (skin included) does not “spread” its own DNA, it remains within the cells of the donated organ.<<

>>It is also possible to artificially end up with different DNA in some of our cells. Some ways are temporary (like blood transfusions). But others like bone marrow transplants are permanent.<<

And

>>Our blood cells need to be replaced constantly (this is why a blood transfusion only temporarily changes the DNA profile of our blood). What this means in a bone marrow transplant patient is that his or her blood comes from the donor’s stem cells. And so has the donor’s DNA.<<

http://genetics.thetech.org/ask/ask208

However, it still does not answer if these instances will affect body function.

Apparently some transplants, especially bone marrow transplants can not only change the recipients DNA, but also be responsible for body changes and function.

>>Taken together, current research results could support the following scenario after allo-HCT (Figure 1): the engrafted bone marrow produces continuously hematopoietic cells which after their programmed death charge constantly the host environment with donor-derived apoptotic bodies. In this context, the excessive amount of foreign material taken up repetitively by the recipient’s professional and non-professional phagocytic cells may overwhelm their lysosomal capacity and thus part of the donor-derived apoptotic DNA fragments may escape degradation in the cytoplasm, be transferred into the nucleus and integrate within the recipient genome (DNA chimerism). This phenomenon may be more pronounced in GvHD lesions where the generated reactive oxygen species (ROS) from the activated lymphocytes may destabilize and damage lysosomes. Furthermore, the incorporation of the foreign DNA into the host genome could result in physical rearrangements at the site of integration, including point mutations, deletions, interruptions of coding sequences and chromosomal breakages. This “inappropriate” illegitimate integration of donor DNA in epithelial cells after allogeneic HCT may come in light as detection of epithelial cells with donor-derived genotype or as genomic instability in the epithelium and may have implications in the development of secondary cancers.<<

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3084955/