One million blood donors needed to meet demand and avoid 'red alert' shortage, NHS warns
The NHS has warned the UK needs one million regular blood donors to maintain supply and avoid a "red alert" - which means supplies are so low there is a threat to public safety.
Last July, officials issued for stocks of O negative and O positive blood after hit London hospitals.
Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) said blood stocks have remained low since.
Dr Jo Farrar, NHSBT chief executive, said: "Our stocks over the past 12 months have been challenging. If we had a million regular donors, this would help keep our stocks healthy - you'd truly be one in a million.
"Please book an appointment today, experience how good it feels to save lives, and come and do it again in a few months."
The NHSBT added just 2% of the population - under 800,000 people - sustained the whole of England's blood supply over the past 12 months.
It said there is a "critical" need for more donors who have O negative blood, the universal type used in emergencies or when a patient's blood type is unknown.
It is typically carried by air ambulances and emergency vehicles - and makes up around 16% of hospital blood orders.
There is also a need for more black donors, who are more likely to have specific blood types which can help treat people with sickle cell disease.
Read more from Sky News:
Health Minister Baroness Merron said: "The NHS is in urgent need of more lifesaving blood donors from all backgrounds.
"We are working alongside NHS Blood and Transplant to make donating blood easier than ever before, opening up new donor centres and making appointments available closer to home."
Women can donate blood once every four months and men can do so once every three.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The cost of caring for a loved one
It's Carers' Week, when we're encouraged to recognise the effort put in by unpaid carers looking after their loved ones. As more people live longer and need more care, it should also be a chance to consider what we'd do if we found ourselves in this position, and someone we love needed care. You might want to step in and help, so it's worth understanding the potential costs — from the extras you'd need at home to the cost of any lost income. In many cases, the whole family will need to have a frank conversation about how to support the person offering care, as well as the person needing it. If your family member needs professional care, the question of costs becomes even more pressing. On average, you'll pay about £50,000 a year for residential care and £66,000 for a nursing home, but the averages hide some big costs, and plenty of people pay well over £100,000 a year. You may be able to get some help from the state, but there's a process you need to go through first. It starts with a "needs assessment", done by your local authority, who will work out what care the person needs. Read more: How much does it cost to become a driver in the UK? Next you go through a financial assessment, which looks at the assets of the person needing care. If they're getting care at home, or they're in a care home temporarily, this assessment won't include the value of their own home. If they're going into a care home permanently, it may include their home, unless someone from specific groups also lives there. This includes a partner, any of their children under the age of 18, or a relative who is disabled or over the age of 60. In England, if they have assets of less than £14,250, the council may pay for care — although it will also take their income into account. If they have between £14,250 and £23,250, they will have to contribute to the cost of care, but if they have assets over £23,250, they'll need to foot the entire bill. If your loved one has complex medical needs, they should be assessed for NHS Continuing Healthcare. This can pay for all their care in some cases, but don't assume they'll qualify. It's not enough to have caring needs around the clock, they'll have to have very high medical needs too, requiring regular intervention from medical experts and professionals. If you end up needing to pay for care for someone, there are a few benefits that will help. If they are over state pension age, they could get the attendance allowance — or pension age disability in Scotland. However, this will barely scratch the surface of costs. It means you may need to speak to anyone in your life who might need care, to see what preparations they've put in place. A piece of research we did a while ago found that fewer than half of people thought their loved ones could pay for care from their savings. It means you should consider their pension too. A guaranteed monthly pension income will go towards the cost of care. If they're using pension drawdown, they may have money in their pension pot that can be used too. For younger people, this often makes sense as a way to save for your own care needs, especially if you're saving into a workplace pension and your employer is helping to build the pot. Read more: What is the Pension Investment Review? However, the value of the property will often need to be used. Some people will rent the family home out to cover fees, although this is risky because rental income isn't guaranteed, and will be depleted by maintenance and repairs. You can consider equity release to free up some of the value in the property, but this is expensive. There will be a set up cost, and usually any interest on the loan will roll up, and needs to repaid when the property is sold. There's also the option of a deferred payment arrangement with the local council, which is a bit like equity release, but run by the council and slightly less expensive. But for many people, the most sensible option ends up being selling up. You might pay fees from the lump sum as you go along, but it's worth considering an immediate needs care annuity instead. These pay a fixed amount to the care home every month for the rest of their life, and tend to cover the gap between pension income and the cost of care. Talking to your loved ones about care, and how they'd pay for it, is difficult, but it's a far easier conversation well in advance, when they have time to make a plan. It's much more stressful to try to discuss this at the point they already need care and are starting to panic about how they're going to pay for more: How to tell if you're rich Should people keep working until later in life? How to get your children to move outError while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
Around 1,000 doctors have written to MPs urging them to vote against the assisted dying Bill describing it as 'simply not safe'. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments. But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
King Charles' Cancer Is Incurable, Bombshell Report Suggests
King Charles' will die 'with' but not 'of' cancer, a bombshell report claimed Saturday. The report essentially confirms long-standing rumors that the king's cancer is considered manageable but ultimately incurable, which is the case for many older individuals afflicted by the disease. Charles is 76. The report will be unwelcome in the palace, as it will reignite speculation that the king's health is in a delicate state, rumors that were rekindled when Prince Harry said in a recent BBC interview that he didn't know how long his father had left to live. Charles' aides have consistently briefed reporters that he is, broadly speaking, winning his battle against cancer, and the king himself recently said he was on 'the other side' of the health crisis. The king is back to essentially running a full diary after being diagnosed with cancer last year, albeit with some modifications. The report, by the respected royal writer and associate editor of the U.K. Daily Telegraph, Camilla Tominey, also claimed that Charles will never move into Buckingham Palace due to his health struggles. 'The talk now is that he may die 'with' cancer, but not 'of' cancer following a rigorous treatment program,' she wrote. A spokesperson for the king declined to comment. Tominey, who was the first to break the news about Prince Harry and Meghan dating and also about the latter's row with Kate Middleton, added that planning for Charles' 80th birthday in 2028, while 'very tentative,' is going ahead. Tominey also claimed that Charles and Harry could be publicly reunited at the Invictus Games, in Birmingham in 2027, with palace aides quietly investigating whether the event could provide a suitable backdrop for a long-awaited reconciliation. It is understood officials hope any reconciliation would include Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. The king last saw the children in 2022. Harry has said he can't bring his family safely to the U.K. and hinted some powerful palace figures want him dead. Intriguingly, Tominey suggests that a reconciliation might be considered because of the negative impact the narrative of estrangement is having on the king's reputation. She writes: 'There is an awareness that the impasse cannot continue forever, not least if it starts to reflect badly on the king.' Prince Harry said, in a bitter interview with the BBC following a comprehensive legal defeat on his security arrangements, that he does not know how long his cancer-hit father has left to live because the king won't speak to him. Harry also said he won't bring his family to the U.K., blamed his father for his security being reduced after leaving the royal family, and said he had 'forgiven' those family members who had hurt him. He added, 'Some members of my family will never forgive me for writing a book but I would love reconciliation with my family.' The prince continued, 'There is a lot of control and ability in my father's hands. Ultimately, this whole thing could be resolved through him.' Appearing emotional, Harry said, 'There's no point in continuing to fight anymore. As I said, life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has. He won't speak to me because of this security stuff, but it would be nice to reconcile.'
