Slashdot Mirror


All Blood Converted to Type O?

UnanimousCoward writes "The BBC is reporting that scientists claim to have discovered a technique to convert all blood into Type O with the discovery of an enzyme that can strip the A and B antigens. This has implications to transform the stored blood supply into transfusable blood for all. It does not address the RH negative issue, however."

31 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Damn. by Stanistani · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I can't sell my rare blood at a premium. It was my only worthwhile body fluid since they shut down the saliva banks.

  2. No RH, no problem... for me. by el+americano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It does not address the RH negative issue, however

    OK, so not everyone would be a universal recipient, but most people would be. 85% of the US population (apologies to the international community.

    --
    Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx
  3. O negative, eh? by arthurh3535 · · Score: 4, Informative

    While I won't mind the ability of people to donate to me, the benefit is actually pretty amazing. O Negative is the preferred donor type, as (IIRC) anyone can accept it, but no other blood type works for us poor O Neg's.

    So this technology could literally save my life!

    --
    No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
  4. Re:That's great until... by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

    Until we find that new disease that only destroys type O blood.

    I wouldn't worry about it. This is only for Type-O transfusions. Since a transfusion doesn't change your blood type (it just supplements your existing plasma until your body can manufacture sufficient replacement quantities), you won't have to worry about those "new diseases". Unless you're normally O-negative, that is...
  5. Synthetic Blood by gears6556 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm actually surprised that we haven't developed synthetic blood before now. We've known about blood types for 100 years and I keep expecting to see a machine producing blood cells in the news any day now.

    Provided with the proper nutrients couldn't we keep a cell alive and dividing to have an unlimited supply?

    Something I didn't know before that I learned from the article: Anyone can receive type O blood without risk.

    Great post!

    1. Re:Synthetic Blood by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not entirely, there is such a thing as graft Vs host, whereby if the recipient receives too much blood the donor blood can attack the person's body. Yes you can strip the white cells, but this is slow and costly, the former prohibits doing it at time of need, the latter from doing it "just in case". Not normally an issue except when massive bleeding due to extreme trauma or bleeding disorder are present as below.

      As the father of a type O son with hemophilia this is awesome news. Opens up a much wider source of blood should the worst happen, especially since my wife and I are neither type O, and my father in law, while type O is also hemophilic.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:Synthetic Blood by jimstapleton · · Score: 5, Interesting

      blood is a horribly complex substance.

      In labs, there are several growth mediums made from cow blood (remove the red blood cells as well as several other factors). They can't be properly synthesized because of how complex it is, and that's even after the most complex stuff is removed.

      It's not suprising at all that we can't synthesize it, but it's nice that we can "produce" type O from other types.

      --
      34486853790
      Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
    3. Re:Synthetic Blood by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Something I didn't know before that I learned from the article: Anyone can receive type O blood without risk

      I got that from junior high biology. Actual issues are more complicated when you get in deep, of course. One oddball is that you can usually survive 1 non-matching transfusion, even if it's incompatible. After that your immune system is 'primed', much like for a vaccination, and will attack a second transfusion with extreme prejudice, likely resulting in your death.

      And we are testing at least one blood substitute. The last one I read about(sorry, dead tree article), was intended for use in ambulances, which can't normally carry blood. Unfortuantly, it actually performed worse than saline IV's when it came to patient survival.

      As for simply cloning a blood supply, it's difficult because you'd have to clone marrow, as blood cells no longer have a nucleous. Not insurmountable at this point, but currently unable to compete with donated blood.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:Synthetic Blood by WhyDoYouWantToKnow · · Score: 4, Informative
      There have been attempts to synthesize RBC's (red blood cells). The linked article discuses a current synthetic blood product. While there are many advantages, there are still a number of issues to overcome before this becomes a viable alternative to RBC transfusions.

      http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/BI108_2005_G roups/10/webpages/HBOClink.htm

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex. I could pinch them."
      Marvin the Martian
    5. Re:Synthetic Blood by milamber3 · · Score: 3, Informative

      First off, it's the red blood cells that are important in the majority of transfusions so that is why the lack of a nucleus is pointed out by the gp post. Secondly, blood cells are created in the marrow so I'm not sure what your point is about development. Some blood cells do mature in other places (e.g. thymus and spleen) but you're not going to be getting any blood if you try to grow new cells out of a tissue besides the marrow.

    6. Re:Synthetic Blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You are such a pessimist. Is your blood type B-negative?

    7. Re:Synthetic Blood by norton_I · · Score: 3, Informative

      Clinical trials recently finished for Polyheme by Northfield Labs, which takes expired blood and polymerizes the hemoglobin to make a long lasting, oxygen carying substitute for saline, which is currently used in amulences to maintain blood pressure but does not carry oxygen. It also showed the potential for a superiority to blood in massive trauma situations since it avoids the immune response.

      Unfortunately, the initial reports from the trials failed to show even non-inferiority over saline, though there were multiple issues of coding errors by the 3rd party data analysis company, and they are in the process of reviewing the database to see if their conclusions were correct.

      The work is very hard since you have to get FDA approval to do non-consent trials of an experimental procedure.

      There are other procedures under development that use non-human blood as the hemoglobin source, but they are not to testing phases yet, and there are some additional problems that need to be solved to avoid rejection in those cases.

    8. Re:Synthetic Blood by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      As milamber3 said, it's the red blood cells they need, followed by platelets. If they could remove everything else, leaving a saline/glucose solution with rbc and platelets, they'd likely do it. Heck, there's situations where they'd want to remove the platelets as well.

      In an emergency situation you wouldn't be worried about the nutritional substances. There it's about keeping oxygen flow up until they get to the hospital. Heck, with a working artificial blood substitute if that means they gotta run 5 gallons through you, they can do it.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    9. Re:Synthetic Blood by empaler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've always held that being blood type AB is probably one of the biggest fortunes of my life. Of course, like all other privileges, it should be shared, and even though I can get tap water in my veins and my body won't reject it, I donate (note: not sell) willingly and regularly to help others. In the end, if they start running low, it won't affect me if I get run down in that time, but that'd just mean I'd be taking blood that could help others.

    10. Re:Synthetic Blood by chooks · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually graft vs. host is due to lymphocytes of the donor attacking the cells of the recipient and does not directly have to do with blood volume (although obviously, the more blood you get, the more foreign lymphocytes you will get). In most people this is not a big deal b/c the immune system of the recipient can handle the foreign lymphocytes appropriately. However in immunodeficient individuals (or young people with underdeveloped immune systems) this is not good, since they do not have the ability to protect themselves against the donor immune cells.

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
    11. Re:Synthetic Blood by Thwaites · · Score: 3, Informative

      Just an FYI ...

      You're correct about the marrow and liver creating RBC's. The other organ is the spleen (as you mentioned); however, the spleen only creates RBC's (haematopoeisis) up until around the 5th or 6th month of gestation. After that, the spleen behaves like an recycling plant, returning the components of RBCs undergoing apoptosis (controlled cell death) to the body.

      The more you know!

  6. Blood made suitable for all by sas-dot · · Score: 5, Informative
    Here more info from Nature

    Scientists have discovered enzymes that can efficiently convert blood groups A, B and AB into the 'universal' O group -- which can be given to anyone but is always in short supply.

    The two novel glycosidase enzymes were identified in bacteria by an international team led by Henrik Clausen of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. The researchers hope that the enzymes will both improve the erratic supplies of blood around the world, and also the safety of transfusions. Clinical trials to test the safety and effectiveness of their converted blood are being planned.

    The ABO blood-type system is based on the presence or absence of the sugar-based antigens 'A' and 'B' on red blood cells. Type O blood cells have neither A nor B antigens, so may be safely transfused into anyone. But types A, B and AB blood do, and cause life-threatening immune reactions if they are given to patients with a different blood group. The bacterial glycosidase enzymes strip these antigens away from A, B and AB blood.

    The idea of such antigen-stripping goes back to the early 1980s, with the discovery of an enzyme in coffee beans that removes B antigens from red blood cells1. Early-stage clinical trials showed that the converted blood could be safely transfused into individuals of different blood groups; no traces of enzyme or antigen remained to cause reactions2. But the enzyme reaction was far too inefficient to make large-scale conversion practical.

    Clausen's team screened 2,500 extracts from different bacteria and fungi for their ability to cleave off A and B antigens. The newly discovered bacterial 'B' enzyme is nearly 1,000 times more efficient then the coffee-bean B enzyme -- the additional discovery of an enzyme to remove A antigens means that all blood types can now be converted. The work is reported in Nature Biotechnology3.
    (snip)

  7. Re:dem Jap's is kuh-RAZY! by Spudtrooper · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder what blood type Chuck Norris has?

    Diesel.
  8. Duh by Scott+Lockwood · · Score: 4, Informative

    It does not address the RH negative issue, however.

    Duh. Rh factor is a combination of several different genes. Blood type isn't controlled by those.

    Also, it should be noted that, unlike what several of the replies thus far seem to think, this won't change your blood type - it will only alter blood that has already been removed from the body for future transfusion. Your body will still produce blood of whatever type you normally produce. Also, it basically has the added implication of making more than just O neg the universal donor. After all, if I can 'strip' A, and B off of cells, then A neg, B neg, and AB neg also become universal donors.
    --
    But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
  9. I am O- by jlowery · · Score: 4, Funny

    All bow before me, The Universal Donor!

    --
    If you post it, they will read.
  10. More than ABO and RhD blood groups by kenrick · · Score: 5, Informative

    Although ABO and RhD grouping systems are the most well-known and the most important, there are a myriad of other blood groups (about 29 last time I checked) that are of relevance when it comes to crossmatching blood for a patient.

    Whilst this potentially is a great step forward, as always with biomedical headlines, it's not the be-all and end-all.

    --
    Not a member of the General Public
  11. Bad News for Vamps by travdaddy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bad news for Vampires, Type A is the tastiest. So much for just going to the blood bank for meals!

    --
    Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
  12. In the Meantime by necro81 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Naturally, before this sees widespread clinical use, it'll have to go through a very stringent set of studies, tests, trials, and approvals. So, it may well be 5-10 years before this sees even pilot-program use. Even once in place, this process won't lessen the demand for blood of all types, merely make the blood supply more available.

    So, in the meantime, everyone who is able should at least consider donating blood. It is fast, easy, and (nearly) painless. Many may object to the exclusion criteria used by the Red Cross and other organizations, but the overwhelming majority of eligible donors simply do not give. Chances are good that, at some point in your life, you too will need a blood transfusion.

    Find a blood drive near you.

    1. Re:In the Meantime by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Acatully, I stopped giving blood regularly about 10 years ago. I used to give every two months until I had some blood work done for a physical that revealed I was suffering from low ferritin levels (stored iron, as I understood it). The doctor recommended several tests, but after hearing that I gave blood regularly sugessted that I stop for 6-8 months and get re-tested. My ferritin levels came back to normal. I've given very sproadically since then.

      BTW - does anyone know if there is a publically availble (and layman-readable) list of medications which would cause your blood to be rejected? I usually try to schedule when I've not been taking anything for at least 2 weeks, but as one grows older the periods of time when I'm (a) available and (b) haven't taken a single medication for 2 weeks or more prior are starting to occur with lower frequency.

      It's not that I mind going, but if I'm going to spend an hour and a half of my time, I'd rather not have some techician decide later that my bag goes in the trash 'cause I had heartburn last week.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  13. Re:Half solution by tripa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Half solution is not a solution!
    It's a full solution to the half problem.
    Is half a problem not a problem?
  14. What about allergy to the enzyme? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Interesting

    you can usually survive 1 non-matching transfusion, even if it's incompatible. After that your immune system is 'primed', much like for a vaccination, and will attack a second transfusion with extreme prejudice, likely resulting in your death.

    Which brings up the issue of whether the body would develop an immunity to the enzyme, potentially producing a fatal anaphylactic reaction upon a future transfusion.

    On the other hand, if the enzyme remains in the serum rather than attaching to the red cells the reaction would not produce the fatal clumping. Meanwhile the allergy to the enzyme, even if severe, could be handled by other drugs...

    Which would also suppress the immune system somewhat - in a hospital "superbug" environment. So artificial type-O will likely remain an emergency measure, and type-O donors will remain in demand.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:What about allergy to the enzyme? by Telephone+Sanitizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In fact, enzymes are just protein chains and allergies are frequently reactions to foreign proteins so it is a very legitimate concern.

  15. The author of the article is confused about RH - by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 3, Informative

    The author of the article doesn't seem to understand that 'X negative' is synonymous with 'Type X, RH negative' where X can be A, B, AB or O. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_type The positive or negative in a blood type refers to the blood being either positive or negative for the Rhesus (RH) Factor. So there is no such thing as being AB-positive but negative for the RH factor. The preceeding is an oxymoron. Since the author of the article evidently does not understand this, the whole article is unclear and not to be trusted. Either the treated blood is ok for everyone ( both the A, B and also the RH antigens are removed by the enzyme ) or the enzymes remove A and B antigens but not RH antigens. In that case, the blood is not universally safe. Given the author's confusion, I would not hazard to guess which the actual case is.

    --
    ...
  16. A couple of answers... by teidou · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My day job is to run a blood bank.

    The enzymes discussed in the article are the next step in 25+ years working toward the goal of making blood universally compatible. The enzymes are years and years away from routine use, if they ever do make it to market. Offhand, major questions that need to be addressed include: Does it *really* work? Is the process cost-effective at manufacturing scales? Is it safe? Does the enzyme affect other proteins so people make antibodies?

    Conversion of non-O RBCs to group O RBCs will make them more widely compatible, and may alleviate the shortage of group O RBCs, but does not affect Rh compatibility or the compatibility of platelets or of FFP. We would still have shortages of these products even when the process is up and running, and, so, we still need people to donate.

    There are a number of guesses, comments, and half-truths posted above. I'll do my best to answer specific (on-topic!) questions posted as replies to this comment.

    Teidou.

    1. Re:A couple of answers... by teidou · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're not far off!

      In the US, the FDA establishes minimal eligibility criterea. Most health adults who are in reasonably good health (e.g. within 20% of their ideal body weight) are eligible to donate. Deferrals exist for viral hepatits, HIV, behaviour which places one at risk for HIV (e.g. exchanging money or drugs for sex), and some travel (e.g. an extended trip to rural South America gets a one year delay for possible risk of malaria).

      Only a few medications defer one from donating; unfortunately, any active infection or medication for infection is a reason to delay donation as there is a chance that the infection could be transmitted by blood transfusion.

      Your local blood center should be willing to help you with specific eligibility questions.

      I hope that was clear, if not, do let me know!

      Teidou