Breathing on a ventilator, and without a drop of transfused
blood flowing in his veins, Jackson gradually began to respond
to the treatment. Within four days his blood count had risen
significantly. Soon after, he was shaking his head in disbelief
and telling his doctors, "If it wasn't for this, I wouldn't be
here." It was around then that the first hospital called to ask
whether Jackson was dead. With undisguised satisfaction, Shander
told them, "He's not only not dead, but he's well and ready for
discharge, and he'll soon be about his usual business."
If Shander, 49, an Israeli-born physician who majored in Asian
languages as an undergraduate, is passionate about anything, it
is blood. Not only because it is, as Goethe observed, "a very
special juice," the fluid pumped by our hearts through arteries,
veins and capillaries, and without which the body's cells would
be starved of oxygen and nutrients; nor only because he knows
blood transfusions save lives; nor simply because 70% of those
transfusions are administered by anesthesiologists.
What concerns Shander most is how blood has become a convenient
tool for his fellow anesthesiologists, and how it is sometimes
used cavalierly when it need not be given at all. According to
some estimates, 25% of U.S. transfusions are unnecessary. There
are also indications that patients cannot tolerate levels of
hemoglobin as high as previously thought and that young people
especially have a built-in reserve of blood. These findings,
Shander believes, support the need for a more sparing use of
blood products. As one of the directors of the Englewood
institute, he is convinced that withholding blood is a viable
and preferable choice for most patients. It not only benefits
many patients but also forces surgeons to pay closer attention
to technique and tests their willingness to depart from tradition.
| Page 1 | Page 2
| Page 3 | Page 4 |
Page 5 | Page 6 |
|