this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
133 points (94.6% liked)
Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
2290 readers
98 users here now
Health: physical and mental, individual and public.
Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.
See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.
Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.
Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.
Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.
Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think they were talking about how older generations need to donate more. My take on the article and their comment was that younger generations are being asked to "step up" and help the country/people, but in return get shafted on life.
House and food prices doubled over the past 2 years while pay stagnated. Medical bills soar without any signs of universal healthcare being implemented in my lifetime. Student loan debt was temporarily deferred, but now might even need to be reversed with interest. The most the Red Cross can do is say, "We'll give you a shirt if you donate! And maybe a chance to win Super Bowl tickets!" But in return hospitals can charge $219 for the blood.
Overall it's demoralizing. While people should donate because it's needed, it's just a symptom of a larger problem of young people (adults participating in society though) being expected to keep giving without having their voice heard.
I hear what you're saying, but young people like us not donating blood only ends up screwing us later. We're not hurting "the olds" by not donating blood. The point of the article is that when people donate blood when they're young, they tend to continue doing it more throughout their lives.
If you're looking for personal rewards, it's a free way to reduce the microplastics in your blood stream, of which young people tend to have more. And it's just the right thing to do. This seems like a fairly poignant example of misplaced, impotent intergenerational anger.
Not donating blood isn't how this gets resolved. But, I do understand how symbolically this feels weird. Nevertheless, as I recall, people under 40 are more likely to suffer injuries involving massive blood loss (guns being the #1 cause of death for people under 18 surely plays into that), and reducing the available blood supply doesn't seem to get us anywhere.
Oh, sorry. I'm not saying I think its a conscious decision to screw people over or that people only donate since they get something out of it. I think it's just one more social responsibility that gets lost under the rest of everything going on.
I'm hearing it better now and generally agree. Thanks for clarifying. It sucks that it is that way, and it sucks that things being sucky makes good people more sucky. But I'm not blaming, just bummed.
Student loan debt deferment was a joke as it merely shifted the problem down the road.
The system that charges 70k for a four year degree still exists, maybe we should take care of the gushing artery instead of continually giving unsustainable blood bags to them. No pun intended for the current thread.