Using enzymes produced by a bacteria that almost everyone has in their gut, researchers have removed the antigens from red blood cells that determine blood type, putting us within reach of producing universal donor blood.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/15069736

Bacterial enzyme strips away blood types to create universal donor blood

“Researchers at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and Lund University, Sweden, have used enzymes produced by a common gut bacteria to remove the A and B antigens from red blood cells, bringing them one step closer to creating universal donor blood.”

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      292·
      7 months ago

      Well in an emergency, once can be the difference between decades of life or near-immediate death, so I’d still call this a massive win…

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          353·
          7 months ago

          Fair enough. I guess I’ll stop being excited about the good news and instead focus on how it could have been better 😉

          • littleblue✨@lemmy.worldEnglish
            934·
            7 months ago

            Don’t whine. You were presented with a learning opportunity and your reflex was to be shitty? That’s not very mature, son. Do better.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              293·
              7 months ago

              I’m not whining, just teasing the one who, in spite of agreeing that it’s definitely a win, saw it necessary to yuck on everyone’s yum in UPLIFTING News of all places. 🙄

              This group is meant as a more hopeful counterweight to all the negative stuff in all other news groups and, for some, help not feeling that the world is only irrevocably fucked up. To be a wet blanket in such a group is a SPECIAL level of grouchiness lol

              • Fedizen@lemmy.worldEnglish
                112·
                7 months ago

                one of the problems with scientific literacy today is that on the web the value of nearly every new study, drug, technique, etc is overstated by both the media and the public. This is probably because overstating things increases engagement.

                Imo things can just be small steps in the right direction and that’s ok.

                • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  71·
                  7 months ago

                  Man, science communication is in a bad spot if all they’re doing is blunting people’s expectations and, as the previous user very aptly mentioned “yucking everyone’s yum”.

                  This is why people make fun of Neal Degrass Tyson, many times his explanations are both pedantic and unnecessary, which I would argue is the same as the comment that started this thread.

                  Especially when what they were talking about was actually listed in the article!

    • AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.worldEnglish
      252·
      7 months ago

      Article

      They specially mention this in the article. It does work on multiple antigens beyond ABO, they even list that there are over 40 blood types that we know of with 300+ antigens.

      Did what you do at a blood bank involve an education or just a name tag, cause they have receptionists and hourly workers at blood banks.

    • glimse@lemmy.worldEnglish
      18·
      7 months ago

      I don’t feel like they were expecting this to change a lot right now - it’s a stepping stone

      bringing them one step closer to creating universal donor blood."

    • Infynis@midwest.socialEnglish
      7·
      7 months ago

      How many people do receive more than one blood transfusion on average? Seems like something that doesn’t happen often, and maybe this could make it easier for the most common uses of donor blood?