English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

4 answers

that is worse way or expesive

2006-12-11 07:19:27 · answer #1 · answered by pranmaster 2 · 0 0

When an organ is replaced, it's going to be there for many years. The body's defense systems recognise the cells as being foreign and will try to attack the organ without the anti-rejection drugs.

When someone has a blood transfusion, it's just to replace lost blood until the body is able to produce more by itself. Blood in the body is replaced regularly by new cells with the old ones being broken down, so it's only a temporary situation. Couple that with the fact that transfusion blood will be stripped of all immune-response-causing parts and will be as closely matched to a patient's own blood type as possible, it gives the body very little reason to try and attack it as there is so little difference.

2006-12-11 22:17:39 · answer #2 · answered by junkmonkey1983 3 · 0 0

A person is given a type of blood that is compatible with his or hers, so there is no need for anti-rejection drugs. There's nothing to reject. Organs, on the other hand, can sometimes be rejected by one's body, so anti-rejection drugs are necessary.

2006-12-11 07:16:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

if the blood cells aren't the proper type then you would get sick.

2006-12-14 16:49:21 · answer #4 · answered by jloertscher 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers