Talk:Blood type

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.

Additional information: ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. This article is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

Blood type has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess.
GA	rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale
Top	rated as top-importance on the assessment scale

This article was previously a Medicine Collaboration of the Week.

This article was selected on the Medicine portal as one of Wikipedia's best articles related to Medicine.

This article has been improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of quality. Please see its Cleanup Taskforce page for more details on this process, and possible ideas on how you can further improve this article!

	To-do list for Blood type:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Strike through when completed: Here are some tasks you can do: Wikify: Check number, distribution and accuracy of links Verify: Distribution of ABO and Rh Blood types - France "a person's blood type changes through addition or suppression of an antigen in infection or malignancy", Distribution of ABO and Rh Blood types - Australia, "Some front-line military personnel choose to be tattooed with their blood type in case they should need an emergency blood transfusion." "In Nazi Germany research was done to associate B-type blood type with inferior personal characteristics." "B-type blood was relatively common among German Jewish populations." and "This research has since been discredited." "Over 400 different blood group antigens have been found" Distribution of ABO and Rh Blood types - Sweden "blood services in (East Asia) may look to encourage westerners to donate blood" "Duffy blood group is related to immunity against some kinds of malaria, and is more common in ethnic groups from areas with a high incidence of malaria, probably as a result of natural selection." "The Japanese blood type theory of personality is a popular belief that a person's ABO blood type is predictive of their personality, character, and compatibility with others" "Very rarely, a person's blood type changes through addition or suppression of an antigen in infection ..." Expand: Add Japanese, Chinese, Asian countries and perhaps Basque, and others to the blood group table for a more holistic view. Other: Archive talk page

Contents 1 "Powerful" IgM antibodies 2 Duffy antigen and malaria 3 Type O or type 0? 4 AB / A1B / A2B 5 How are you supposed to know...? 6 Reference for type B in Nazi Germany 7 GA review 8 Relative importance of ABO and Rhesus 9 U-negative 10 A "the the" typo

[edit] "Powerful" IgM antibodies

There has been a little debate between Mmoneypenny and myself as to whether to include the term "powerful" in relation to IgM antibodies and blood type. Quoted from my talk page:

"I appreciate that the pentameric structure of IgM makes it bigger than the IgA dimer or IgG monomers. However, I do not believe that IgM is any more powerful than any of the other antibodies and calling it such may confuse laypeople. In fact, IgE might be called even more powerful because it causes immediate life-threatening (Type I hypersensitivity) anaphylaxis. I have seen both conditions (anaphylaxis and immediate transfusion reactions) and the anaphylaxis is by far the scarier. I am therefore removing powerful, but if you feel it should stay, let's start a discussion on the talk page and see what others think."

So, what do others think? --apers0n 21:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

We should stick to the most specific language possible. Powerful does not seem to be the right word. A description why IgM causes a stronger response would be an acceptable substitute. InvictaHOG 00:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It looks like there may be evidence that IgM is both faster in it's immune response and has a significant effect despite only being 6% of total Ig's.

• "Class M (IgM) is a very large type of antibody found in blood plasma. Each molecule is made up of five of the basic Y-shaped molecules. This means that it has five times as many sites that can combine with antigen making the IgM molecule much more powerful than IgG or IgA. IgM is the first to appear in an immune response, as much as a day or two before IgG, but is eventually replaced with IgG antibodies." [1]
• "IgM makes up 6% of the total immunoglobulins in normal individuals. IgM is a very powerful antibody in the fight against foreign invaders. ... IgG makes up 80% of the total immunoglobulins." [2]

Perhaps the wording could be improved to: "The associated anti-A antibodies and anti-B antibodies are usually fast-acting IgM antibodies", but the following sentence may also require revision: "RhD negative individuals can produce powerful IgG antibodies when they are transfused with RhD positive RBCs" --apers0n 05:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hurray! After only a few weeks on wikipedia I am having my first discussion about the use of one word! I guess I just don't think using words such as "powerful", "weak", etc. are suitable for an immunoglobulin. Am I being pedantic? Probably. Does it matter? Probably not. I think my problem is with describing one Ig as powerful, people might wonder if the others aren't as powerful. If the sentence went along the lines of: "Immunoglobulins are a powerful weapon in the fight against disease and IgM is the largest of these immunoglobulins..." (Okay that sentence is bad, but I'm thinking on the hoof here!) As for the two references above, well the first one is from innvista which "began in 1997 as a hotel program" and the second reference goes on to describe IgE as the "miserable" antibody. None of the major (NEJM, Lancet, Nature, BMJ) journals use the word "powerful" when describing IgM and I guess I'm not used to thinking of it as such. Anyway, enough rambling on from me, I'm sure consensus will be reached and thanks for listening. All the best.Mmoneypenny 06:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Language is important - especially as we move forward with attempts to bring this article to featured status. Your contribution and critiques are appreciated! InvictaHOG 07:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

From a textbook on immunology:

"The severity of the reaction depends on the class and amounts of the antibodies involved. Antibodies to the ABO system antigens are usually of the IgM class, they cause agglutination, complement activation and intravascular haemolysis. Other blood groups induce IgG antibodies, and although these agglutinate the cells less well than IgM antibodies they activate Type II hypersensitivity mechanisms and cause red cell destruction. The cell destruction may cause circulatory shock, and the released contents of the red cells can produce acute tubular necrosis of the kidneys." Immunology. Roitt, Brostoff, Male. Churchill Livingstone 1985. p. 20.4

It seems that the agglutination of IgM is stronger, but the nature of the bodily reaction as a result of agglutination of IgG can be more dramatic. Perhaps this could be reworked and added to the article. --apers0n 06:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This seems to be borne out by the Coombs test article (see Section: Enhancement Media).Mmoneypenny 20:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. --apers0n 06:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duffy antigen and malaria

PMID 778616 found that some Duffy negative children have been infected by P. Vivax. The wording in the article, which mentions Fy- as protective should ideally reflect these new findings. --apers0n 18:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Type O or type 0?

It seems that someone has recently changed all (or many?) references to "type O" to instead say "type 0". (They changed the letter 'O' to the number zero). Is this common, or is this simply vandalism? --Stéphane Charette 18:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Here are the diffs, which were done by 195.23.6.3 earlier today. ...but it seems that using zero instead of the letter 'O' may be common in Europe and the USSR (according to ABO blood group system#Nomenclature in Europe former USSR). --Stéphane Charette 18:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AB / A1B / A2B

I wanted to know about Blood Subgroups. I infer from this article that a person from AB group can accept blood of AB group. I'm A1B+ve. Does that mean I can accept blood from A2B as well? Vyas b 18:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

In principle the subgroups of A have the same antigenicity and are therefore compatible, but transfusion based purely on ABO group is only done in an emergency. Should the A subgroup issue be added to this article or the cross-matching article? --apers0n 19:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that A1B can be mistaken for B blood group and this is a problem. A1 is less antigenic than A2. Snowman 00:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that the most obvious place for A1 and A2 is on the ABO blood group page. Snowman 11:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How are you supposed to know...?

How are you supposed to know what blood type you are? Do you just look at the descriptions and if the one fits you, you call it your 'blood type'? Or do you have to go to a doctor and ask? 75.17.15.0 01:09, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

You have to have a blood test. In future you may wish to consider asking the friendly people at the science reference desk who are very helpful and informative (and will answer your question much faster!)Mmoneypenny 10:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference for type B in Nazi Germany

Although evidence exists that type B is comparatively common in Jewish populations, It has not been possible to find enough references for the following statement relating specifically to research in Nazi Germany on type B and personal characteristics, so it has been removed from the article:

• In Nazi Germany research was done to associate B blood type with inferior personal characteristics.[citation needed] Type B blood was relatively common among German Jewish populations. This research has since been discredited.

One reference relating to the discrediting of the research:

Proctor R N (1988). Red Gold. Blood Basics: Blood in War - Protecting German Blood - PBS. Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis. Harvard University Press. Retrieved on November 21, 2006. “'In some cases, it can be ascertained whether or not an illegitimate child is the offspring of a Jewish father, because the Asiatic B blood type is more common among Jews than among Europeans.' Reche conceded that such tests were never conclusive, given that no single blood type was typical among Jews; most Nazi physicians admitted this was the case.” --apers0n 06:50, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

A good article has the following attributes.

1. It is well written.

Reasonably clear.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

There was a citation needed tag in the misc section, but I fixed that.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

It covers the subject well.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

I don't think it is biased in any way.

5. It is stable, i.e. it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of ongoing edit wars.

it is stable.

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

Good figures.

Further suggestions

The sections on transfusion and immune responses to blood incompatibility seemed slightly repetitious. Most of the material in the Misc section should either be deleted or incorporated into the rest of the text.

GA pass, congratulations, good work. TimVickers 20:30, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Most of the paragraphs in the Misc section moved to main text of the page, 2 paragraphs to a new "See also" section, and one paragraph to ABO page. No information lost. Snowman 16:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relative importance of ABO and Rhesus

What is the justification for attaching more importance to the ABO blood group system than the Rhesus group system? [3] This statement could either be justified in terms of what the importance relates to, i.e.

• "The most important of these in relation to blood transfusion is the ABO blood group system and the second most important is the Rhesus blood group system." or rephrased to:
• "The most well-known of these are the ABO blood group system and the Rhesus blood group system."

--apers0n 15:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I can see you point of view and I will change the wording back. I thought that in a general sense that ABO is more important than Rh. Snowman 15:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U-negative

Did we establish what the U blood group was or what U-negative means? Snowman 15:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A "the the" typo

This sentence obviously has a typo (or several), but I'm not completely certain about the correct fix: "The most significant blood groups arise from antigens the the ABO blood group system and the Rhesus blood group system." Skarkkai 22:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

It was a clumsy sentence and it needed fixing. I have rewritten it. Snowman 22:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)