Requests for blood from unvaccinated donors harm patients

A hospital in the US has had to comply with an unusual request for patients requiring blood transfusions: that they come from donors who have not been vaccinated against covid-19. This led to delays in treatment that caused a life-threatening reaction in one individual.

“These demands have often been driven by misinformation about the safety of vaccines and the blood supply, rather than evidence-based transfusion concerns,” he says. Jeremy Jacobs at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. “I think one of the most important broader points is that the community blood supply is already highly regulated and scrutinized, and there is no evidence that asking for unvaccinated blood increases the safety of transfusions.”

Jacobs and his colleagues analyzed blood donations that took place at the Vanderbilt center between January 2024 and December 2025. They found that 15 patients — or their caregivers — requested a direct donation, when blood is donated by a chosen person, often a relative, rather than drawn from a blood bank.

Direct donation is only permitted in the UK and Australia in exceptional circumstances, such as when an individual has a rare blood type and a suitable blood bank donor is not available. In the United States, the practice is more widely permitted but discouraged, with policies varying widely between centers.

The researchers found that all 15 patients donated directly because they wanted blood from a donor they knew had not been vaccinated. That was specifically against covid-19, says Jacobs. Blood banks do not record or communicate the vaccination status of anonymized donors.

These demands led to treatment delays that put patients at risk. In the most extreme case, the patient’s level of hemoglobin – the protein that carries oxygen around the body – has reached a critical level that can cause organ damage and failure. Another patient developed anemia.

“Direct donation is operationally more complex than using a routine blood supply,” says Jacobs. “It requires additional coordination, collection, processing, tracking and timing.”

Although blood is carefully screened before transfusion, direct donation is also associated with a higher risk of infection. This is because they are often given on a one-off basis, rather than from repeat donors in the community who may be known to blood banks and may be particularly wary of exposing them to infection.

Direct donations surged during the HIV/AIDS epidemic during the 1980s and early 1990s, but their importance rose again when covid-19 mRNA vaccines became available. These involve injecting part of SARS-CoV-2’s genetic code into someone to make their cells produce one of its proteins. Their immune system then reacts and destroys the cells with this protein. If an individual later catches SARS-CoV-2, their immune system is triggered to fight it.

Research has repeatedly shown that these vaccines are safe and highly effective, but misinformation incorrectly linked them to fertility problems and other health problems. Conspiracy theories have even falsely stated that these vaccines contain a microchip and affect your DNA.

In 2025 a studies confirmed that accepting blood donations from people vaccinated against covid-19 is safe. “Requests for unvaccinated blood reflect a wider uncertainty about vaccines among parts of the public, rather than any recognized risk of transfusion,” he says Ash Toy at the University of Bristol in Great Britain.

And the problem isn’t just at Vanderbilt’s center. This was reported by the Welsh Blood Service last year people ask about the vaccination status of blood donors. The UK government was also refused a partition request blood donation according to vaccination status. But in Oklahoma, lawmakers proposed that patients should have it access to unvaccinated blood.

“These requests illustrate how misinformation can create a real operational burden for patients, hospitals and blood providers,” says Jacobs. “At the same time, they emphasize the importance of addressing patients’ concerns with respect and thoughtfulness, even when those concerns are not supported by evidence.”

topics: