Exemption to Blood Law Would Help Ally of Bane

Stepping into a political controversy involving Assemblyman Tom Bane (D-Tarzana), a Sacramento-area state senator has introduced legislation to extend a legal exemption that has helped a Sherman Oaks blood-processing firm sell one of its major products.

Sen. John Doolittle (R-Rocklin) is carrying a bill that would create a three-year exemption from a state law banning the use of blood platelets taken from paid donors. Platelets assist blood clotting during transfusions.

The bill was approved 23-0 on the Assembly Ways and Means Committee’s consent calendar Tuesday. It was sent to the Assembly floor, where it could be heard as early as Friday, but probably not until next week.

State health officials and private blood banks have long opposed use of purchased blood, saying it could contaminate blood supplies because payment attracts indigent donors who are more likely than volunteers to be infected with hepatitis and other diseases. Since 1974 the state has banned the use of purchased blood in transfusions.

In 1986, however, Bane sponsored legislation creating a three-year exemption from the law, allowing the use of purchased blood if volunteer blood was unavailable.

Firm Donates to Bane

Bane’s action touched off controversy because one of the few companies in California that sells platelets from paid donors is HemaCare Corp. HemaCare, located in Bane’s 40th Assembly District, has contributed $4,850 to Bane campaign committees in the past four years.

In addition, HemaCare’s medical director, Dr. Joshua Levy, is a longtime friend of Bane’s and provided important medical referrals when the lawmaker was stricken in 1984 with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a paralytic and sometimes fatal ailment.

Bane also drew fire by ordering a study of the relative safety of purchased and donated blood that would be financed with $400,000 from the state Lupus Appropriations Board. His wife, Marlene, chairs the board and Levy is a member.

Bane and Levy have denied the platelet exemption was designed to benefit HemaCare. They also argue that platelets taken from paid donors are safer than those from volunteers because of screening safeguards and the process used to harvest them, known as hemapheresis.

Under it, enough platelets needed for a complete transfusion can be taken from a single donor. By contrast, most voluntary blood banks must combine blood from as many as 10 donors to get sufficient platelets--which proponents of purchased blood argue increases the chances of contamination by a factor of 10.

But the state Health Services Department counters that studies have shown that paid-donor blood is far more likely to contain the hepatitis virus because payments attract high-risk donors. They also say paid donors are less likely to tell the truth about their medical histories on screening questionnaires.

HemaCare argues that those studies are outdated and irrelevant because its donors are middle-class college students and hospital employees, not Skid Row denizens.

Exemption Expires

A Bane-sponsored exemption for purchased blood expires at the end of this year.

Doolittle said last week that he is carrying the bill because “medically I think it’s a well-established procedure to increase the safety” of blood supplies. “We should be taking advantage of all the wonderful technology . . . that would increase the safety of blood.”

He said donors whose blood is taken through hemapheresis must be paid because the process takes several hours and is “fairly unpleasant.”

Although it still supports voluntary blood donations, the Health Services Department does not oppose Doolittle’s proposal because blood is needed to cover a shortage in Southern California, a spokesman said.

Levy said last week that Bane offered to carry the exemption bill himself about six months ago, but backed off after adverse publicity about his links with the firm.

Times Staff Writer Mark Gladstone contributed to this story.