{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016414141414141416, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013257575757575758, 'mean_word_length': 5.522633744855967, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Safety of blood donations following a natural disaster

To evaluate the relative safety of blood donations given in response to a major disaster, donor demographics and infectious disease test results were compared for donations made during the 10 days following the October 17, 1989, San Francisco Bay Area earthquake and those made during the preceding 6 months. These comparisons were made for donations given to the regional blood center in the area that was immediately affected by the disaster (Irwin Memorial Blood Centers) and for those given in an unaffected region (Los Angeles/Orange Counties Region, American Red Cross Blood Services). The rate of donation increased more than 200 percent during the 5 days following the earthquake in both the disaster‐affected and unaffected regions. Both the disaster‐affected and unaffected regions observed significant increases in the proportions of donations by first‐time donors, by persons aged 20 to 39 years, and by women. The rates of confirmed positivity for infectious disease markers for post‐earthquake donations did not differ significantly from rates for homologous donations given during the preceding 6 months, particularly when the rates were adjusted for the increased representation of first‐time donors. Approximately 39 percent of post‐earthquake first‐time donors gave blood again within the following 6‐month period. It is concluded that donations given after major disasters are essentially as safe as routine donations and that active efforts to recruit these donors again can be undertaken without reservation