eMeS
Member
Recent comment on why we had the "Infected Blood Scandal" seems to be that our policy makers "didn't know" that blood sourced from the US was risky at the time. My memory is that there were serious warnings at around the time when it started. Is my memory at fault? (I graduated in 1962, so I think I've been around long enough, and I'm sure I was brighter in the 60s than I am now!)