Singapore has long relied on the generosity of strangers. Since 1946, blood for transfusion has been collected from voluntary, non‐remunerated donors—a model endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and operated locally by the Health Sciences Authority together with the Singapore Red Cross. In 2025, the programme collected nearly 128,000 whole blood and 8,000 blood product donations, distributed across five blood banks. It is, by any reasonable measure, one of the world’s better‐functioning altruistic systems.

The Healthpoints incentive scheme is a step in the right direction. The spirit of goodwill can be largely preserved: altruists can continue to donate for free, or redirect their compensation to charity, as the Healthpoints scheme permits.

Three objections to incentives are typically raised. The first concerns donor safety. Blood and plasma donation in a properly regulated system is extremely safe; risks are minimised by medical screening, deferral intervals and volume limits. Singapore already enforces these standards, and would continue to. The second objection concerns the safety of the supply. The historical worry—that paid donors conceal infections—is addressed today by universal nucleic‐acid testing, behavioural questionnaires and donor deferral registries. Modern screening does not care whether a donor was paid. It cares whether the blood is safe.

The third objection is moral: that payment constitutes undue influence, coercion or exploitation, particularly of the financially disadvantaged. But coercion, properly understood, involves pressuring someone to do something against their interests. Donating blood under medical supervision is not against a healthy adult’s interests; it is a low‐risk act that helps strangers (indeed, in many cases, it is life‐saving) and now, modestly, helps the donor. Such modest incentives do not “cloud judgement” in a manner that constitutes undue influence. And donors are not exploited when the risks to them are properly controlled.

Singapore is right to incentivise blood donation—at home, transparently, and under its own ethical control—rather risk importing moral compromise from abroad. Blood donation is a potentially life‐saving act. The safety of the supply and of the donor must be paramount concerns. But the Healthpoints initiative achieves both of these aims. Properly regulated financial incentives can save lives without compromising the safety of donors or recipients.