This paper is an outgrowth of a study undertaken to determine the current procedures and protocols for handling the recall/withdrawal of blood products in Ontario and beyond [37, 38] . In this we adopt a quasifoundational position, with the experiences and views of respondents being seen in the answers to our questions (see Additional File 1: Appendix 1) from which exemplars in the form of quotations are drawn (see [39] ). We undertook a number of one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders in the blood supply and management arena, both within and beyond Ontario. Interviews were conducted with individuals from Canadian Blood Services, Héma-Québec, Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (Ontario), relevant staff at hospitals and hospital laboratories, as well as blood product recipients. These recipients were not professional or credentialized experts but it was felt that their experience of the blood transfusion system might add a different perspective to our investigation. Within hospitals, we interviewed physicians (both transfusion medicine physicians and physicians who do not work in the transfusion service but who use blood products), hospital administrators, CEOs, risk managers and public relations personnel. Within hospital laboratories, we interviewed managers, technologists and transfusion safety officers. In other words, we interviewed in total 45 professionals involved in blood supply -regulators, suppliers, treatment individuals and agencies, administrators, laboratory personnel and transfusion recipients. The project's steering committee (composed of individuals from the blood supplier, hospitals and laboratories) helped to identify individuals from the blood supply and management arena who had experience of blood product recalls and withdrawals and who could therefore be anticipated to be able to provide rich data. This purposeful sampling was augmented by asking those individuals interviewed to suggest others whom they thought it would be helpful to interview. We employed a multilevel sampling framework in that we wished to compare the perceptions of those with potentially different stances on blood risk management (see [40] ). We recognise that the sample size in our study limits the generalisability of our findings and interpretations, and it may indeed be exploratory with our practice suggestions being essentially that-suggestive. Table 1 shows the number of participants interviewed within each category. As well as interviews, copies of written relevant rules and procedures pertaining to recalls/withdrawals were obtained. And we may askdoes opinion converge on the type and nature of the risk?