Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should Gay People Be Allowed To Give Blood?  
User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2236 times:

Today I went to a blood drive held by the American Red Cross. It was my first time so I didn't really know what to expect. They handed me forms to fill out and I did so. One of the questions was "Are you a male who has had sex with another male since 1977?" Wanting to answer truthfully, I responded "yes". My number was called and I went to the woman who proceeded to ask me questions. After examining my arms and asking me a few health related questions, she asked me if if I had had sex with another male? I once again answered yes, and she asked me the dates. Then she checked her manual and said that I was to be deferred because doing that is deemed "risky behaviour."

I was kinda sad because I thought that if I could at least do one good thing in the world it would be to sacrifice 500mL of my (clean) blood. When they told me I couldn't, and that I would now be on a permanent deferral list it was kind of a shock.

I realize their reasons for doing those background checks...these days you can't be too careful, but I'm not a promiscuous person, and the few times I have had sex in my life, it's all been protected. So, here's my question: Do you think it's right of the Red Cross to not allow gay men (didn't say anything about women) to not be able to donate their blood because of the slightly higher risk for HIV/AIDS? Statistically speaking there are more HIV infected straight men and woman who are infected than there are gay men, and I know they have tests to prove if there is the virus present. I know furthermore that the reason they don't want to take the chance is because of some contingencies that may happen while the blood is in transit before it has been tested. However, I think in this day in age 99 per cent of people are responsible enough to not give blood if they are doing things truly risky.

So, do you agree or disagree that gay men should NOT be allowed to donate blood to the American Red Cross?

LH423


« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2177 times:

I don't know, that's a tough call.

But you can always give back to the world even without your blood.

Did they ask questions about heroin use, etc?

Maybe you can get AIDS test papers and show them you are unaffected.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineGalilee From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2163 times:

I don't really have a comment about allowing gays to donate. However, there is nothing you can do once put on the deferral list. I am on the list because I had a increased liver enzyme. It was only 2% higher than normal and when I went to the doctor, he said even though it slightly high, there is nothing wrong with my blood.

As far as the HIV rate being higher in heterosexuals than homosexuals, that was not always the case. It is because of the many bisexuals and needle users.


User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2142 times:

Don´t the US health care test the blood that are given?
All these questions are rubbish, they should test the blood properly or not take blood at all!


User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2138 times:

I think it is a stupid and totally discriminatory policy. On the whole, gay men are no more of a risk to use blood from than straight men and women, or lesbians, for that matter. It is a lie that we are more of a risk group, and the mentality of the people behind this ridiculous, antiquated, prejudiced policy sickens me. I think that we should give blood just like any other group of people.

User currently offlineN400QX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2136 times:

Hey, as long as the blood is uncontaminated, they shouldn't care where it comes from. Makes sense to me.

Sorry to hear about your rejection, LH423.

N400QX


User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4992 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2130 times:

Same thing happened to me. Had my AIDS test results and asked if they screened the blood. They said "yes" so I asked them why I couldn't donate and they said I was "a risk". The Hell with 'em I donate to the United Way out of my payroll check for the St Louis Effort For AIDS. Look into that (United Way, you pick the charity).


Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineVC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3697 posts, RR: 34
Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

In the UK you cannot give blood if you have EVER had any form of sex with a man with/without a condom (assuming you are male).

User currently offlineN400QX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2114 times:

Oh and just to add to my statement, I have been the recipient of a major blood transfusion. I am grateful to have received blood, so I probably shouldn't be picky as to where it came from as long as its clean....

User currently offlineTWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2108 times:

So they probably let straight men who have slept with 100's of sluts, but don't let gay men even if they have only had sex with just one man and used a condom.


Retarded.



An unexamined life isn't worth living.
User currently offlineVC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3697 posts, RR: 34
Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No, if you have had sex with a prostitute also you are not allowed.

User currently offlineBlink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2095 times:

I think they should at least draw a sample of your blood, and if it is safe, then do it. I think they did this because of HIV, but it has spread so much that now anyone could get it.

If anything, they should have it where they take a small sample of your blood and study it and then make a decision on whether it is ok and to come back to you.

blink



Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
User currently offlineNgr From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2090 times:

I am biased to say no. Following what you said about statistics, you are somewhat right, somewhat wrong.

Yes, there is a larger number of HIV/AIDS cases with straight people, but then look at it this way. Of the very few gay people, look at the percentages of them who have AIDS/HIV. Their percentages, based on relative position, are much higher than straight people.

Again, I am saying no.

NGR


User currently offlineGalilee From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2086 times:

Gays could lie about it on the forms. I mean, if you are clean and know that you are clean then go for it. It is for the greater good anyhow right. The Red Cross does check every sample it takes before it is put into circulation. Thats how all of the people that did not know they had HIV found out they did after 9/11. I don't really understand why they don't take everyones blood in the first place. If it comes out negetive, good. If it comes out positive, well they send you a letter. But unless there is a medical reason not to accept blood, then they should accept everyones.

User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2085 times:

NGR: Yes, percentage-wise that's true, when you look at it in terms of infected population, the gay population has a higher percentage than the straight population, however when you consider that the people who donate come from all walks of life it really doesn't matter.

I think I should also clarify, that if you have ever:
1. Offered sex for drugs or money.
2. Offered drugs or money for sex.
3. Are a female who has had sex with a male who has had sex with another male since 1977.
4. Are someone who has suffered from Creutzfeld-Jakob disease or other liver related diseases.

...you are also not allowed to donate. Obviously, there is no denying this is when many STDs (notable AIDS) entered America, but with our advanced screening technology I think that with the sample of blood they take before they take the full 500mL, they could detect any abnormalities in the blood.

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineSophiemaltese From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 2064 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2071 times:

I have a good friend who is gay who gives all the time. Just don't tell them, it's none of their damn business anyway. I could get AIDS too and I'm straight.

User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 2054 times:

Guys,

I think it is an outdated and ridiculous process, we still have the same here in Australia.

However, you cannot blame the blood banks for not screening potential blood donors for all sorts of things. They have to cover their backs legally.

Even though blood is screened for any potential pathogen or disease it's vital that the blood that is delivered is disease free. Otherwise the blood banks across the world could end up in financial collapse.

I wonder if Vampires use a similar process?

mb

Vale Ansett


User currently offlineApathoid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2035 times:

Absolutely not.

User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4776 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2025 times:

Care to comment, Apathoid?

User currently offlineRickster From Austria, joined Dec 2000, 653 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2014 times:

To answer the above question: definately yes.
I have never heard of "straight" or "gay" blood. Blood is divided in groups and not by race, skin color or sexual orientation. I fully understand that blood banks want to eliminate the risk of receiving infected blood by handing out such forms, but Viruses tend not to choose who they are going to infect. And there is not only HIV/Aids around.
Regards Rickster


User currently offlineVC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3697 posts, RR: 34
Reply 20, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1998 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Viruses tend not to choose who they are going to infect - true but some goups carry a higher risk of infection than others.

The good thing about the UK donor organisation is that you don't get paid for giving blood so there is no incentive to lie about your health.


User currently offlineAirsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 34
Reply 21, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1993 times:

Unfortunately homosexual males are more probable to be infected with the HIV than heterosexuals and homosexual females; that´s a sad fact.

That said, homosexual males are a risk group, along with e.g. drug users or promiscuous heterosexuals. This assumption is based on sheer numbers and does not imply a statement of approval or disapproval of anyone´s lifestyle or sexual orientation.

As far as I know, the HIV cannot be detected for roughly three months after the infection. Plus people might consider themselves clean but aren´t, for whatever reason.

Taking all that into account, no groups of persons who, regarded as a whole group, are more likely than the average population to be infected with the HIV should be allowed to donate blood.

And please don´t lie when it comes to determining whether you´re a member of a risk group - the whole system relies on sincerity.

Daniel Smile


User currently offlineNormalSpeed From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1967 times:

Airsicknesbag said:
That said, homosexual males are a risk group, along with e.g. drug users or promiscuous heterosexuals. This assumption is based on sheer numbers and does not imply a statement of approval or disapproval of anyone´s lifestyle or sexual orientation.

I couldn't agree more.

Galilee wrote:
Gays could lie about it on the forms. I mean, if you are clean and know that you are clean then go for it. It is for the greater good anyhow right.

Galilee. Frankly, I'm a little shocked that you would say something like this. I find that concept morally unacceptable and socially irresponsible. The safety of the entire public relies on the integrity of system's participants, and you are suggesting a practice that would degrade that safety. It is not right to put many at risk so that a few can feel good about themselves. The end does not justify the means.







User currently offlineDragogoalie From Australia, joined Oct 2001, 1220 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1959 times:

I think thast BS. As long as the blood is clean and will serve its purpose, it doesn't matter where it comes from. I can't give blood because I was born in the UK (the whole mad cow disease thing).

--dragogoalie-#88--



Formerly known as Jap. Srsly. AUSTRALIA: 2 days!
User currently offlineTWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1939 times:

>>I find that concept morally unacceptable and socially irresponsible.<<

That's OK, I find classifying an entire group of people as not eligible to give blood just because of their sexual orientation morally unacceptable and socially irresponsible.


I've been involved in an HIV vaccine study the last 3 years. In order to be in the study, you must be HIV negative. I've been tested every 6 months for the last 3 years. Yet I wouldn't be eligible to donate blood just because I'm gay. Yet there are women who have never used a condom who can donate no problem.

Most people still don't understand how HIV is transmitted: primarily through semen coming into contact with mucous membranes... thus it isn't even all gay men that are more susceptible to HIV infection... only those that have receptive anal sex, and that's only a portion of the gay population.


Whatever.



An unexamined life isn't worth living.
25 SK A340 : The blood test should decide wether you are allowed to give blood or not. Here in Sweden, everyone who want's to give blood has to leave a blood samp
26 Sophiemaltese : Yeah, I can agree that classifying a group of people as not eligable simply because of their sexual orientation is wrong. Not all gay men conduct them
27 Post contains images Galilee : You're right, I should not have said it like I did. The ends do not justify the means, I could not agree more. It was a stupid thing to say. I really
28 NormalSpeed : I wrote: >>I find that concept morally unacceptable and socially irresponsible.
29 Post contains images AC320 : Well much of how I feel has already been said. I see no problem with so-called "gay blood". In the end what matters is that blood banks are turning do
30 Toadpipe : I guess the better question(imho) would be, all things being equal, who's blood would you want? I think I'd play the odds and take a heterosexuals blo
31 MJC777 : I thought French people could already give blood?
32 N400QX : I agree with Galilee-- change the form to ask "...in the last six months" instead of since 1977 (or whatever). Makes sense. Toadpipe, I understand you
33 ILOVEA340 : I'm not gay but it still seems totaly rediculous to me. The test the blood anyways so who the hell cares about the persons personal life?
34 Tbar220 : Maybe, they're all just a bunch of homophobes, and are afraid that "gay" blood will turn other people gay. Just a thought...
35 NormalSpeed : Our church is doing a blood drive, and this is the criteria: You must be 17 or older, and must weigh at least 110 lbs (50 kg) You must not: Have cold
36 Post contains images JetService : My opinion is that the Red Cross determines who is a risk based on statistics. If you do not agree that any particular group is statistically a risk,
37 Timmay : The same applies in South Africa i.r.t gays. What I can't understand thougth, is that HIV/AIDS is predominantly found in our hetrosexual population. A
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Old People In FL Shouldn't Be Allowed To Drive posted Fri Apr 28 2006 05:30:28 by Corey07850
Should Churches Be Allowed To Handle Money? posted Wed Jan 4 2006 18:56:03 by ConcordeBoy
Should Everyone Be Allowed To Vote? posted Wed Oct 27 2004 23:28:04 by Dl021
Should Those W/ Bad Genetics Be Allowed To Breed? posted Tue Sep 14 2004 19:26:24 by ConcordeBoy
Should Russia Be Allowed To Join Nato? posted Sun Jun 23 2002 21:00:56 by LY772
Should Be Pitchers Be Allowed To Get Mvp? posted Sat Apr 27 2002 11:50:24 by Donder10
Should Geezers Be Allowed To Drive? posted Sun Nov 18 2001 02:20:18 by 757PF
Should FBI Be Allowed To Torture? posted Thu Oct 25 2001 17:33:56 by JetService
Should Pilots Be Allowed To Arm Themselves? posted Sat Sep 15 2001 21:14:59 by Hardlanding
Why The Old Shoudnt Be Allowed To Use Computers posted Fri May 12 2006 20:03:42 by Nighthawk