Dvk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2588 times:
Wrong, Maverick. The form at the Red Cross says you can't give blood if you've engaged in M2M sex, period. It doesn't specify anal. Before the recent upsurge in HIV infectioin among gay men, the groups with the highest new infection rate for a number of years were IV drug users, and women who had sex with HIV+, usually IV drug using, men.
I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
You think wrong; the existing blood donation questionnaire prohibits prospective male donors who have had "male to male sexual activity" [without defining the "sexual activity"]. ALL gay males, except celibate ones, cannot donate blood.
The questionnaire is phrased:
"Have you had male to male sexual activity in the last 5 years?"
also, [for potential female donors]
"Have you had any sexual activity with a male in the last 12 months, who has had sexual activity with another male in the last 5 years?"
This FDA rule is reprehensible and discriminatory. It not based on sound science and has, I strongly suspect, been developed with political influence from religious groups. The FDA is not protecting the health of our society and will damage its credibility through the implementation of this ban.
Jaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2498 times:
The Red Cross is the one who initiated the ban on gays donating blood.
And while this ban may have had a public health basis 20 years ago when the AIDs crisis was associated with gays and when detection systems were either unavailable or in their infancy, the level of protection it offers is very marginal.
Does this rise to the level of discrimination? I doubt it, especially if there is a valid public health basis.
Adam From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 465 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2483 times:
This rule doesn't make much sense. There are more efficient ways of keeping disease out of sperm and blood banks: by testing the fluids no matter who they come from, homosexual or heterosexual donors, because HIV doesn't play favorites.
Aren't all fluids checked anyway?
Texas: You'll come for the Alamo, You'll stay because you were wrongfully executed. - Conan O'Brian State Quarters
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3534 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2458 times:
Quoting MD-90 (Reply 13): The Red Cross is the one who initiated the ban on gays donating blood.
I've given blood at work, and I don't remember them asking if I was gay. Or maybe they did and I lied. F#%k them if they are going to discriminate me on the basis of who I have sex with. Why don't they discriminate against African-Americans, since that group has the highest growth of HIV infections? (And I am not advocating this, just posing the question rhetorically.)
My company is currently involved with several litigations regarding this very topic. I can tell you the concerns from people are very real, regardless of the nature of it. I'm glad I only read contracts, this is very out there!
QANTASFOREVER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 2361 times:
Quoting United737522 (Reply 11): Seriously, being paid for it is worse. How would you like to know that somewhere out in the world, you have a kid that will never know you, or any fatherly figure for that matter?
How do you know that a person wouldn't have a fatherly figure around just because their mother used a sperm donor? Perhaps the legal father was somehow reproductively disabled?
It's these sorts of dogmatic and illogical sweeping statements that lead a lot of people away from social conservatism.
Quoting Afay1 (Reply 19): If you have stepped foot in most western european nations after some point in the 1980s you are also banned from giving blood in the US as well due to Mad Cow fears.
That is correct. I ate meat in the UK before 1984 - so I cannot legally give blood in Australia due to Mad Cow concerns.
Quoting RedDragon (Reply 21): In the UK the restrictions are similar, but without the time limit - so any gay man who's ever had any kind of sexual activity with another man is barred from donating blood.
But still - how would they know? Gaydar?
I mean - any sexual activity, that's a bit rough. Does that mean that Tony Blair can't give blood because of his "encounters" with GWB?
Seriously though - this is discrimination in it's purest form. It must end.
CORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 2357 times:
Being banned from donating sperm and blood is basically saying that all gay men have HIV, and well that is NOT true. It is complete discrimination which doesn't surprise me in the least bit. Next time I hear the Red Cross and other organizations complain about the lack of blood, I'll throw this in their face. I mean, what is next...gay people denied medical attention because they might have HIV? It is ridiculous. This all goes back to the idea of the 80's when people thought ONLY gays got HIV and that is why so many straight men and woman got it. It is called being uneducated.
Flybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1801 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 23 hours ago) and read 2348 times:
Quoting Travelin man (Reply 17): Why don't they discriminate against African-Americans, since that group has the highest growth of HIV infections? (And I am not advocating this, just posing the question rhetorically.)
Apparently African Americans rarely give blood or donate organs. Period. If they went to the red cross in droves I'm sure similar actions will be made against them as well.
I guess when it comes down to it, it's elimination of unnecessary risks. All the advocates for gay blood donations say the screening process is perfect. However, it is not. And to let loose high risk blood samples into the pool is not prudent because some unfortunate soul is going to contract a disease they didn't deserve. Now, HIV in the gay community IS indeed a problem. Thank God that treatments are available to quell the avalanche of premature deaths, but men who have sex with men are way up there in terms of HIV critical demographics. I am certain that drug users and people engaging in unusually high sexual activity with multiple partners are also barred from giving blood. Needless to say, that the red cross can never know if a sadistic person is lying about their personal life in order to infect innocent people.
I presume that in the end the Civil Liberties Union will sue the hell out of the red cross for this. But one day soon, infected blood that slips through the system (and it will... the system isn't perfect) is going to infect an innocent person and that is something that the people who cry wolf over this defensive measure are going to have to contend with.
"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
: One less source of income in the George Bush Economy I guess. Oh well, guess I can still blow Republicans on the side for my gas money.
: It is actually extremely rare for it to take more than six months for an infected individual to test HIV+. Many seroconvert within 3 months of infecti
: Must....not....bite..... Is being a "lap-dog" contagious ?
: This ban has no basis in good science. Straight people carry disease, too, and usually they're more apt to not know if they are or not. Therefore, all
: I've given blood several times, and they don't ask if you're gay, but they do ask if you've had sex with a member of your own sex. And they will most
: As of April 2005, the two groups with the most rapid increase of HIV infections were African American females and Hispanic teens between the age of 15
: *Falls of chair laughing* Whe the hell have I been drinking (or eating by the sounds of it)? The d***heads over at airwhiners are going to have a fie
: *realises double meaning with revulsion* Just had to quote you out of context QFF.
: It's cool, it's cool - gave me a good laugh. QFF
: Not exactly true... at least here. You're asked if you've spent more than 90 cumulative days in Europe (6wks in Africa) in the past 5yr period. Also,