See, I am at North Memorial Blood Center in Plymouth, Minnesota where I finally followed through on a commitment I've been "yeah yeah yeah"ing about for YEARS now.

It took less than ten minutes and having that THING in my arm was uncomfortable; I won't bullshit you; but it wasn't PAINFUL.

Think about the real pain that some poor ill folks are in, and in it CONSTANTLY. Wouldn't you pay ten minutes of mild discomfort to make things easier on them?

Give blood if you can.

See, it's PAINLESS.

I would, but unfortunately, the FDA still has a thing against gay men giving blood (though they're perfectly OK with promiscuous individuals so long as it's not MSM) and while they've lowered the restrictions from life deferment to 12 months to 3 months (COVID) after having any kind of sexual contact with another man, I'm still not willing to donate. Their loss. I'm O+ so my blood is in high demand.

On the few occasions I've donated, I've tried doing double unit: they extract the blood, but they'll place it in a container to split up the red cells from plasma and platelets; these last ones are then returned to you. Takes a bit longer, but it also means you're deferred for twice as long to allow red blood cells to return to normal levels.

I've only donated platelets once, and I will never go through that again. The needle isn't the issue; it's the serum added when returning blood and plasma. It causes tingling of the fingers and lower jaw as a result of binding to calcium (i.e. it makes your calcium levels in the blood drop); you counter it by taking calcium, but the calcium they give you is TUMS tablets...ugh...I'm about to throw up just thinking about it. Two TUMS for upset stomach is OK; taking about 10-20 tablets to prepare yourself and then take them as needed is just awful.

Airstud wrote:

See, I am at North Memorial Blood Center in Plymouth, Minnesota where I finally followed through on a commitment I've been "yeah yeah yeah"ing about for YEARS now.

It took less than ten minutes and having that THING in my arm was uncomfortable; I won't bullshit you; but it wasn't PAINFUL.

Think about the real pain that some poor ill folks are in, and in it CONSTANTLY. Wouldn't you pay ten minutes of mild discomfort to make things easier on them?

Give blood if you can.

See, it's PAINLESS.

Fully agree with you. I am doing it frequently as well. Maybe its a bit strange and it can also be that you feel uncomfortable, but you are getting used to it.

I have done the "2 fer" RBC apheresis..they take only 1 unit of just RBC's and pump the the remainder back into you...and give you Tums for calcium depletion when your lips start tingling...

I have hemochromatosis which is high iron in my blood. It is a condition that affects, generally, from Northern Europe and Ireland. The best treatment is giving blood. I have given over 50 gallons in my life and try to go it as often as possible. For me, it's a win win deal.

I need to give, I lapsed since March.

Oh well. They will start banging on the door soon when surgeries pick up. I have

I'm on my 5th battle with cancer so donations are out for me now - probably for the rest of my life.

Art the same time my wife went through 18 moth of chemo for acute leukemia (ALL, the type little kids get) and she had blood during her trips to the hospital, with two units 10 times. That blood was a core reason while she is still alive.

In my "younger' days I would give blood at odd times, without being emotional about it. Just a normal act of helping others. After ALL hit my wife I became more than a little emotional about donations, even when I couldn't donate. I did sneak in one donation between cancers and when my better half saw the band in my arm and I think she was more appreciative of that act than anything I've done over 50 years of marriage.

You normally don't think about it, but giving blood is actually giving life to the in need. It is a give that cannot be matched with any other type of gift, and you normally know who has received that give of life.

That's pretty special. For those who have given I can only say Thank You! For those waiting to start I can only offer encouragement.

einsteinboricua wrote:

I would, but unfortunately, the FDA still has a thing against gay men giving blood (though they're perfectly OK with promiscuous individuals so long as it's not MSM) and while they've lowered the restrictions from life deferment to 12 months to 3 months (COVID) after having any kind of sexual contact with another man, I'm still not willing to donate. Their loss. I'm O+ so my blood is in high demand.

"Infected donations can be released due to false negative errors or quarantine release errors (QRE). A study using quantitative probabilistic modelling estimated how many more MSM (men who have sex with men) would become eligible if the then permanent exclusion was revised, and used this data along with disease prevalence statistics to determine how many more infected units would be donated. This, along with the rate of QREs occurring, was used to estimate the increase in erroneously released infected units. Their model suggested that a change from permanent deferral to 1-year deferral would result in an average of 0.18 and 0.02 additional HIV and HBV infected units being released per year, respectively. This represented a 3% increase in relative risk of erroneous release for HIV infected blood, and 0.04% increase for HBV infected blood. This suggests that allowing high-risk groups to donate more freely would increase infected blood being erroneously released. However, as the risks involved are already small, the overall increase in risk may be negligible."

I personally would rather not take any chances and risk offending you and others like you who politicize this (blood donations should be about the recipient, not the donor IMO), In those cases I would still like the option of knowing the only available blood is from an MSM donor and be able to decide (assuming I am conscious) based on how vital the transfusion is, but we know that would cause even more outrage and never happen.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6334046/

Airstud wrote:

See, I am at North Memorial Blood Center in Plymouth, Minnesota where I finally followed through on a commitment I've been "yeah yeah yeah"ing about for YEARS now.

It took less than ten minutes and having that THING in my arm was uncomfortable; I won't bullshit you; but it wasn't PAINFUL.

Think about the real pain that some poor ill folks are in, and in it CONSTANTLY. Wouldn't you pay ten minutes of mild discomfort to make things easier on them?

Give blood if you can.

See, it's PAINLESS.

It is the same type of needle for having a standard blood test? If so you might have finally convinced me to do it myself.

TheWorm123 wrote:

It is the same type of needle for having a standard blood test? If so you might have finally convinced me to do it myself.

It's longer and thicker (aka cannula), but in reality, the only discomfort comes from leaving your arm in a position for very long. You'll still feel the same pierce on the vein (and you barely feel it when pulled out). They always warn about a bruise, but if your blood coagulates quick, the bruise is very small and fades away like any other.

afcjets wrote:

I personally would rather not take any chances and risk offending you and others like you who politicize this (blood donations should be about the recipient, not the donor IMO), In those cases I would still like the option of knowing the only available blood is from an MSM donor and be able to decide (assuming I am conscious) based on how vital the transfusion is, but we know that would cause even more outrage and never happen.

I'm not politicizing it; I'm just stating my position. The FDA is in critical need of blood (O type in particular). I want to donate, but they don't want the blood of a MSM individual. I could lie, given that I'm tested at least yearly, but the satisfaction of helping people does not offset the fact that the only reason I would be helping someone is by lying on the form (which could be punishable if discovered). At least it's not a permanent deferral anymore, and with Covid, I am more than ready to donate given that haven't had any sexual contact in months. But if agencies need blood desperately, they need to accommodate us as well.

A MSM donor with a permanent partner (both of who are HIV- and can attest to using condoms) is deferred; a woman who is dating several guys and has unprotected sex is not; neither is a guy sleeping with multiple women; even lesbians get off the hook easy. What is the difference here? Blood will still be tested for HIV on all 4 cases, yet we're only asked about the sexual activities of the first one.

einsteinboricua wrote:

TheWorm123 wrote:

It is the same type of needle for having a standard blood test? If so you might have finally convinced me to do it myself.

It's longer and thicker (aka cannula), but in reality, the only discomfort comes from leaving your arm in a position for very long. You'll still feel the same pierce on the vein (and you barely feel it when pulled out). They always warn about a bruise, but if your blood coagulates quick, the bruise is very small and fades away like any other.

Thanks for the detailed info, I used to think I was afraid of needles but I managed to have a blood test last month with no pain and I’ve got two tattoos so maybe I need to stop being a chicken shit and just donate.

TheWorm123 wrote:

Thanks for the detailed info, I used to think I was afraid of needles but I managed to have a blood test last month with no pain and I’ve got two tattoos so maybe I need to stop being a chicken shit and just donate.

Honestly, I think a tattoo would hurt more. With this, it's just one pierce and, provided you don't move your arm abruptly, you may even forget the needle is there.

I've donated over 6 gallons (8 units per gallon) to my local blood bank, but I also donated at least another gallon or two in college. It the technicians are good, I barely feel anything.

einsteinboricua wrote:

A MSM donor with a permanent partner (both of who are HIV- and can attest to using condoms) is deferred; a woman who is dating several guys and has unprotected sex is not; neither is a guy sleeping with multiple women; even lesbians get off the hook easy. What is the difference here? Blood will still be tested for HIV on all 4 cases, yet we're only asked about the sexual activities of the first one.

The difference is the first belongs to a high risk group, the others do not.

afcjets wrote:

einsteinboricua wrote:

A MSM donor with a permanent partner (both of who are HIV- and can attest to using condoms) is deferred; a woman who is dating several guys and has unprotected sex is not; neither is a guy sleeping with multiple women; even lesbians get off the hook easy. What is the difference here? Blood will still be tested for HIV on all 4 cases, yet we're only asked about the sexual activities of the first one.

The difference is the first belongs to a high risk group, the others do not.

Which in the describes case is not true... the others are the higher risk groups.

einsteinboricua wrote:

TheWorm123 wrote:

Thanks for the detailed info, I used to think I was afraid of needles but I managed to have a blood test last month with no pain and I’ve got two tattoos so maybe I need to stop being a chicken shit and just donate.

Honestly, I think a tattoo would hurt more. With this, it's just one pierce and, provided you don't move your arm abruptly, you may even forget the needle is there.

The needle is bigger, but you still don´t really feel it. And the people doing the sticks usually have so much practice that it is really quick, and once you know what to expect essentially painless. I think mosquito´s are worse. And for sure tattoos are worse. I have seen a couple of people dropping unconscious after donation, but usually its petite girls barely making the 110 lbs limit to donate, but not anyone indicating it hurt.
And i´d be surprised if you forget the needle, since you do feel the blood flow. When friends of mine had that "problem", i would just take them along to see for themselves how relaxed everyone is. Works like a charm and usually ends with some mild embarrassment and a new blood donor.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

afcjets wrote:

einsteinboricua wrote:

A MSM donor with a permanent partner (both of who are HIV- and can attest to using condoms) is deferred; a woman who is dating several guys and has unprotected sex is not; neither is a guy sleeping with multiple women; even lesbians get off the hook easy. What is the difference here? Blood will still be tested for HIV on all 4 cases, yet we're only asked about the sexual activities of the first one.

The difference is the first belongs to a high risk group, the others do not.

Which in the describes case is not true... the others are the higher risk groups.

They are not considered high risk groups because they're not high risk. Why do you think the first group still uses condoms?

afcjets wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

afcjets wrote:

The difference is the first belongs to a high risk group, the others do not.

Which in the describes case is not true... the others are the higher risk groups.

They are not considered high risk groups because they're not high risk. Why do you think the first group still uses condoms?

Cleanliness comes to mind.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

afcjets wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Which in the describes case is not true... the others are the higher risk groups.

They are not considered high risk groups because they're not high risk. Why do you think the first group still uses condoms?

Cleanliness comes to mind.

best regards
Thomas

If that were the case they're never would have been an AIDS outbreak to begin with.

I have been donating now for 18 Years (started on whole blood and then swapped to platelets) and have managed 490 units donated so far. With regards to the tingling drinking milk works (and is certainly a better option than taking TUMS). This is a tip given to me by the Nurse who introduced me to platelet donations and it has worked for me every time.

Whilst whole blood is every 12 weeks (for the UK for males) and 16 weeks (for females) I can give platelets every 2 weeks (and have been for quite a while). I can manage a triple donation in about 60 minutes and after the first 2 or 3 minutes I do not even notice the needle in my arm. Not everyone can give platelets as the veins need to be of good quality and not too deep.

Donating blood or platelets is something I wish I had started doing a long time ago. By giving SOME of your time you can give others MORE time.

dc10bhx wrote:

Not everyone can give platelets as the veins need to be of good quality and not too deep.

that must be location specific. My veins never cooperate, even the pros in donation centers often need 2-3 attempts AND often end up prodding the needle around in my arm for a minute or so, and used to donate platelets or plasma about 10-15 times year.

best regards
Thomas

afcjets wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

afcjets wrote:

They are not considered high risk groups because they're not high risk. Why do you think the first group still uses condoms?

Cleanliness comes to mind.

best regards
Thomas

If that were the case they're never would have been an AIDS outbreak to begin with.

https://books.google.de/books?hl=de&lr= ... &q&f=false

I do think you need to get some misconceptions out of your head. Especially the big can of "absolutely all gay men are the same" you seem to haul around.

best regards
Thomas

I would absolutely love to give blood, but unfortunately am barred from doing so by virtue of potentially being a mad cow. Such is life.

Good job Airstud!

I've donated 20 liters of blood myself since turning 18. I'm always a bit disappointed how few people in my surroundings are blood donor. Nobody ever seems to really have an answer for why they don't do it either. But it's very much necessary! All in all I think it takes me about 6 hours PER YEAR to drive to the blood bank and donate, now that's hardly an effort right?

The app says I’ve given 73 units. Seems like it should be more, since I’ve been giving for decades. I was given the all clear to start giving again about a year ago. Since then I’ve given double reds twice, and a single whole blood. I need to setup my next donation.

It is relatively painless. It seems to me the finger stick Is more painful than the arm stick. Anyone remember when they took the blood sample from your ear lobe? That sucked. Happily, that didn’t last too long.

tommy1808 wrote:

I do think you need to get some misconceptions out of your head. Especially the big can of "absolutely all gay men are the same" you seem to haul around.

best regards
Thomas

I think you need to consider context more before you post. The original post I responded to concerned policies regarding blood donations and safety of the blood supply. It was clear he pointed out the use of condoms in his hypothetical example to illustrate gay couples can safely donate blood, not for the reason you suggested.

fr8mech wrote:

It seems to me the finger stick Is more painful than the arm stick.

Depending on where in the finger they do it. One nurse did it close to where the nail rests on the finger and I saw galaxies for a moment.

When I first attempted to donate, I grew so nervous because of the prick that when they took my temperature, it was "too high". They always dismissed me as being sick with a cold, even though I felt fine.

einsteinboricua wrote:

fr8mech wrote:

It seems to me the finger stick Is more painful than the arm stick.

Depending on where in the finger they do it. One nurse did it close to where the nail rests on the finger and I saw galaxies for a moment.

When I first attempted to donate, I grew so nervous because of the prick that when they took my temperature, it was "too high". They always dismissed me as being sick with a cold, even though I felt fine.

I gave for years, at the time they recommended you ate before donating. I quickly found out that it was not wise to drink regular Coke before donating, it would elevate my pressure and I would have to lie there until it wore off.

casinterest wrote:

I need to give, I lapsed since March.

Oh well. They will start banging on the door soon when surgeries pick up. I have

"They" schmey, why put it off when you know there's always an urgent need?

You know you're going to feel better about yourself on the day you give, so why put that off either?

The worst part is still the finger prick (at least here in Australia). My donation yesterday was around my 140th, although switching to donating plasma rather than whole blood maybe 5 years ago has pushed thee number up. I now donate each 3 weeks rather than each 3 months. I'm also a donor for our national Anti-D program https://www.donateblood.com.au/anti-d-program

After the tainted blood issues of the 80s into the 90s I can understand the very broad prohibitions on donations by gay men. However, it surpises me that they have lasted so long - sexuality itself is not a risk factor, and surely there are more fine grained questioning options to determine risk. Many people from my workplaces are unable to donate due to either their sexuality or having lived in the UK in "mad cow" related times.

Another benefit men get by giving blood: Studies have shown that as red blood cells age, they become less flexible, and more likely to form clots. When men give blood, it removes older, less flexible blood cells, and afterward mens' bodies create new red blood cells that are more flexible, and less likely to clot. This reduces mens' risk of heart disease by 5%.

This benefit doesn't apply to women, because they regenerate their red blood cells constantly through menstruation.

I used to give blood every 56 days. However, now it's illegal for me to give blood, because I spent more than three months in the United Kingdom. I hope this regulation is changed, so I can resume giving blood.

Congratulations to those of you who give blood; your kindness makes a HUGE difference. And, as others have said, if you haven't given blood, please resume doing so!

WA707atMSP wrote:

Another benefit men get by giving blood: Studies have shown that as red blood cells age, they become less flexible, and more likely to form clots. When men give blood, it removes older, less flexible blood cells, and afterward mens' bodies create new red blood cells that are more flexible, and less likely to clot. This reduces mens' risk of heart disease by 5%

So, bloodletting? I kid, I know there are certain diseases/conditions that can be treated by therapeutic phlebotomy.

WA707atMSP wrote:

However, now it's illegal for me to give blood, because I spent more than three months in the United Kingdom. I hope this regulation is changed, so I can resume giving blood.

I’ve occasionally wondered about pilots, flight attendants and others that travel abroad for business and pleasure. Since the questions asked refer to cumulative time in certain regions, do these folks slowly get disqualified, and who really keeps track of cumulative time? What about those that live in those areas, how is the blood supply managed there? Are there any regions abroad that classify blood from the US, or specific regions of the US, as potentially tainted?