Donating Blood

[xander]

When I was little, I hated the site of needles and hated getting my blood drawn or getting shots and what have you (but then again, what kid does? ), but my sophomore year, I saw that the blood mobile was coming to my school, and I thought, what the hell, I'll get over my little fear of needles if it's to help save lives. Unfortunately, you have to be 17 to give blood, and I was only 16 at the time. So last year, the next time it came around, I was one of the first to sign up. It went smoothly and easily. I didn't faint, I felt completely fine, and actually felt a little better. Reguardless of that fact, the nurse lady who took my blood made me sit up one notch at a time on the cot since I was a first timer . But anyway, I've given three times now, and each time, they have you do the questionaire about various things that could make your blood, in sort, "tainted" and unsuited for them. Each time, this question always sticks out for some reason: "Since 1977 to the present, have you ever had sexual contact with another male, even once?". Guess it's because I'm gay, huh? But because I'm a virgin, I've always been able to answer "no" to the question and I go on and give my blood no problem. But when I'm in a relationship some day with "Mr. Right", and I answer "yes" to that question, am I going to be turned down, merely because I'm gay? I guess I've never really heard much about gays being banned from giving blood, so if it is actually so, I didn't know, and now am outraged about something else . If our blood supply is running so low, then why is homosexuality discriminated against? If it's because of the whole AIDS factor (I'm guessing that's where that date came from), that's a bullshit excuse because everyone's blood goes through all the right tests to make sure its free from Hepatitus, HIV, AIDS, Syphilus, etc. So if 10% of the population is gay, that's 30,113,994 people (courtesy of Google ) that are being turned down for being gay. Now granted I'm just jumping on a bunch of assumptions here, but they're ones that I fear to be true based on that question being asked during the process. So I guess my question is, how many of you donate blood or have been rejected because you are gay? If it is the case, that they reject all gay people, let them. One blood donation they say can save up to 3 lives, and one can donate up to 5 times a year. That's 15 lives that can be saved a year, by one person. Take that 15 by the supposed number of gay people in America, and you get 451,709,910 MORE lives that could be saved if gay people could donate....okay, someone please tell me that my assumption isn't true .

 

Ronnie

[Marty]

Ronnie,

 

I think you'll find, although not being in the US I can't be 100% certain, that it is the HIV situation that prompts this question on the form you fill in.

 

The first cases of AIDS were diagnosed around 1981, if my memory serves me right. Allowing for several years between infection with the HIV virus and the development of AIDS symptoms, this will explain why the question refers to 1977.

 

Certainly here in the Republic of Ireland there is a similar question asked, and if you answer 'yes' to it you will be told that you are not permitted to be a blood donor.

 

Obviously the reasoning is flawed, since the rate of HIV infection per head of population is nowadays greater in the heterosexual population and the intraveinous drug using population.

 

I understand that the USI (Union of Students in Ireland) is currently planning a campaign against this discrimination.

 

The Blood Donation Service here in Ireland regularly runs radio and TV ads, asking people to sign up as blood donors. "Join The Most Extraordinary Club" - or something similar - is the slogan they use. As you say, if there is a shortage of blood products, it is either ignorance, fear, or just bloody-minded discrimination that they still don't allow those people who admit to having male to male sex to become members of the club.

 

Marty

[AFriendlyFace]

Hey Ronnie

 

First off, I'm really proud of you! It's awesome that you're doing your part to help people out!

 

To answer your question, if memory serves, we've had several discussions around here about this topic (sorry I'm too lazy to look up the threads, but perhaps someone else will, or I'll get around to it later in the thread ). As my understanding goes people who answer "yes" to that question are categorically excluded. It is because of the AIDS thing, and yes, the numbers and reasoning do seem to be flawed. I believe in one of the threads there was a very compelling link to another site where someone crunched the numbers and determined that the increased risk probably wasn't worth the decreased number of potential donors.

 

Anyway, I guess I don't really have anything useful to say, but once again I do think it's great that you're doing your part! I hope the rules are altered to reflect more modern needs, concerns, and situations.

 

Take care and have a great day!

Kevin

[Graeme]

This topic has been covered in great detail in the A homosexual giving blood? thread.

 

Essentially, because several people became HIV positive as a result of blood transfusions, they are paranoid about that being repeated. They are playing a numbers game -- looking at the number of donors they are losing vs the increase in probability of safety of the blood supply.

 

The main problem is that they haven't significantly updated the rules since they were put in place. The demographics for HIV have changed considerably since then, and it would be better to ask about sexual practise (eg. safe sex, monogamous relationships, etc), rather than the broad-brush approach they are using at the moment.

 

Oh, and I'm also banned from donating, but that's because I'm considered to be a vCJD risk since I lived in the UK at the time of the mad cow disease panic. The odds of me having vCJD is miniscule, but the Australian Red Cross decided that losing 5% of their donors was worth it to decrease the chance of a contaminated blood supply (because the mechanism of transmission for vCJD is still unknown -- it may be via blood so they have decided to be paranoid).

[Benji]

This topic has been covered in great detail in the A homosexual giving blood? thread.

 

Essentially, because several people became HIV positive as a result of blood transfusions, they are paranoid about that being repeated. They are playing a numbers game -- looking at the number of donors they are losing vs the increase in probability of safety of the blood supply.

 

The main problem is that they haven't significantly updated the rules since they were put in place. The demographics for HIV have changed considerably since then, and it would be better to ask about sexual practise (eg. safe sex, monogamous relationships, etc), rather than the broad-brush approach they are using at the moment.

 

Oh, and I'm also banned from donating, but that's because I'm considered to be a vCJD risk since I lived in the UK at the time of the mad cow disease panic. The odds of me having vCJD is miniscule, but the Australian Red Cross decided that losing 5% of their donors was worth it to decrease the chance of a contaminated blood supply (because the mechanism of transmission for vCJD is still unknown -- it may be via blood so they have decided to be paranoid).

 

 

I remember when I got back from 'nam I was banned for (I ThinK) 5 years ... they were afraid of malaria

[BeaStKid]

First off---You are doing a wonderful job donating blood!!!

 

Now, to your question...I was part of the organizing committee for my school's annual Blood Donation Camp from 2005-2007 and never have I come across this outrageous question in any of our forms....But then, I cannot comment about the rest...

 

Sigh...Where id this World headed to???

 

The BeaStKid

[Graeme]

Now, to your question...I was part of the organizing committee for my school's annual Blood Donation Camp from 2005-2007 and never have I come across this outrageous question in any of our forms....But then, I cannot comment about the rest...

The question is not the same in each country, but many countries have a question whose purpose to is to stop practising homosexuals from donating. The USA is extreme in that any male-male sexual experience in the last 30 is enough to ban you. The Australian Red Cross Blood Service only asks about the last 12 months.

 

Here's the FAQ for the Australian Red Cross:

 

http://www.donateblood.com.au/page.aspx?ID...8&parent=30

 

I'll quote the section on sexual activity:

Sexual activity - Is there any kind of sexual activity that will affect my ability to donate blood?

 

If you have any reason to believe you may have acquired an infection through unprotected sex, you should not donate.

 

Safe sex practices are vital to the prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. However, 'protected sex' is not 100% effective and therefore the Australian Red Cross Blood Service's guidelines relating to sexual activity are based on the prevalence of infection in certain population groups.

 

The following questions are asked in regard to sexual activity:

 

* Have you ever thought you could be infected with HIV or have AIDS?

* In the last 12 months have you engaged in sexual activity with someone who you think might answer yes to any of the questions on the use of drugs, partner with HIV, hepatitis B, hepatitis C or HTLV, or treatment with clotting factors?

* Since your last donation or in the last 12 months have you had sexual activity with a new partner who currently lives or has previously lived overseas?

 

Within the past twelve months have you:

 

* Had male to male sex?

* Had sexual activity with a male who you think might be bisexual?

* Been a male or female sex worker (e.g. received payment for sex in money, gifts or drugs?)

* Engaged in sex with a male or female sex worker?

 

If the answer is 'yes' to any of the above questions, then a 12 month deferral is applied.

 

If you scan through the list, you'll notice that there is a similar ban on people who have been in prison, and for similar reasons.