Should gays be allowed to donate blood?

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: Zim Hosein

Originally posted by: Syringer
Inspired by a friend of mine who tried to give blood today..

I personally think it's ridiculous that gay men who have had relations since '97 are prohibited from giving blood. I mean sure the rate of disease among them may be statistically higher than the rest of the population, but who cares?

Anyone who's had any sort of sex is basically at risk for disease, and I'm sure among the different races there's higher rates among certain ones as well. Should they be banned as well?

Not only that, the blood will be tested before it will be used, so if there are any problems with the blood it won't necessarily spread anyways.

Really? 😕

http://www.hrc.org/Content/ContentGroup...nd_lesbian_Americans_donate_blood_.htm

The Red Cross and all other blood banks currently ban any man who has had sex with another man since 1997 from donating blood

 

[GeekDrew]

OK... so create a testing procedure that we must go through in order to give blood. It would be a PITA, and I think unfair, but I'd still do it.

<gets a bit choked up>

Over 50 students asked the American Red Cross volunteers at my old high school why they wouldn't let me donate blood... the only thing they would say is "Because he's gay."

Of course, I had to explain myself every other time the Red Cross came to my office for the next two years, because I was the only staff member in the main office that wasn't giving blood...

 

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: Wallydraigle

Originally posted by: Syringer
Inspired by a friend of mine who tried to give blood today..

I personally think it's ridiculous that gay men who have had relations since '97 are prohibited from giving blood. I mean sure the rate of disease among them may be statistically higher than the rest of the population, but who cares?

Anyone who's had any sort of sex is basically at risk for disease, and I'm sure among the different races there's higher rates among certain ones as well. Should they be banned as well?

Not only that, the blood will be tested before it will be used, so if there are any problems with the blood it won't necessarily spread anyways.

The person receiving the transfusion might. Maybe? 😕

Yeah, let's tell that person receiving the tranfusion that they'll have to die instead because they can't receive blood from a sizable portion of the population because there's a possibility that there might be a chance that they have a disease.

 

[Wallydraigle]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: Wallydraigle

Originally posted by: Syringer
Inspired by a friend of mine who tried to give blood today..

I personally think it's ridiculous that gay men who have had relations since '97 are prohibited from giving blood. I mean sure the rate of disease among them may be statistically higher than the rest of the population, but who cares?

Anyone who's had any sort of sex is basically at risk for disease, and I'm sure among the different races there's higher rates among certain ones as well. Should they be banned as well?

Not only that, the blood will be tested before it will be used, so if there are any problems with the blood it won't necessarily spread anyways.

The person receiving the transfusion might. Maybe? 😕

Yeah, let's tell that person receiving the tranfusion that they'll have to die instead because they can't receive blood from a sizable portion of the population because there's a possibility that there might be a chance that they have a disease.

I didn't say that I was against gay people giving blood, only that the people receiving a transfusion might care. You did ask who cares.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Syringer
Yeah, let's tell that person receiving the tranfusion that they'll have to die instead because they can't receive blood from a sizable portion of the population because there's a possibility that there might be a chance that they have a disease.

If the Red Cross gives someone HIV, guess who will be held responsible. Liability, not necessarily practicality, is my guess as to why this is the way it is.

 

[Platypus]

It's not because they're gay, they ask about if they engage in a high risk behavior. It should be the same for all hetero males as well. It could possibly hurt someone else so why take the chance? I think that it's unfair the questions only ask about gay males though.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: GeekDrew
OK... so create a testing procedure that we must go through in order to give blood. It would be a PITA, and I think unfair, but I'd still do it.

<gets a bit choked up>

Over 50 students asked the American Red Cross volunteers at my old high school why they wouldn't let me donate blood... the only thing they would say is "Because he's gay."

Of course, I had to explain myself every other time the Red Cross came to my office for the next two years, because I was the only staff member in the main office that wasn't giving blood...

If anything, it's humiliating. Being told that I cannot donate because I'm supposidly "at risk", although, I probably practice safer sex than most people. I can understand not letting people donate who have practiced unprotected sex, reguardless of orientation.

 

[her209]

So statistically speaking, what's the percentage of homosexuals with HIV verus heterosexuals with HIV?

 

[Wallydraigle]

If you needed a transfusion, and you were offered gay blood, or straight blood, and you had to choose one or the other, which would you take, and why?

 

[Sentinel]

i dont think promiscuous ppl should donate

 

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Syringer
Yeah, let's tell that person receiving the tranfusion that they'll have to die instead because they can't receive blood from a sizable portion of the population because there's a possibility that there might be a chance that they have a disease.

If the Red Cross gives someone HIV, guess who will be held responsible. Liability, not necessarily practicality, is my guess as to why this is the way it is.

But like it was said above, people who are sexually active are also at a higher risk than the rest of the population.

Blacks have almost a 5 time greater chance of having HIV than a white person. For people who answered "no" to the poll above, should they be banned from giving blood as well?

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Syringer
But like it was said above, people who are sexually active are also at a higher risk than the rest of the population.

Blacks have almost a 5 time greater chance of having HIV than a white person. For people who answered "no" to the poll above, should they be banned from giving blood as well?

Anyone who engages in risky behavior is not supposed to give blood for the reason I already stated - hence the questionaire and the ability to call in and cancel your blood donation (that's why they give you the blood lot # when you're done - in case you don't want to divulge in person that you engage in such behavior). I see pros and cons on both sides, which is why I suggested that liability is the overriding factor in making this a firm rule.

 

[GeekDrew]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
It's not because they're gay, they ask about if they engage in a high risk behavior. It should be the same for all hetero males as well. It could possibly hurt someone else so why take the chance? I think that it's unfair the questions only ask about gay males though.

I know that you're technically right, but the forms indicate that it *is* because they are gay, and will continue to be that way until they decide that *gasp* someone besides a homosexual can engage in high risk behavior.

They're covering their asses... which is a good legal aspect, I suppose. It just pisses me off that I'm unable to donate blood to *anyone*, even a specific person, even if they want it.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Syringer
Yeah, let's tell that person receiving the tranfusion that they'll have to die instead because they can't receive blood from a sizable portion of the population because there's a possibility that there might be a chance that they have a disease.

If the Red Cross gives someone HIV, guess who will be held responsible. Liability, not necessarily practicality, is my guess as to why this is the way it is.

But like it was said above, people who are sexually active are also at a higher risk than the rest of the population.

Blacks have almost a 5 time greater chance of having HIV than a white person. For people who answered "no" to the poll above, should they be banned from giving blood as well?

Statistically speaking, isn't anal sex in general far more dangerous when it comes to contracting STDs/VDs?

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: GeekDrew

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
It's not because they're gay, they ask about if they engage in a high risk behavior. It should be the same for all hetero males as well. It could possibly hurt someone else so why take the chance? I think that it's unfair the questions only ask about gay males though.

I know that you're technically right, but the forms indicate that it *is* because they are gay, and will continue to be that way until they decide that *gasp* someone besides a homosexual can engage in high risk behavior.

They're covering their asses... which is a good legal aspect, I suppose. It just pisses me off that I'm unable to donate blood to *anyone*, even a specific person, even if they want it.

Yeah like I was saying I think the questions should reflect the act rather than the preference.

 

[EvilHomer]

should people that use intravenous drugs be allowed to donate....???i donate blood every 2 months ....Im going to agree with the system that they have in place now ..not only gay people are not allowed to donate blood . There are many questions that if you answer yes to ...you are put into a higher risk category ...Other than having sex with a male (if you are Male).do you take IV drugs or had sex with someone who takes IV drugs...do you take certain meds .. or clotting agents ..given money or drugs for sex...taken money or drugs for sex...or had sex with someone (one of those two) ever had a STD or had sex with someone that had an STD ..traveled to Africa ... Spent more than 3 months outside the US ...had a blood transfusion outside the US....there are many more ...But if you anser yes to any of these questions, they will not use your blood ..they may let you donate ...but it will not be used for a transfusion... SO Yes I agree with the current guidlines and they are affective and work...

 

[AaronB]

Originally posted by: her209
So statistically speaking, what's the percentage of homosexuals with HIV verus heterosexuals with HIV?

Alright. I tried to come up with some statistics and the best I could do was by running some figures from this page. It seems to be factual, nonbiased information.

Anyhow, at the end of 2003, there were about 405,926 cases of hiv infections in the US.

77% of them were male which give us about 312,563 men infected.

Of those 312,563 cases 58% were from homosexual intercourse and 11% were from heterosexual intercourse which gives us:

181,286 cases of hiv infection through male homosexual contact.

34,381 cases of hiv infection through male heterosexual contact.

Draw your own conclusions but that does seem to be the raw data.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: AaronB
Alright. I tried to come up with some statistics and the best I could do was by running some figures from this page. It seems to be factual, nonbiased information.

Anyhow, at the end of 2003, there were about 405,926 cases of hiv infections in the US.

77% of them were male which give us about 312,563 men infected.

Of those 312,563 cases 58% were from homosexual intercourse and 11% were from heterosexual intercourse which gives us:

181,286 cases of hiv infection through male homosexual contact.

34,381 cases of hiv infection through male heterosexual contact.

Draw your own conclusions but that does seem to be the raw data.

And note that most studies indicate the homosexual male population to be anywhere from 1-5% of the total male population.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Wallydraigle
If you needed a transfusion, and you were offered gay blood, or straight blood, and you had to choose one or the other, which would you take, and why?

Straight blood, else it would throw my gaydar off.

Never really thought about it but yeah the Red Cross is sort of discriminatory there. Not to mention having to wait a whole year after getting a tattoo.

 

[Chiboy]

Yes, I dont think any gayness would be inserted into you if the blood came from a gay dude. On the other hand it would be great if they could insert lesbian blood into gay men to turn them str8. /me wakes up.

 

[crt1530]

Screening for risk factors does NOT equal discrimination.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: Chiboy
Yes, I dont think any gayness would be inserted into you if the blood came from a gay dude. On the other hand it would be great if they could insert lesbian blood into gay men to turn them str8. /me wakes up.

Yeah, that woudl be SSSSTHUPER. :roll:

 

[upsciLLion]

As long as they aren't engaging in risky behavior, I don't see why they shouldn't. Though we're close to having synthetic blood, so this is quickly becoming a moot point.

 

[Syringer]

Originally posted by: upsciLLion
As long as they aren't engaging in risky behavior, I don't see why they shouldn't. Though we're close to having synthetic blood, so this is quickly becoming a moot point.

What's this synthetic blood deal about?

 

[nageov3t]

if they've had unprotected sex or haven't had an HIV test decently, definitely not.

otherwise, I don't see why they'd make a big deal about it.