Why can't gay folk give blood?

[Straw Dog]

Greetings!

So this is a question I've been pondering for a while now and it arises in my head every time I go to donate blood. It seems that, at least, the American Red Cross has a filter for excluding all actively gay and bisexual individuals from donating blood in their questioning process. I mean, it doesn't matter whether they have any STDs or AIDs specifically because they're excluded across the board. I have a gay friend who just lies so that he's able to donate blood.

Now, is there a rational explanation for this? Is it based on actual statistics signifying some danger that can not otherwise be avoided? Don't they test the blood regardless? Is this just an outdated protocol? Are they just afraid their blood will turn other people gay or what?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Greetings!

So this is a question I've been pondering for a while now and it arises in my head every time I go to donate blood. It seems that, at least, the American Red Cross has a filter for excluding all actively gay and bisexual individuals from donating blood in their questioning process. I mean, it doesn't matter whether they have any STDs or AIDs specifically because they're excluded across the board. I have a gay friend who just lies so that he's able to donate blood.

Now, is there a rational explanation for this? Is it based on actual statistics signifying some danger that can not otherwise be avoided? Don't they test the blood regardless? Is this just an outdated protocol? Are they just afraid their blood will turn other people gay or what?

People don't want "the gay" in them.

 

[Rakhel]

ask the red cross. they will be more than happy to tell you why

 

[Quagmire]

Isn't gay blood like, you know, a different color?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Actually the Red Cross felt a one year deferrment was sufficient as opposed to a lifetime ban on homosexual and Bi doners in light of improved testing methods to detect HIV. Its actually the FDA's regulatory arm that wont budge on the issue maintaining that the controls are still needed to stem transmission of AIDS.

In other words, until the tests for detecting AIDS become 100% accurate, they just wont cave in. Even though the Red Cross and other blood groups maintain that the lifetime ban is, "medically and scientifically unwarranted".

 

[Comet]

Actually the Red Cross felt a one year deferrment was sufficient as opposed to a lifetime ban on homosexual and Bi doners in light of improved testing methods to detect HIV. Its actually the FDA's regulatory arm that wont budge on the issue maintaining that the controls are still needed to stem transmission of AIDS.

In other words, until the tests for detecting AIDS become 100% accurate, they just wont cave in. Even though the Red Cross and other blood groups maintain that the lifetime ban is, "medically and scientifically unwarranted".

Good post and all the more reason why people should educate themselves.... including the Red Cross. Like straight people don't have these types of transmitable diseases! UGH! Stereotypes of many kinds exist... this is a good example of another one I'll give to my gay/lesbian friends when they argue the point of equal rights!

 

[Straw Dog]

Actually the Red Cross felt a one year deferrment was sufficient as opposed to a lifetime ban on homosexual and Bi doners in light of improved testing methods to detect HIV. Its actually the FDA's regulatory arm that wont budge on the issue maintaining that the controls are still needed to stem transmission of AIDS.

In other words, until the tests for detecting AIDS become 100% accurate, they just wont cave in. Even though the Red Cross and other blood groups maintain that the lifetime ban is, "medically and scientifically unwarranted".

So it is an outdated protocol of sorts. At least it is only a one year ban so people can just learn to lie about their sexual orientation the following year. I mean, hey their blood could save lives.

 

[Straw Dog]

ask the red cross. they will be more than happy to tell you why

I did ask one of the nurses working that day, but she indicated she didn't really know and gave me a suspicious look.

 

[Rakhel]

LOL. A suspicious look? "they're asking questions again. What do we do now?"

 

[Twilight Hue]

So it is an outdated protocol of sorts. At least it is only a one year ban so people can just learn to lie about their sexual orientation the following year. I mean, hey their blood could save lives.

I suspect the 1 yr ban was proposed to the FDA in order to reach a compromise for which improved medical testing and procedures justify a reduction, but it obviously didnt work out.

Actually The Red cross agrees that in light of improved testing and medical advances the ban has become excessive and discriminitory. The FDA on the other hand is just brushing all the counter arguements off by saying in response that there is no such discrimination involved in their policymaking, even in light that healthy individuals are turned away at the door.

Article (MSNBC.com 2007) : http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...y7nlCg&usg=AFQjCNFApUJ2P4bz8WgGHAIQ1SLdGeE_KQ

 

[fallingblood]

The reason is actually quite simple. It isn't a ban on gay folks giving blood (lesbians can, as well as can celibate homosexuals males). The ban is on men who have had sex with other men anytime between 1977 to the present (regardless of sexual orientation). The reason is because statistically, they are at higher risk. It is a way to safeguard blood products. And personally, I'm all for safeguarding blood products. It's nothing against homosexuals, it simply reducing risk.

Other bans include:
People who have used intravenous drugs (illegal IV drugs)

Men who have had sexual contact with other men since 1977

People who have received clotting factor concentrates

People with a positive antibody test for HIV (AIDS virus)

Men and women who have engaged in sex for money or drugs since 1977

People with hepatitis since his or her eleventh birthday

People who have had babesiosis (tick-borne malaria like illness or Chagas (parasitic infection) disease

People who have taken Tegison for psoriasis, removed from approved drug lists in the US because of reports of severe birth defects

Anyone with risk factors for Crueutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) or who has an immediate family member with CJD

People with risk factors for vCJD

Anyone who spent three months or more in the United Kingdom from 1980 through 1996

Anyone who has been to Europe from 1980 to the present.If you have been to Europe from 1980 to the present, you are ineligible to donate blood through 17 May 2004. After 17 May, you will be able to donate blood as long as you were not in UK for more than 3 months, or 6 months in Eastern / Western Europe between the 1980 to present timeframe.

 

[Straw Dog]

The reason is actually quite simple. It isn't a ban on gay folks giving blood (lesbians can, as well as can celibate homosexuals males). The ban is on men who have had sex with other men anytime between 1977 to the present (regardless of sexual orientation). The reason is because statistically, they are at higher risk. It is a way to safeguard blood products. And personally, I'm all for safeguarding blood products. It's nothing against homosexuals, it simply reducing risk.

Other bans include:
People who have used intravenous drugs (illegal IV drugs)

Men who have had sexual contact with other men since 1977

People who have received clotting factor concentrates

People with a positive antibody test for HIV (AIDS virus)

Men and women who have engaged in sex for money or drugs since 1977

People with hepatitis since his or her eleventh birthday

People who have had babesiosis (tick-borne malaria like illness or Chagas (parasitic infection) disease

People who have taken Tegison for psoriasis, removed from approved drug lists in the US because of reports of severe birth defects

Anyone with risk factors for Crueutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) or who has an immediate family member with CJD

People with risk factors for vCJD

Anyone who spent three months or more in the United Kingdom from 1980 through 1996

Anyone who has been to Europe from 1980 to the present.If you have been to Europe from 1980 to the present, you are ineligible to donate blood through 17 May 2004. After 17 May, you will be able to donate blood as long as you were not in UK for more than 3 months, or 6 months in Eastern / Western Europe between the 1980 to present timeframe.

Thanks for trying to make the point from a statistical standpoint. When isolated, some of those other criteria seem fairly arbitrary as well. Perhaps actively gay men (or straight men who've 'experimented' with other men) really are at greater risk. I suppose I was aware of this more specific criteria, but I'm still not sure about this though. I mean, I'm also for safeguarding blood products, but does any evidence really pan this out? Or is it just mostly an unfounded hypothesis? I've never encountered any actual statistics on it.

 

[fallingblood]

Thanks for trying to make the point from a statistical standpoint. When isolated, some of those other criteria seem fairly arbitrary as well. Perhaps actively gay men (or straight men who've 'experimented' with other men) really are at greater risk. I suppose I was aware of this more specific criteria, but I'm still not sure about this though. I mean, I'm also for safeguarding blood products, but does any evidence really pan this out? Or is it just mostly an unfounded hypothesis? I've never encountered any actual statistics on it.

There are statistics backing this: http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/fastfacts-msm-final508comp.pdf There is a significantly higher rate of a man who has had sex with another man, to have AIDS or HIV compared to men or women who haven't.

 

[Kathryn]

"Why can't people who lived in Germany for three years during the 1990s give blood?"

My husband and I can't give blood. Is this discrimination?

 

[Straw Dog]

There are statistics backing this: http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/fastfacts-msm-final508comp.pdf There is a significantly higher rate of a man who has had sex with another man, to have AIDS or HIV compared to men or women who haven't.

I see. Thanks for sharing those facts. Well, I'm glad there's at least some statistical correlations that their policies are based off. I'm also glad I didn't just blindly stick with notions of political correctness. I think it's worth noting, however, this source mentions that social discrimination and cultural issues may actually prevent many actively homosexual/bisexual men from seeking appropriate prevention measures. There are also a plethora of other reasons in which some are universal among all types of people.

I suspect from experience that gay male culture tends to be more promiscuous in general than other socio-sexual dynamics. It's not really a matter of judging such individuals to be more or less morally righteous as it is a product of their culture in relation (and partially in reaction) to mainstream culture. I suspect if gay marriage and monogamy were more wildly accepted then such statistics would diminish.

I do hope they create better ways of testing HIV or AIDs so that many perfectly healthy homosexual men can donate blood without having to sacrifice acting on their natural sexual orientation. My thinking is that many actively gay and bisexual men are still donating blood and lying about it, so their precautions are probably not as preventative as they've hypothesized.

 

[Me Myself]

Other bans include:
(...)
Men and women who have engaged in sex for money or drugs since 1977

I have engaged in sex and drugs only since 1978! Yay! I am fair game!

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

We do not get paid for blood donatins in the uk it is voluntary.
Since last year non active gays of one year may give blood.
However as these processes rely on the honesty of the donator, who knows what the real situation is.?

 

[Pegg]

Greetings!

So this is a question I've been pondering for a while now and it arises in my head every time I go to donate blood. It seems that, at least, the American Red Cross has a filter for excluding all actively gay and bisexual individuals from donating blood in their questioning process. I mean, it doesn't matter whether they have any STDs or AIDs specifically because they're excluded across the board. I have a gay friend who just lies so that he's able to donate blood.

Now, is there a rational explanation for this? Is it based on actual statistics signifying some danger that can not otherwise be avoided? Don't they test the blood regardless? Is this just an outdated protocol? Are they just afraid their blood will turn other people gay or what?

this is straight from the blood bank website in australia

DONOR POLICY FACT SHEET
MALE TO MALE SEX
This fact sheet provides information concerning the Australian Red Cross Blood Service donor deferral policies, particularly with respect to male to male sex.
The relevant eligibility criteria for donors are listed on the Frequently Asked Questions page. Anyone who has engaged in male to male sex is deferred by the Blood Service from blood donation for a period of twelve months following the last occurrence of such activity.
The deferral of males who have had male to male sex is based on two factors: the statistically higher incidence of some blood borne diseases (such as HIV) and the existence of ‘window period’ infections.
In terms of statistics, the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research (University of New South Wales) reports that men with a history of male to male sexual contact continue to make up the majority of people diagnosed with AIDS and HIV infection in Australia. These statistics are regularly reviewed by Blood Service.
A window period infection is the time between contraction of a disease and the ability to detect the infection using currently available screening tests. This window period contributes to the risk of the disease not being detected and being passed on in the blood supply.
In Australia, State and Territory legislation and governments require that the Blood Service screens blood donors on the basis of declared issues. The Blood Service uses the Donor Questionnaire to perform this screen and determine donor eligibility. All donors are required to answer Yes or No to the question relating to male to male sex (along with other questions relating to identified risk factors) and sign a declaration that they have answered the question honestly and to the best of their knowledge. A false declaration will result in prosecution.
Our community demands, and is entitled to, the safest possible blood supply and our actions are focused on delivering sufficient and safe blood to all who require it.

 

[Kathryn]

Good lord, people, it's not discrimination - it's a health issue. If you need blood, don't you want to be assured that it's as risk free as possible?

I was disappointed when I had to stop giving blood. I lived in Germany during the whole "mad cow beef scare" in the UK. Then I moved back to the States, and for many years was a regular blood donor.

Then suddenly one day, when I went in 6 weeks after my last donation to give another donation, when I answered the usual screening questions, they focused in more on where I lived during the 1990s. Then the nurse told me that I was ineligible to give blood. What the heck! I was surprised and saddened. She explained to me that this was likely to be a lifetime ban.

This was in about 2002. I check on this regularly and it is still an automatic ban. It may never be lifted.

What struck me as odd was that I had been giving blood for years between 1993 and about 2002 and suddenly I couldn't give anymore. What about all those poor sods who got my blood before the ban was in place? I hope they're ok - and I still have no signs or symptoms of mad cow disease, though my husband may tell you otherwise.

I was not married to my husband during the 1990s, but he lived and worked in Scotland during that time, so he is also ineligible to give blood.

And we've got good blood! So - to gays who are feeling discriminated against - think on this: My white, heterosexual husband and I, who haven't even engaged in any "risky behavior" for the past TWENTY YEARS, can never give blood again.

It ain't personal, buddy.

 

[Drolefille]

Good, lord people, just accept the discrimination and stop asking questions.

And yes the US's current policy is likely discrimination as noted above, the recommendation is for a year, other countries use a year and so on. Tattoos are typically also a year due to blood borne diseases that come with a window period. Why then a lifetime ban for men who have sex with men. Technically fwiw this would exclude me as my first boyfriend was raped as a young teen, I had sex with him... and that rule is written on the actual forms so as to exclude me from donating as well.