Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ban on gay blood donors revisited
MSNBC.com ^ | 06/10/2010 | Andy Miller

Posted on 06/10/2010 9:12:41 AM PDT by OldDeckHand

Groups urge government to lift lifetime restriction

Should gay men be allowed to donate blood? A government health committee is re-examining that question today.

A regulation created at the height of the 1980s' AIDS epidemic banned men who have had sex with another man since 1977 from ever giving blood.

Advocacy groups, blood-collection organizations and some members of Congress are calling for the Food and Drug Administration to revise the lifetime ban, which has been reviewed twice in the past 10 years, but left unchanged.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 111th; blood; bloodsupply; gayvote; hiv; homonaziagenda; homosexualagenda; medicine; publichealth; taintedblood; taintedbloodsupply
This is a powerfully stupid, and probably dangerous decision. While male homosexuals makeup for only a tiny fraction of the US population, they account for over half of all new HIV infections, annually. The infection rate also has been on the rise in recent years, not the decline, which should give additional pause to this decision.

From the New York Timesas recently as 2008...

The study, conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that 56,300 people became newly infected with H.I.V in 2006, compared with the 40,000 figure the agency has cited as the recent annual incidence of the disease.

The findings confirm that H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS, has its greatest effect among gay and bisexual men of all races (53 percent of all new infections) and among African-American men and women.


1 posted on 06/10/2010 9:12:41 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

are people really this stupid or really this malicious?


2 posted on 06/10/2010 9:14:12 AM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mockingbyrd

Isn’t there a testing protocol in place? Has anyone(in recent years) received HIV+ blood?
If the answer is no, I don’t see the problem. No difference from you or I.


3 posted on 06/10/2010 9:17:52 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mockingbyrd

Yes, a # of people are this stupid. All in the name of political correctness. Let’s cut the nonsense: it’s not because they are fags, but the fags lead a degenerate, irresponsible lifestyle.


4 posted on 06/10/2010 9:19:18 AM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
HIV can lay dormant in your body and blood for up to 10 years before becoming detectable. That's the problem with letting a high-risk subgroup donate blood.
5 posted on 06/10/2010 9:22:56 AM PDT by Dayman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I agree. As someone who got Hep C way back when from a blood transfusion I am for strict guidelines for giving blood.


6 posted on 06/10/2010 9:23:42 AM PDT by pandoraou812 (Hey 0.....you don't kick A$$, you kiss A$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
There isn't a testing protocol that can find HIV in it's earliest stages. You can pass along HIV and other dieseases and not realize and it can be missed in testing.
7 posted on 06/10/2010 9:23:55 AM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mockingbyrd

The cost of testing the bolld will drive up the price to the recipient.

NO MATTER WHAT— I would never want blood from an HIV person.

Long time friend of mine is fighting Hepatitis for the rest of her days because of a blood transfusion she got over 30 years ago.


8 posted on 06/10/2010 9:25:46 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mockingbyrd

I realize that. But don’t the blood banks hold the blood and do proper testing? I can’t imagine the blood supply safety depending on self-reporting their sexuality.

Again, has anyone gotten AIDS from a blood bank in the last 20 yrs?

If not, blood is blood.


9 posted on 06/10/2010 9:26:51 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles

I sure cannot spell this AM.


10 posted on 06/10/2010 9:26:53 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

We don’t need the blood that badly, and giving blood is hardly a “right”.

However, maybe they could set up a special collection to be used for HIV-positive patients, and gay men could give blood for that purpose.


11 posted on 06/10/2010 9:30:03 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

AIDS is a gay disease whenever it is politically advantageous...


12 posted on 06/10/2010 9:30:10 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
I'm 64...I had yellowjaundice at age 12...THEY STILL WON'T TAKE MY BLOOD TO THIS DAY.

Yet, "groups" are wanting to allow possible HIV exposed gays to give blood freely.

Is there any f**king thing in the liberal world that makes sense?
13 posted on 06/10/2010 9:32:40 AM PDT by FrankR (Standing against tyranny must start somewhere, or the future belongs to the tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand; mockingbyrd; ridesthemiles; goseminoles

The ban should be extended to anyone engaging in anal sex.


14 posted on 06/10/2010 9:33:11 AM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

HIV positive blood is removed by screening assays that require an additional test to verify an HIV positive result.

This means that you get to pay for blood that can’t be used.

Additionally the screening assays can’t be made perfect. The more HIV positive blood that gets donated, the more likely that someone will get HIV positive blood, serum, cells or platelets.

It would be such a rare occurance, it will be almost impossible to tell how the victim acquired the HIV virus, leaving the family of the victim to speculate on what the victim has been doing.


15 posted on 06/10/2010 9:35:19 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pandoraou812
"I agree. As someone who got Hep C way back when from a blood transfusion I am for strict guidelines for giving blood."

It seems to me that irrespective of how robust and effective the blood screening protocols may be, it only makes logical sense to eliminate blood from the most high risk groups. Science & medicine should apply logic and reason, not emotion associated with political correctness. It's illogical to solicit blood from a population demographic that is insanely more at-risk for HIV, than the general population is.

16 posted on 06/10/2010 9:35:25 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: max americana

Exactly. The question isn’t “are you gay?” but “are you a man who has had sex with another man sinc 19XX?” But since homos can’t separate their behavior from their “gayness”, this question gets them worked into a tizzy.


17 posted on 06/10/2010 9:35:41 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Great, now we’re putting political correctness ahead of the safety of the nations blood supply...


18 posted on 06/10/2010 9:35:58 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
But their screening procedures cut down on the possibility of transmitting dieseases, by eliminating MANY people based upon behavior and where they lived.

Right now, blood is tested in large batches, because the infection rate is so low. If any thing appears in the batch, every donor is disqualified for life. This is efficient, because so many potentially dangerous donors are prescreened out. If you open to door to people whose behavior automatically increases their risk of carrying many different kinds of dieseases, screening protocols will have to be changed, causing the price and availibilty of blood to rise and and become limited.

Your argument that no one has been infected from blood in the last 20 years is exactly why we shouldn't alter the procedures. They work, and people stay safe.

Donating blood is to help people. More people are helped if we limit their exposure to many different dieseases.

19 posted on 06/10/2010 9:36:29 AM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike

There wouldn’t be any blood.

Look, I’m just trying to get facts. There is no way to screen blood for behavior. The blood supply is safe. This seems to be a silly issue.


20 posted on 06/10/2010 9:36:49 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Political correctness is killing us.


21 posted on 06/10/2010 9:39:13 AM PDT by pandoraou812 (Hey 0.....you don't kick A$$, you kiss A$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Sir --- how dare you use logic!

Everything you said is true; but, I predict that political correctness will rule the day and we will see gay guys giving blood again. I also predict that you will see a rise in people storing their own blood before elective surgeries.

22 posted on 06/10/2010 9:43:48 AM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Hmm. Could be time to store some of my own blood...


23 posted on 06/10/2010 9:44:15 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

The fact that lesbians are allowed to donate blood, proves that the ban on gay male blood is not homophobic.


24 posted on 06/10/2010 9:44:36 AM PDT by pinochet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike
The ban should be extended to anyone engaging in anal sex.

Like the ban on gay donors banning folks who participate in anal sex would also have to rely on the honor system. So they could lie too if they wanted.

I can also lie if I wanted to give blood and am not supposed to. I lived in Europe during the Mad Cow scare and am also on the list of not being able to donate blood. I'm fine with that and surely don't feel discriminated against. And I certainly don't need convincing.

The problem is the attitude of the gay community that considers not being able to donate blood as a discrimination issue rather than common sense due to their sexual behavior.

25 posted on 06/10/2010 9:45:48 AM PDT by VeniVidiVici (What's black and white and red all over? - OBAMA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

I am at 103 donations, and I don’t do anal sex, so we have at least one donnor left.


26 posted on 06/10/2010 9:46:12 AM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

The blood supply IS safe as long as we keep in place screening criteria as we now have. What makes you think the level of safety will remain static once prohibitions to unacceptably risky behavior are lifted?


27 posted on 06/10/2010 9:49:22 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike
The ban should be extended to anyone engaging in anal sex.

Fair enough.

28 posted on 06/10/2010 9:59:11 AM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Why in the 21st century are we not using synthetic blood replacements?


29 posted on 06/10/2010 9:59:29 AM PDT by 6SJ7 (atlasShruggedInd = TRUE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retain Mike
"I am at 103 donations..."

Bravo for your generosity!

I'm O+ and would love to donate, but with my history of malaria, dengue fever & hepatitis, they won't take mine.

30 posted on 06/10/2010 10:08:15 AM PDT by BwanaNdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
I have nothing personal against homosexuals, but they are a group engaged in high-risk behaviors that make them more susceptible to bloodborne infections. In fact, anyone who engages in high-risk sexual behavior, regardless of being gay or straight, should be barred from giving blood.

This is a no-brainer. Perhaps that's why our small-c congress has such a hard time with it.

31 posted on 06/10/2010 10:10:30 AM PDT by 60Gunner (But there's this one particular harbor...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I was set to donate a few weeks ago, the morning of the donation I broke out in a rash from my new detergent.....they would not draw blood from me due to the rash on my arms.


32 posted on 06/10/2010 10:13:54 AM PDT by ThisLittleLightofMine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThisLittleLightofMine

Label the blood, “MSM donated”.

Problem solved.


33 posted on 06/10/2010 10:18:16 AM PDT by BenKenobi (I want to hear more about Sam! Samwise the stouthearted!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

The Red Cross trying to turn a few more bucks. How many people have AIDS because of the political correctness of the Red Cross.


34 posted on 06/10/2010 10:20:23 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7
Try googling no blood surgery. You'll be surprised at how many surgeries are being done without using blood.
35 posted on 06/10/2010 10:25:43 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
This is why faggots are despised by most people... they do not care about infecting anyone... they want HIV to spread to everyone... they even have fags that try to become infected... "bug chasers"... do you know what they do to fags in china? china knows about secure borders and secure blood supplies.

LLS

36 posted on 06/10/2010 10:28:27 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ( WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

I’ve decided against those prostate drugs, because they are on the deferral list and I’d loose a couple years. I think I’ll go for at least 120.


37 posted on 06/10/2010 10:28:54 AM PDT by Retain Mike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The variable is the same. If the point is homosexuals giving blood, they are going to whether or not there is a “law”. Noone knows but that person what behavior they have engaged in. Its up to the blood banks to ensure blood is clean NO MATTER the donor.

I just wouldn’t want to lay in the hospital worrying about who gave it. ALL blood should be 100% prior to giving it no matter the donor or their behavior. Straight people do sick shit too.


38 posted on 06/10/2010 11:17:17 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

“Yes, um... I’ll have the kosher blood, please.”


39 posted on 06/10/2010 11:17:18 AM PDT by MarineBrat (Better dead than red!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

They’ve been told to lie about their behavior to be able to donate blood. Not only do they want to kill themselves slowly they want the same for others.


40 posted on 06/10/2010 11:21:13 AM PDT by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

From Nov.2007:

Transplant patient not told organ donor a homosexual.

A woman in her 30s who is one of the four organ transplant patients infected with HIV and hepatitis was not told that the infected donor was high risk, and had previously rejected another donor “because of his lifestyle,” her attorney said.

The woman had been told the donor was a healthy young man, her attorney said. But on Tuesday, hospital officials disclosed to the woman that he was actually high-risk, a 38-year-old gay man, Demetrio said. CDC guidelines say that gay men who are sexually active should not be used as organ donors unless the patient is in imminent danger of death.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926969/posts


41 posted on 06/10/2010 11:27:21 AM PDT by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
Good point. It IS all on the "honor system" as it is, and there's no way to verify whether everyone is telling the truth.

But to state that the questionnaire will not have ANY effect on who gives is false. There are enough people who will not give if prohibited by the questionnaire that the decline in risk should be significant. And if "straight" people were anywhere near as risk-prone as homosexuals have been proven to be, yes, I'd want that behavior prohibited as well to qualify as a donor.

42 posted on 06/10/2010 11:27:23 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Their propaganda has always been: “Aids is everyone’s problem.” Now they want to make that falsehood a reality.


43 posted on 06/10/2010 11:29:00 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I was donating blood on a regular basis. Every time I was subjected to a barrage of questions about my travels and my sex life. The question sessions lasted for several minutes. They read each question and ask for a yes or no answer. I totally refuse to donate again until that mess stops. My blood pressure peaks when a young woman questions me about my sexual history.
I am in none of the high risk groups. I would have no problem reading the questions as a group and answering once.


44 posted on 06/10/2010 11:30:38 AM PDT by seemoAR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Yep. In all honesty, I don’t think folks that are HIV+ are lining up to give blood.
They know better(for the most part).
The end result is what counts which is clean blood. No matter the donor.


45 posted on 06/10/2010 11:35:36 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Amen!

LLS


46 posted on 06/10/2010 1:00:13 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer ( WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles
It's not just folks who are HIV+ that are prohibited, but also those who have engaged in behavior that is confirmed to spread HIV. Others on this thread have already offered the reason; that there are early stages of infection that are nearly undetectable. There are a host of other diseases that plague those who engage in MSM. Perhaps even some that are as yet unknown.

If anything, the prohibition creates a formal censure of this type of behavior, which tends to have a powerful effect on those who would otherwise like to violate health laws.

If you get the chance and haven't done so, peruse the CDC's website under HIV/AIDS and you might be appalled at the large number of cases attributed to such a small segment of the population. Any sane society would quarantine.

47 posted on 06/10/2010 2:13:58 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Let them donate blood but it only goes to other gay men.


48 posted on 06/10/2010 2:15:34 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (Liberals are educated above their level of intelligence.. Thanks Sr. Angelica)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED
Let them donate blood but it only goes to other gay men.

You apparently don't understand the homo-agenda. They will demand that their blood be indistinguishable from all others in the blood supply. Otherwise, it would be "discriminaaaaation."

I'm not being facecious.

49 posted on 06/10/2010 3:00:05 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson