Posted on 06/15/2016 9:35:06 AM PDT by Faith Presses On
Hell - I can’t donate because I got back from being stationed in Europe 2 weeks after the deadline - for the potential of Mad Cow Disease and I’d wager, that after 35 years, I’m less of a threat than the average homosexual....
But the Obama administration and the Democratic politicians and media aren’t on the same page with this one, most likely due to the election:
“The Obama administration has shied away from suggesting when it would completely lift the ban. White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that policy changes would have to come from the agency itself.
“This was a decision that was made by the FDA, and it was made consistent with the advice that our scientists have offered about the best way to insure the safety of the blood supply,” Earnest said. “The president believes that when it comes to ... these kinds of questions, that we’re going to rely on scientific evidence.”
http://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/democrats-try-lift-fda-blood-donor-ban-gays
That's not exactly accurate. That implies they have the wit to recognize the consequences of what they believe. In many cases they simply don't think that far ahead, or don't believe it if they do.
More like, they think being "tolerant" is so much more important than the results of recklessly endangering the lives of others.
Also they don't mind "breaking a few eggs" if it furthers the world view they wish to believe.
“Were you a victim of a mass shooting, received blood and contracted AIDS?” CALL HASTINGS AND HASTINGS for your free consultation. Hundreds of victims have received millions of Dollars, get yours now. CALL HASTINGS AND HASTINGS NOW!”
In the book, “War on Women” written by Roger Stone...
It seems from different things I’ve read that they have erred on the side of safety by making broad, blanket exclusions.
Probably this is for the sake of keeping things simple, so that people are more likely to answer their questions honestly, or just not bothering to go to a donation center in the first place.
The FDA report on the issue mentions in a few ways that “self-selection” and rigorous screening have helped keep the blood supply very safe, despite the tests on donated blood not nearly being perfect:
“The use of donor educational material, specific deferral questions, and advances in HIV donor testing (e.g., HIV antibody assays, p24 antigen assays, and nucleic acid tests (NAT)) have reduced the risk of HIV transmission from blood transfusion from about 1 in 2500 units prior to HIV testing to a current estimated residual risk of about 1 in 1.47 million transfusions (Refs. 14, 15).”
And a study on the donor history questionnaire suggests why people need very simple questions they can’t so easily fudge on: people tend to distort the questions in their own minds. If they believe their blood to be safe, apparently, they will answering less truthfully on questions that might challenge their belief:
“The key result of this study, which was highly consistent for both individuals who only have sex with partners of the opposite sex and MSM, was that individuals respond to questions posed by the questionnaire as if they were answering the more general and subjective question in the self-assessed context of “is my blood safe,” rather than providing an answer to the literal questions as asked.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440453/posts
Yet they can’t be without a clue of the consequences.
That FDA report is online, and the media should be going to it. Every story I’ve read on this in the last few days makes different claims on the scientific facts involved, or fails to fill in blanks.
This is a science-based story, and the FDA made their decision based on studies of the issues. The media are trained to look for that information, and it is so easily provided that it is publicly available online. It isn’t difficult to read, either. It’s written in plain English, requiring no help from medical experts to understand it.
From the report:
“As a group, in the United States, MSM have the highest HIV risk: according to CDC, two-thirds of new HIV infections occur in the approximately 2% of the population who are MSM (Ref. 27). The risk of HIV among MSM is more than twenty-fold higher than that of men who have sex with multiple female partners and women who have sex with multiple male partners (Ref. 32).
“Thus, absent another scientifically-validated way of identifying individuals at highest risk of transmitting HIV, a time-based deferral for MSM since last sexual encounter is the one deferral policy that has been demonstrated to be effective in a setting with similar HIV epidemiology to the United States.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440453/posts
Facts matter not a whit to agenda-blinded sodomy activists.
And the media is going without facts, too, facts readily available from the FDA:
“As a group, in the United States, MSM have the highest HIV risk: according to CDC, two-thirds of new HIV infections occur in the approximately 2% of the population who are MSM (Ref. 27). The risk of HIV among MSM is more than twenty-fold higher than that of men who have sex with multiple female partners and women who have sex with multiple male partners (Ref. 32).
“Thus, absent another scientifically-validated way of identifying individuals at highest risk of transmitting HIV, a time-based deferral for MSM since last sexual encounter is the one deferral policy that has been demonstrated to be effective in a setting with similar HIV epidemiology to the United States.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440453/posts
Yes they can, they believe "gay" is normal. Propaganda emitted from every media source tells them so.
They don't research the issue so as to discover that the homosexual community is actually a vast reservoir of nasty diseases far in excess of what normally occurs in the heterosexual population.
That FDA report is online, and the media should be going to it.
They won't read it, or if they do, they will conclude that "Gay Equality" is so important, the risks don't matter. At least the risks don't matter to them.
This is a science-based story, and the FDA made their decision based on studies of the issues.
They don't care about science. They are emotion driven, and are willing to believe a man can become a woman. They aren't reasonable people.
I can’t donate my blood because of my time living in the UK during the Mad Cow era of the ‘80s.
So it goes. However small the risk, why would I possibly want to impose it someone else?
Sexually active homosexuals are a virtual petri dish for various pathogens to flourish in, mutating readily and breaking out into new, drug-resistant strains. They LOVE homosexuals.
Yeah, I don’t get that. Is there not a blood test for Mad Cow disease pathogens?
The slogan that will soon replace "In God We Trust."
The gays know perfectly well why they can’t donate blood.
I wonder how many filthy, disease-ridden queers lied and donated blood anyway at that clinic.
They do, but to varying degrees.
This whole younger generation is being told that the eighties were a period of “panic” over AIDS.
In the stories I’ve read in the past few days on this issue, all but one neglected to mention that people actually acquired AIDS through blood donations. They all spoke of “fears of HIV entering the blood supply” led to the ban on gay men donating. And they all spoke of how there was “panic” in the ‘80s over AIDS that caused homophobia.
With HIV being seen as more of a “chronic” disease these days, many young people might not even be aware that it was a most deadly disease for almost two decades, and that from just the reports of surviving homosexual men, most of the other homosexual men they knew who were sexually active before AIDS surfaced died from it.
From what I’ve seen, history has been rewritten on this.
Perhaps they should find a way for queers to be able to donate strictly to other queers. Maybe mark their blood bag with a large rainbow sticker?
I’m sure other queers would be eager to receive it.
I just wonder what has happened to their journalistic training. They have to know that the FDA is behind the ban and that they need to go to the FDA on why.
So far the White House isn’t going along with it:
“As a group, in the United States, MSM have the highest HIV risk: according to CDC, two-thirds of new HIV infections occur in the approximately 2% of the population who are MSM (Ref. 27). The risk of HIV among MSM is more than twenty-fold higher than that of men who have sex with multiple female partners and women who have sex with multiple male partners (Ref. 32).
“Thus, absent another scientifically-validated way of identifying individuals at highest risk of transmitting HIV, a time-based deferral for MSM since last sexual encounter is the one deferral policy that has been demonstrated to be effective in a setting with similar HIV epidemiology to the United States.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440453/posts
Exactly. Mixing their blood with yours is just asking to be both a social and medical experiment, with *YOU* picking up the bad consequences.
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.