Healthy Gay Men Must Be Allowed to Donate Blood, Says GMHC

Mar 8, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: EDGE

Tired of the bureaucratic foot-dragging, the Gay Men's Health Crisis has teamed up with the Sarah Lawrence College Student Life Committee and the Student Senate to create a We The People online petition to demand that the President Barack Obama force the Food and Drug Administration to reform their policy preventing gay men from donating blood.

Comments
1 - 20 of 101 Comments Last updated Mar 15, 2013
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#2 Mar 8, 2013
The current policy is not based on good science but rather on fear and prejudice. Risk screening should be used to separate out anyone who has engaged in high risk behavior rather than focusing on sexual orientation.

While the current policy made sense before reliable testing was developed, now that we have such testing the current policy makes no sense.

Anyone can carry HIV and pass it on. But having the virus is required for passing it on. People who are not infected cannot pass the virus, no matter what they do. There is no reason to exclude people who are not infected and have not had the opportunity to become infected in a year.

While the virus can go undetected for a month or more, the new policy would require no risk of exposure within a year, which is plenty of time to develop the antibodies which would show up in the repeated testing.

The population at risk is those who have had the risk of contracting the disease within the past year. That includes heterosexual people as well as gay and bi people. There is no need to exclude those who have no risk within the past year and have been tested.
Olin

Kerteminde, Denmark

#3 Mar 8, 2013
Not allowing queers to donate blood is only common sense.

If I ever need a blood transfusion I would like to feel safe knowing I'm not receiving any homosexual AIDS infected blood.
Jerome

Rowlett, TX

#4 Mar 8, 2013
Olin wrote:
Not allowing queers to donate blood is only common sense.
If I ever need a blood transfusion I would like to feel safe knowing I'm not receiving any homosexual AIDS infected blood.
Me two!!!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#5 Mar 8, 2013
Considering more straight people are likely to not know their medical status and are thus more likely to spread blood born illnesses, we need healthy blood wherever we can get it.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#6 Mar 8, 2013
It is already based on "behavior" rather than who you are. It does not ask "are you gay?" It rather asks are you a man who has had sex with men in the last few years. I do think gay men should be able to donate blood, but it should be labeled for use by other gays, and even they should be given the option of whether or not they want to risk it.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#8 Mar 8, 2013
The biggest danger in receiving blood from a homosexual is that it might turn you gay.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9 Mar 8, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why that ban queers and not straights. Stupid
So banning all the healthy ones, because of a few unhealthy ones, is "smart" to you? At least with the healthy gay people, you know they're actually healthy. Leads me to wonder how many diseases you have.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#11 Mar 8, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
I have none. I bet you're loaded with them though.
Nope. In spite of being asexual, I get tested once a year, got tested a month ago, still clean. If I did have one, I'd know, because I get tested. You, if you're straight, you are not likely to get tested, and since you're a bigot I know you have been exposed to a lot of fluids that are probably unsafe, so your chances of being infected with some blood born pathogen is extremely high.
JeffnHouston

Houston, TX

#13 Mar 8, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why that ban queers and not straights. Stupid
Obviously you did NOT even "get" what the post said. And you scream "stupid". jeez, priceless!

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#15 Mar 9, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
Go su:ck another d!ck queer.
Actually, he was correct, you just outed yourself as a complete and total idiot.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#16 Mar 9, 2013
Olin wrote:
Not allowing queers to donate blood is only common sense.
If I ever need a blood transfusion I would like to feel safe knowing I'm not receiving any homosexual AIDS infected blood.
Then bleed out and die. It'll be a win win for all of us.

ALL blood now is checked for HIV or hep or any other blood borne pathogens. Tests are far more accurate and much quicker than in other days. No blood, even from heteros, is NOT tested, so calm down.
It is not 1982 anymore, grampy, get with it.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#17 Mar 9, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
The biggest danger in receiving blood from a homosexual is that it might turn you gay.
Then give me some young person's blood and I can wake up and be 25 again.

Please, tell us that you aren't SERIOUS are you? Who can tell? You are so full of whack opinions that no one can tell anymore.

You've been watching too many vampire movies, Cletus. Or, sniffing too much jet exhaust.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#18 Mar 9, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why that ban queers and not straights. Stupid
Hard to call someone "stupid" when your grammar is INCOMPREHENSIBLE. What were you trying to SAY? No one knows.

Why are you pretty ones always so DUMB?

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#19 Mar 9, 2013
Chance wrote:
It is already based on "behavior" rather than who you are. It does not ask "are you gay?" It rather asks are you a man who has had sex with men in the last few years. I do think gay men should be able to donate blood, but it should be labeled for use by other gays, and even they should be given the option of whether or not they want to risk it.
So some slutty girl, or promiscuous man, she who has sex with many men, or he with many prostitutes, can waltz in and give blood and NO one will ask him or her anything? Sounds safe to me...let's hook you up to him or her, shall we? Roll up your sleeve!

I mean since he or she are straight, then he or she are IMMUNE to blood disease, according to YOUR ahem, cough cough,*logic**.
The Big Gay Explosion

Alpharetta, GA

#20 Mar 9, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
The biggest danger in receiving blood from a homosexual is that it might turn you gay.
They're not making anymore straight people; so if you have the opportunity to join The Big Gay Explosion; light your fuse; baby!
Blood Bank Lab Tech

Ocala, FL

#21 Mar 9, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
While the current policy made sense before reliable testing was developed, now that we have such testing the current policy makes no sense.
Such testing is not cheap! The cost of collecting, processing, and preserving blood and blood products is already excessively high. Just the collection sets we use at the blood bank I work at are $175. Collection and processing includes drawing tubes for testing, and over 70 different communicable diseases are screened for each donor. If we added the latest reliable HIV test, the cost of a single unit of blood would quintuple.

By law any blood intended for human transfusion must come from VOLUNTEER DONORS (so all you folks who SELL your plasma thinking you're doing some good, forget it - it's used for some research, but mostly for other products, like cosmetics and glue!), and there are enough volunteer donors who do not engage in high-risk behavior to maintain the supply without having to multiply the cost of blood just so for the sake of being politically correct.

There's no such thing as a "right" to donate blood for Chrissakes. Those who engage is extremely high risk behavior are not having their "rights" violated by being excluded from giving blood any more than missionaries who travel to Haiti or Honduras to help out. Deferral from blood donation should NOT be politicized.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#24 Mar 9, 2013
Blood Bank Lab Tech wrote:
<quoted text>
Such testing is not cheap! The cost of collecting, processing, and preserving blood and blood products is already excessively high. Just the collection sets we use at the blood bank I work at are $175. Collection and processing includes drawing tubes for testing, and over 70 different communicable diseases are screened for each donor. If we added the latest reliable HIV test, the cost of a single unit of blood would quintuple.
By law any blood intended for human transfusion must come from VOLUNTEER DONORS (so all you folks who SELL your plasma thinking you're doing some good, forget it - it's used for some research, but mostly for other products, like cosmetics and glue!), and there are enough volunteer donors who do not engage in high-risk behavior to maintain the supply without having to multiply the cost of blood just so for the sake of being politically correct.
There's no such thing as a "right" to donate blood for Chrissakes. Those who engage is extremely high risk behavior are not having their "rights" violated by being excluded from giving blood any more than missionaries who travel to Haiti or Honduras to help out. Deferral from blood donation should NOT be politicized.
All blood it tested for HIV.

Do you really not know this?

Risk screening should be used to separate out anyone who has engaged in high risk behavior rather than focusing on sexual orientation.

Anyone can carry HIV and pass it on. But having the virus is required for passing it on. People who are not infected cannot pass the virus, no matter what they do. There is no reason to exclude people who are not infected and have not had the opportunity to become infected in a year.

While the virus can go undetected for a month or more, the new policy would require no risk of exposure within a year, which is plenty of time to develop the antibodies which would show up in the repeated testing.

The population at risk is those who have had the risk of contracting the disease within the past year. That includes heterosexual people as well as gay and bi people. There is no need to exclude those who have no risk within the past year and have been tested.

Since: Sep 10

Earth

#25 Mar 9, 2013
Not Yet Equal wrote:
The current policy is not based on good science but rather on fear and prejudice. Risk screening should be used to separate out anyone who has engaged in high risk behavior rather than focusing on sexual orientation.
Assuming that all LGBT people are a "risk of spreading HIV" is as false and insulting as assuming all straight people "risk of spreading syphilis and hepatitis".

Actually, that's not true. The number of new cases of hepatitis in the US is twice that of HIV, so straight sex is much more damaging (although the new cases of syphilis are about the same).

http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/statistics/index...

http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats10/syphilis.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/in...

.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#26 Mar 9, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
Who are you, the queer grammar patrol?
Hey, if you WANT your rantings to NOT be understood, more power to you. Why bother to post if your ramblings are not comprehensible to anyone?

Your posts are nothing but non audible farts anyway...talk about "silent but deadly"!

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#27 Mar 9, 2013
Fred wrote:
<quoted text>
Just another rainbow queer from Georgia. Get lost.
And "Queer" is ALWAYS capitalized, please. It IS a proper noun.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ga. teen kicked out after admitting he's gay to... 6 min eJohn 7
Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition 9 min eJohn 1
Local group hopes to revisit decade-old convers... 18 min eJohn 3
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 37 min Roberto 67,982
Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler? 1 hr Mr Slovak 912
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 1 hr Pietro Armando 54,998
Once more on fascism knocking on the Balkan doo... (Aug '09) 2 hr Dr Milan Sufflay 1,078
Supreme Court: Was gay marriage settled in 1972... 6 hr Frankie Rizzo 558
Biggest Gay Lies 7 hr Duran 1,722
California Takes a Stand Against Gay and Trans ... 10 hr Fa-Foxy 54
Gay Marriage Vs. the First Amendment 19 hr Frankie Rizzo 410
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••