Blood Drive

[Que-Ever]

The red cross does blood drives, right? And I hear that they've made lots of updats to the kinds of blood they'll accept. Such as, people with cancer or have had cancer or something can donate blood after a certain amount of time...(cancer wtfbbq) But, if you are a gay male and have had any sort of sexual relations with another guy, you can't? This seems a bit ****ed to me. I don't have any links, but it shouldn't be too hard to find. Que opinas te occuren?

 

[Gunner]

There's a common (mis)perception that gays have STDs I guess, nothing new here.

Edit: I meant aids actually, not STDs.

 

[Ome_Vince]

yeah, there are all kinds of weird reasons why you are not allowed to give blood anymore. I'm not allowed since i've been in Africa longer than 6 months (scared for malaria etc). :S
For gays i bet its because they're scared of AIDS.. :S (while straight ppl spread AIDS just as easy, weird stuff..)

 

[baxter]

I've never actually heard of gays not being allowed to donate blood and although I'm not certain I can't really imagine there is a carpet ban on anybody who is gay from donating.

I do know that all blood donations are screened for HIV/AIDS as a matter of practice. Simply because receiving blood which has this virus is the easiest way to acquire it.

Although HIV/AIDS is spread though gay relationships, it's also spread through, as stated blood transfusion, drug users swapping needles and heterosexual relationships. So it seems odd to say the least that one group of individuals would be singled out and not allowed to donate.

 

[bbson john]

AIDS is not just stick in gays.

But the way the gays make love really helps diseases like AIDS spread.

 

[Que-Ever]

I've never actually heard of gays not being allowed to donate blood and although I'm not certain I can't really imagine there is a carpet ban on anybody who is gay from donating.

I do know that all blood donations are screened for HIV/AIDS as a matter of practice. Simply because receiving blood which has this virus is the easiest way to acquire it.

Although HIV/AIDS is spread though gay relationships, it's also spread through, as stated blood transfusion, drug users swapping needles and heterosexual relationships. So it seems odd to say the least that one group of individuals would be singled out and not allowed to donate.

It's not a carpet ban, as far as I know, it's strictly for gay males who have had sexual relations.

Yeah, it is screened, which is one reason I find it such bullshit.

AIDS is not just stick in gays.

But the way the gays make love really helps diseases like AIDS spread.

I rarely ever understand you. Do you even speak english?

 

[bbson john]

I rarely ever understand you. Do you even speak english?

Do I?

I mean anus sex causing spreading of disease.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Blood Drive

A vampire road movie? Two bickering children of the night race across the open deserts of America from New York to Los Angeles, drinking blood, getting shot at by rednecks and giving the finger to the law? Then they drive off a cliff in each other's arms at the end? No?



On topic, this seems slightly (and by 'slightly' I mean 'lotsly') silly (and by 'silly' I mean 'wtf?').

 

[baxter]

Do I?

I mean anus sex causing spreading of disease.

Anal sex does contribute to the spread of HIV/AIDs but is a far lower risk category than vaginal sex. The virus is present in greater quantity in vaginal fluid than opposed to the lining of the anus and faeces. In other words you are far more likely to acquire HIV through normal vaginal sex than you are through anal sex. HIV cannot be transmitted through oral sex.Nor is it spread through hand to genital contact. It cannot be spread though cuts on you hands or any other part of you body as all cuts form a protective membrane instantly.

It is a myth and total misconception that HIV/ AIDS is a gay disease and is spread solely by anal sex, it is not.

The highest risk factor of them all is by blood transfusion, as already been pointed out to you. Please stop spreading urban myths and misinformation regarding this virus and if you really want to find out about it simply do so research.

Incidentally before any other scare mongering appears in this thread, the chances of catching HIV through Vaginal sex is aprox 1/1000 for unprotected sex with somebody who is HIV positive and almost zero for protected sex. This is a very difficult virus to spread; it is not spread by shaking hand, kissing or sharing the same dinner plate. It is sexually transmitted disease that is spread through prolonged exposure or direct blood to blood contact.

 

[gick]

But, if you are a gay male and have had any sort of sexual relations with another guy, you can't? This seems a bit ****ed to me. I don't have any links, but it shouldn't be too hard to find. Que opinas te occuren?

When I gave blood last week the questionaire said something along the lines of 'Have you ever had anal or oral sex with another man without the use of a condom'. So 'tisnt a blanket ban.

 

[Que-Ever]

Ah, maybe the peple in my area are just being especially rediculous about it... there was an article in the school newspaper on the subject, And one gay guy said he had heard about the ban on gay blood, went in to donate anyway. The first thing he said was, he was gay and had had gay sex, and they flat otu refused him, with no more questions.

 

[Cormeh]

This is just idiotic. I wouldn't be surprised if the Red Cross turned round and claimed that blood donated by gay donors can in turn make patients gay.

Seems to be the attitude these days.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Here are the actual guidelines of who shouldn't donate:

--have ever used needles to take drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by your doctor
--are a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977
--have ever taken money, drugs or other payment for sex since 1977
--have had sexual contact in the past 12 months with anyone described above
--received clotting factor concentrates for a bleeding disorder such as hemophilia
--were born in, or lived in, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea,Gabon, Niger, or Nigeria, since 1977.
--since 1977, received a blood transfusion or medical treatment with a blood product in any of these countries, or
--had sex with anyone who, since 1977, was born in or lived in any of these countries. Learn more about HIV Group O, and the specific African countries where it is found.

Baxter is right for the most part. Getting it from vaginal sex is difficult (though I have heard there is a greater risk if you are uncircumcised--it was from an article about prostitutes in India spreading HIV at an alarming rate due to uncut truckdrivers or something).

The reason anal sex is actually rather dangerous is because the walls of that cavity are so thin and bleed easily thereby exposing the partner to the disease in a very direct way.

It still seems weird that even if you have had tons of unprotected sex for the last year or so, as long as it was heterosexual and your partner didn't fit the above descriptions, then its fine. To me, that is very disturbing....

 

[Direwolf]

Well the Red Cross's attitude for everything seems to be "better safe than sorry." Just playing the numbers, the actual percentage of people who have had male gay sex is pretty small compared to the total population. That said, if they don't want the blood then its their loss.

 

[gick]

AFAIK, the Red Cross doesn't collect blood in the UK, its done by a branch of the NHS. That would explain the difference in criteria.

 

[Angry Lawyer]

I give blood, because I'm a hero. My blood type's B neg.

-Angry Lawyer

 

[kaf11]

I'm AB. Rare blood type, the universal recipient. Good for me, bad for when I donate blood - or at least thats what I thought. They always tell me that my blood is always used and never a waste.

 

[Black Pete]

25% of gay people in san francisco have HIV. it was in the news recently.

 

[gick]

25% of gay people in san francisco have HIV. it was in the news recently.

Source?

 

[short recoil]

My blood type is unrecognisable to modern science, the test equipment is usually destroyed when they try to test it.

 

[kaf11]

This one time I heard they tried to put 1 pint of short recoil's blood into a normal man and his heart exploded. The blood continued to pump. True story.

 

[Black Pete]

Source?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1819368

That's why they cant give blood. 1/4 has HIV.

And in Baltimore 40% of gay men are infected with HIV.

 

[gick]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1819368

That's why they cant give blood. 1/4 has HIV.

And in Baltimore 40% of gay men are infected with HIV.

:O

 

[VictimOfScience]

Sadly, if you look at the statistics, homosexual contact lead to nearly half of the AIDS diagnoses in 2004. So it unfortunately makes sense that the Red Cross would want to keep their rules as they stand now. As the statistics show, its still a high-risk behavior and as such should be excluded. ;(

Just under half of all people diagnosed with AIDS were probably infected with HIV through male-to-male sexual contact, while people exposed through heterosexual contact comprise around 17% of the total. However, since the beginning of the epidemic, the number of heterosexual infections has increased dramatically. According to CDC estimates, heterosexual contact led to about one third of new AIDS diagnoses and one third of new HIV diagnoses in 2004.

Male-to-male sexual contact - 18,203
Injection drug use - 5,962
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use - 1,372
Heterosexual contact - 12,683
Other/risk not identified - 335
Total - 38,553

Source.

 

[el Chi]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1819368

That's why they cant give blood. 1/4 has HIV.

And in Baltimore 40% of gay men are infected with HIV.

But surely if they were to undergo an AIDS screening test, then they could give blood? Seems a bit harsh to assume that because they're gay, they're bound to have HIV. In fact, don't all donors have to undergo some sort of screening?

I'm not allowed to give blood because I take anti-convulsants. I'm not sure whether it'd be particularly bad for a recipient, but better safe than sorry I suppose.

 

[Que-Ever]

By the way, I think the gay guy at my school had tested... uh negative? whichever means you don't have HIV. I'll have to find that article...

 

[Direwolf]

But surely if they were to undergo an AIDS screening test, then they could give blood? Seems a bit harsh to assume that because they're gay, they're bound to have HIV. In fact, don't all donors have to undergo some sort of screening?

I'm not allowed to give blood because I take anti-convulsants. I'm not sure whether it'd be particularly bad for a recipient, but better safe than sorry I suppose.

This probably just comes down to efficiency. They test all their blood, but I'm willing to bet they take a hit in the pocket for it. They want to make sure the maximum amount of blood is usable for their time and money.

 

[Black Pete]

But surely if they were to undergo an AIDS screening test, then they could give blood? Seems a bit harsh to assume that because they're gay, they're bound to have HIV. In fact, don't all donors have to undergo some sort of screening?

I agree, it should be fine if they undergo authorized testing (that the gays pay for). I'm pretty sure that most donors just have to answer the questions about their history.

 

[Raziaar]

My blood type is unrecognisable to modern science, the test equipment is usually destroyed when they try to test it.

I think your greatest feat would be developing a sense of modesty.

 

[Angry Lawyer]

Raziaar, I think you need to learn what satire is

:shh:

-Angry Lawyer

 

[Raziaar]

Raziaar, I think you need to learn what satire is

:shh:

-Angry Lawyer

Shhhh! I like taking cheap shots wherever I see them. I can make more of 'em that way.

<grins>

 

[el Chi]

I agree, it should be fine if they undergo authorized testing (that the gays pay for). I'm pretty sure that most donors just have to answer the questions about their history.

What. The. F*ck.
A gay person wants to give blood in the hope that they m,ight save a life. However, given their sexual orientation, it's only fair to assume they have the gay plague, naturally. There's no chance whatsoever that straight people might have it, so we don't need to worry about them. Ah, but these gays on the other hand... They want to do something good to hopefully benefit other fellow human beings, but to ensure they're clean THEY should have to pay to, essentially, prove themselves worthy?

No, I'm sorry, that's such stereotyping and prejudice, and it's tremendous discriminatory. Screening is no bad thing, but to say that gay people must have it where straight people needn't is going over the top. And to say that on top of that they must pay for it is absolutely horrible.

 

[Raziaar]

All people need screening if they're going to give blood. Either before they give blood, or have the blood tested after the fact. Though its better to do it beforehand, so you don't have to discard of blood if its found to have diseases in it.

 

[Angry Lawyer]

I'm pretty sure they screen you for a lot of things in England. I know they took some blood and tested it beforehand.

-Angry Lawyer

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Sadly, if you look at the statistics, homosexual contact [...is] still a high-risk behavior and as such should be excluded. ;(

Just under half of all people diagnosed with AIDS were probably infected with HIV through male-to-male sexual contact, while people exposed through heterosexual contact comprise around 17% of the total. However, since the beginning of the epidemic, the number of heterosexual infections has increased dramatically. According to CDC estimates, heterosexual contact led to about one third of new AIDS diagnoses and one third of new HIV diagnoses in 2004.

Male-to-male sexual contact - 18,203
Injection drug use - 5,962
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use - 1,372
Heterosexual contact - 12,683
Other/risk not identified - 335
Total - 38,553

Source.

AIDS from "homosexual contact": 47%

AIDS from "heterosexual contact": 32%

Apparently being heterosexual is almost equally high-risk, with only a 15% difference between the two.
But that's not taking into account injection drug users, who are, as the source results show, heterosexual in the majority.

AIDS from "homosexual drug users": 4%

AIDS from "heterosexual drug users": 15%

So, check the math:

47% + 4% = 51% Homosexual

32% + 15% = 47% Heterosexual

The difference is only 4%, and that is if you do not include the "other causes" category, which would bring the results even closer. Also, your source indicates that the heterosexual numbers are rising faster than the rest.