Sometimes I Don't UNDERSTAND This World!

I am far from an expert on this subject, but isn't gay men the highest percent of HIV? So they probably have been testing donated blood and gay mens maybe has come back as positive the most so in order to save time and money, they just flat out say NO to gay men donating blood. I don't know the reasons, but in my own brain, this is what I think and it makes sense. Good luck.

I haven't read the other responses, but I can shed some light for you on WHY this is a rule. When AIDS first was discovered it was actually called GRID (gay related immune disorder) because it primarily affected gay men. The reason for this is that the anus and rectum are very vascular, so anal sex between two men is more likely to transmit HIV than oral sex or vaginal sex. Since it was primarily in gay men, it spread more rapidly from man to man. Women who have anal sex (or regular sex) are still at risk, but it was not nearly as common unless their partner also had unprotected sex with an infected partner (most likely a man). Yes, the blood is tested before it is available for transfusion but this was seen as a way to cut down on costly tests for donors that were considered high risk. It's outdated, but that's how it is.

Just FYI... when a female gives blood, they also ask if she has engaged in oral/anal sex. It's the same questionnaire with the same "risk factors" formula. So... do the "quick math". If having anal sex results in a statistically higher likelihood of tainted blood, then gay men are more likely to fall into that category.

It's not discrimination- it's math. Women who respond with "yes" to that question are turned away too. Of course they screen the blood before it goes into another person's body, but those screenings cost money. A 10 question "interview" keeps them from screening blood from people who engage in high-risk behaviors. It's really that simple. You are making an issue out of something that isn't really an issue.

They also turn away anyone of any gender who has engaged in prostitution, as a customer or as a seller, and anyone whose spouse fits either of those catergories. (That ban is for life.) You can't donate for a certain time period after getting an operation, a tattoo, or a piercing. You can't donate if you answer "I don't know" to several questions. It may seem that they are being too cautious, but when you're dealing with potentially fatal outcomes, you have to be.

I dont think its *meant* to be an attack towards gay men. The law was developed in the early 80s to help prevent the spread of HIV through transfusions. Fact is,that even today, out of the approx 1.2 million people living with HIV, 49% of them are gay men. HIV transmits easier by anal sex than by any other kind of sex. FDA said that while the newer HIV tests are highly accurate, there is still about a 1 per 2 million risk of transmitting HIV by transfusion. Most tests can't detect HIV until the infected party has had it for at least 10-20 days. So, the risk is small, but its still a risk. I think that if the FDA felt it was just as safe as any other blood they would change the law. So what if your kid needs an infusion? Who' blood would you rather get? I 110% agree with you that we are way behind in equal rights for the gay population, and I would happily join in the picket line to defend their rights to equal everything, but this *issue* just does not speak to me.

Sorry but I agree with it. The fact of the matter is that gay men are more likely to carry HIV. It may not be "politically correct" to say but it is the truth.

Krista P. is correct. Very well said Krista.

Good luck to you and yours.

Just an FYI----I have been giving blood religiously for about 10 years. NOT ONCE have I been asked if I have oral or anal sex. Not once. Never. Ever. Also, it's not 10 questions....I answer about 45-50 every time I donate.
It is really quite disturbing that they don't take blood from gay men. The highest percentage of NEW AIDS cases each year are among African American women. Can you imagine what would happen if all of the sudden the American Red Cross said they wouldn't take blood from black women?
You are right...they do test the blood. They test it for HIV and every other possible disease under the sun. I actually had a gay man pull my blood and I asked him ALL about this very subject. He is the one that told me that they test for HIV in every specimen they collect. You could never trust someone to tell the truth on those questionairres. In fact, one of the questions is for women and asks if you have ever had sex with a man that has had sex with other men. Well, how the hell would we know? We wouldn't unless we were in the room with them for every sexual encounter. You answer the questions the best you know how, but the blood is still tested.
It's discrimination...plain and simple. It's also wrong.
L.

I think that rule/regulation was put in place when they first discovered tainted blood donations. I think it's outdated.

Busy, I think your heart is in the right place (and I admire you for that), but I must agree with the majority of the posts. It all comes down to math and money.

:)

There's a MASH episode where they stain a racist dark, because he refused to accept 'negro blood'. This reminds me rather strongly of that.

My good friend is AB- No blood bank has ever cared that he has a husband instead of a wife. Especially not at 3am when he's getting a call to come into the hospital because there's been a car accident.

I don't know if such a thing still exists, but in the 70s his mom was a member of a Rare Blood Club. He gets called in a lot less than she does, because storage and supplies are better these days... But rare blood types are still in high demand.

They did this back in the 80's when they thought that ONLY gay men carry and spread HIV/AIDS. It was spreading so fast through the blood donations and at the time they did not have a test for it so they banned gay men from donating. They should now allow everyone to donate since they can test the blood for HIV/AIDS.

I'm with you! This is an artifact from the cluster f*** response to HIV. If you really want to get your blood boiling on the topic read "And the Band Played On" by Randy Schilts.

It is true that anal sex has higher efficiency of transmission. About half of all HIV infections in the U.S. have been MSM. Over half of all new infections are in African Americans. So, by some people's logic on here, we should ban African Americans from donating blood?

Just to note, over 85% of global transmissions is through heterosexual intercourse. Most of the remaining 15% is from IV drug use. This is a disease that primarily effects women.

All blood must be tested. I'm going to trust that above a demographic profile. Viruses don't discriminate.

I don't think this law is an attack against homosexuals. I think it's a matter of protecting the greater good.

I am not allowed to donate blood either. I lived in Europe for more than 4 years in the 80s. There is a concern about the human variant of Mad Cow's disease. I am pretty sure I don't have this disease (it's fatal) and it's frustrating not being able to donate. But there is no test for the disease and small slight possibility it can be transferred through blood transfusions. So for the greater good, I am not allowed to donate.

Do they not test the blood?

Beyond that I wouldn't care where it comes from, as long as it is clean.

I do think it is kind of ridiculous. I mean if it were only about statistics then black people would be turned away as well since statistically black men are 7 times more likely than white men to contract HIV (black women are 18 times more likely than white women) and African Americans are diagnosed with AIDS at 9 times the rate as Caucasians. African Americans make up approximately 13% of the US population and account for greater than 50% of newly diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases and account for 48% of the people living with HIV/AIDS. That is a terrible statistic about which something should be done (but that is another post). But my point is...saying it is all about statistics is not entirely true. There is still a stigma and fear towards homosexuals.

There have been cases of donated blood carrying HIV/AIDS; it is not always caught before it infects someone. The truth of the matter is that ANYONE can get HIV, it can take years before a person feels any symptoms, and it can even take a while before a person gets an HIV positive test result; what that means is that you can actually have HIV and get a clean blood test result. Gay men are at a higher than average risk of contracting HIV, but in some cases straight, married, monogamous women are actually at a very high risk (because their husbands cheat on them with an infected man or woman and give her HIV). I guess the real challenge is that blood donations are badly needed to save lives, but at the same time, a blood donation can end up killing someone (although with proper treatment people with HIV can actually live healthy lives). Screening questions are designed to weed out those who fit the highest risk categories for spreading blood borne illnesses, many people end up getting turned away for a variety of reasons, (my father was recently told he could not donate blood because he may have consumed beef tainted with mad cow disease back in the 70's in Germany, true story!) but it is all to keep the recipients of the donated blood as safe as possible.

Not that I agree with it, however, yes it costs money to test the blood and they are probably trying to save money. Are they going about it the right way? I think not. Plus the demographics for aids is changing all the time. If they are so very worried about the costs of testing to give blood they should simply say the requirements are to have a recent (6months?) aids test with them along with proper ID to reduce the testing and "bad blood." I can not give due to anemia and I am not sure the rules regarding it since the last time I tried was 9/11

I suppose it would be safest to take blood only from people who've never been sexually active but then that would eliminate practically everyone.

Blood donation is regulated by the FDA.

I don't like it, but they've gotta "go with what they know" which, right now, is how to identify high risk groups for HIV.

Which is interesting, because I believe the largest growth rate for HIV contraction is hetero females, right?

I think O. day, much like we now look back on the Jim Crow laws, we will read these questions and shake our heads. Let's hope so. Obviously eduction about HIV/AIDS has a long way to go.

Do you have a link? I think this may be a state to state issue.

I am not sure how long something has to be active in someone's blood before it can be detected in tests so I am really not sure if it is out of line.

I agree there are many lifestyles that can put blood quality at risk just, well I don't feel like I have enough information to make an educated statement about all of this.

Well I think it's wrong. Even if a gay man who may be abstaining from sex for whatever reason tries to give blood they can refuse him just because he's gay and has at one point or another had anal sex. Yes, I understand the argument that gay men are at a significantly higher risk for contracting HIV, however, ALL blood going through a blood bank is tested for disease. The collective "we" hope that only honest, healthy people are going to give blood, but uh, not always the case. You shouldn't give blood if you have hepatitis, are an alcoholic, do drugs, etc., etc., but people do, that's why they test it. So the argument of "you don't want tainted blood do you??" is ridiculous. Of course "we" don't, of course I don't, but HIV is only one of the MANY concerns. This is not the time of Ryan White, who innocently lost his life because of blood transfusions, this is the 21st century and I expect more than the practice of turning away a gay man who is healthy and willing to help.

Yup. If a man has ever had sexual contact with ONE other man, he's banned from helping to save lives forever. But a straight man or woman, or a lesbian can sleep with as many people as they want and nobody cares. Real awesome, eh?
To answer some questions below, it is NOT a state to state issue, and YES, all people are asked the same questions, however, only gay men are turned away for this reason.