Only because it isn't a result of the fact that they're gay (well, directly at least) - unfortunately gay men are more likely to have HIV. There are other risk factors (such as doing drugs may allow for sharing of needles) that also prevent you from donating blood. It's just a safety precaution.

I guess I'm saying it's not discrimination against gay people - it's just based on known numbers and risk factors for that group.

See, I suppose it's acceptable - I certainly understand the logic behind it, but I think that gay men with a recent HIV test, or gay men who do not engage in anal sex, should be allowed.

I don't know. They're very picky about the blood they accept. I tried to donate blood once, and they rejected me on account of I lived in Portugal near a military base between 1985 and 1995. No idea why that mattered, but, well, like I said, they're very specific and picky.

Agree with Cinders... well the first part. I never lived in Portugal or something like that.

I think it's okay to be overly cautious when it comes to blood donation. It's putting the safety blood recipients over the feelings of blood donors.

There is no HIV test as of now that is 100% accurate. Giving HIV infected blood to a person who already has a disease is pretty much killing the person.
It's as close to 100% as you can get without actually banning all people.



I'm permanently banned from give blood because I lived on a military base in Germany in the 80s.
Pretty much everyone who lived in Europe for 6 or more months in the 80s are banned because that was where and when Mad Cow disease emerged.

Uh, everyone can get HIV. It's not like gay men are more likely to have it. That's just some stupid myth from back in the '60s when HIV was just recently discovered. Women and straight men can get it as much as gay people can get it.

And @Cassie-1-2-3 that's why they always do tests twice or even three times to be sure.

And really? Where did you get that? Because my mom lived in Europe for her whole life(and she was definitely born before the '80s) and she recently donated blood.

I know all people can get HIV, that's why I said it's as close as you can get without banning all people.
I also know men who participate in homosexual acts are not more likely to get it, but statistics from the link say that 61% of new HIV infections are estimated from gay and bisexual men. This isn't information from the 60s.
This link also says that "MSM (men who have sex with men) is the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been steadily increasing since the early 1990s."
Sense MSM only represents 2% of the US population (again, according the the CDC fact sheet), it's not that large of a loss to just cut out that 2% entirely. Especially when more than half of HIV infections come from that 2%.

I'm not suggesting that it's a perfect method, but I think it's good enough for now and I don't find it an unacceptable method.


Aside from tests not being 100% accurate, it seems really complicated to ask any MSM to not have sex with any man from 10-21 days prior to the test up until the day of actual donation every time they want to donate. (I realize this isn't exclusive to MSM)




I got that from link page. (Variant Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease, or vCJD, is the same as Mad Cow disease)
It doesn't apply to ALL areas of Europe. It seemed like just a side conversation, so I didn't elaborate completely.

Also - just a nitpick - AIDS rose in the 80s, not the 60s. :o)

But yes, Cassie knows her facts. I always appreciate that.

Well Cassie I'm sorry to say but your source is either wrong or the US is just hysterical about donating blood.

Holland(my country) is on that list that says you can't donate blood if you've been there during that period of time.
Of course it could also mean that we wouldn't be able to donate blood in the US. But that would be very weird if you ask me. I mean, Holland isn't some outback third world country filled with terrible diseases.
That is, if the US knew that Holland is a country itself and not "the biggest state of Germany" -.- (seriously so many people thought that was the case it's just not funny anymore).

Anyways, I'm drifting off.

Back to the gay men and HIV...

And I think, Cassie, that that's a pretty good solution. Asking a gay/bi man not to have sex for 10-21 days. In other cases of donation we go much further. Like when we donate a kidney we can't eat for an amount of time. Plus 10-21 days of celibacy won't kill you and you actually could save lives(that is, if your blood is healthy).

Btw now you say it I can imagine why gay/bi men are more likely to get HIV than straight men since with MSM you don't have the risk of pregnancy, so less people are motivated to use a condom.

And maybe... -can't believe I'm actually saying this XD- Cinders, you were right about those sources. Now I read Cassie's comment I now realize it's better for the debate to know these sources so no one will debate with a false argument... I guess internet debates are way different than real life debates XD

But... just a question in general because I suck at googling...
Do they actually ask a man if he is straight, gay or bi when he wants to donate blood?

and

Were there actually people who got infected by HIV after a blood transfusion due to a false negative on the donor's HIV test? :O

My sources are the CDC and the Red Cross (The organization that provides over 50% of all US blood donations).
If you would like to provide a source that says the CDC and Red Cross information is illegitimate, please do so.

It has nothing to do with how much money Holland has, or how their government runs. It has to do with what diseases were present at what time. (Even first world countries have diseases.)

Kidney donation is a one time thing. Blood/plasma donation is done pretty regularly. Asking a gay or bisexual man to constantly interrupt his sex life for weeks at a time just doesn't seem justified. It's very different from telling someone to not eat for a few hours, one time. Plus, you'd have to rely on the honor system and just believe if they say they haven't has sex in 2-3 weeks.


They ask all males if they have ever had sexual contact with another male, and I think they may ask females if they've ever knowingly had sex with a male who has had sexual contact with a male.
They don't actually ask "Are you gay?" or "Are you bisexual?"

The only reason you can't eat for donating a kidney is because you have to have surgery... and you have to be sober for any kind of surgery.
There is no other restriction in what you eat or drink before donating a kidney (or any other kind of organ as far as I know. But I am sure about kidneys)

If their blood is HIV-free and meets the criteria, than I don't see why someone wouldn't accept donated blood from a gay man (unless, of course, religious beliefs are involved...but that's just a whole other ball game for me :/).

Edit: Reread the fanpick, thought it stated "gay person" rather than "gay man".

So... the CDC and Red Cross wasn't a good enough source, and me vouching for the sources and appreciating that Cassie gave them wasn't enough? The sources must be wrong? The CDC and Red Cross are both extremely reliable medical organizations. Excuse my French, but they know their shit. Cassie's facts were all in order.

Yes, it is important to know sources, both your own, and those of your opponent. Don't criticize a solid source without your own research to back it up just because you personally disagree with its findings. It comes off as foolhardy.

I'm a gay rights activist, totally, and I believe there is a way to safely allow gay men to donate blood by intelligently utilizing HIV tests. You'll note that lesbians are not barred from donating blood. At least, when I went, there was no question pertaining to my sexual relations with other women. The risk with gay men is a legitimate one, as Cassie explained. The statistics aren't wrong. That being said, not a single one of my myriad of gay male friends is HIV positive. I believe that if you have had a recent HIV test then you should be allowed to donate. I think that's reliable enough.

Because the ONE THING I'll call Cassie out on is that HIV tests are actually highly accurate. According to the US Preventative Services task force, the possibility of a false positive is 1 in 250,000.

Well I don't care if the president of the CDC said that source was right, it's wrong! XD

Seriously, Dutch people are allowed to give blood even in Canada! (even if they have been in Holland for that period of time). My uncle was in the military and then he went to the US for his uncle who was very ill and he gave blood.

So... I don't really get it...

But alright if the internet says it's true then I guess my uncle gave him a handshake instead of blood.

I can't criticize the source with my sources because my sources are howdoyacallit, uncheckable.

Also if Mad Cow disease is the problem with blood donations, then why hasn't there been another epidemic in basically anywhere in Europe with proper health care?

If you're so certain it's wrong, cite me a source that says so.

source 1:
link

So that you won't have to read the whole article;
"To ensure that blood donation and donated blood are safe for donors and recipients, respectively, potential donors are assessed through a personal interview and a standard set of medical criteria decided by national health authorities. People considered to be in good health are then allowed to give blood."

So nothing with the mad cow disease...

Source 2:
link

This is my most important source. It doesn't state that you CANNOT donate blood if you've been in the military stationed in Europe from 1980 to 1996, but it states that you should CONSULT the CBC. But that's the same with people who had a heart attack etc.

This is my most important source. It doesn't state that you CANNOT donate blood if you've been in the military stationed in Europe from 1980 to 1996,
Actually, it does say you can't.


Under "Reasons for Permanent Deferral from Blood Donation"

"Persons who have spent more than 3 months in the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Channel Islands or Isle of Man, Gibraltar, or the Falkland Islands) from 1980 through 1996"

"Since 1980, persons who have spent 5 or more years in Europe, including time spent in the U.K., and individuals who have spent 6 months or more associated with military bases in Europe from 1980 through 1996"

To me it doesn't, it just states that you should get a blood test to see if you're healthy. Then you can give blood.

That's not what "Permanent Deferral" means.
I don't quite understand, but I guess if you want to pretend it means "get a blood test", then okay...
The donation stations aren't going to go along with the fantasy.

Uh, but if you read my source it says; "consult the CBC" so I can't see why they wouldn't test the person for healthy blood so that they have more donors and therefore more healthy blood.

Also; ...oh fudge i was wrong... (seriously i hate saying that XD)

link

Here it says that there is no test to determine that disease...
It also explains why my other source was encouraging young people to donate blood(because they haven't been exposed of course).

I guess I read my sources wrong =S but to me, "consult" means make sure you have it so... my source was wrong XD

Damnit XD But... then why was my mom allowed to donate blood? I don't get it =S

Maybe all who engage in risky behaviors (I don't know many men who don't) shouldn't give blood. That would make me feel better. Seriously I would rather have my friend donate to me (who's gay) than some of these straight guys who can't control their own behavior.

Not all gay men have sex -.- Though, majority of gay men do oral rather than anal. As long as they practice safe sex and get tested, I don't see the problem. The idea is to save people.

@EgoMouse True but some people get paranoid and get more scared of the treatment than of the disease.

yup

Why do you think that?

If they have proof that they don't have any sort of sexually transmitted diseases then they should be allowed but if not then they shouldn't be

If you want to give blood that is your buisness, as long as your blood is clean then I don't really care. But I must admit I understand why gay men can't give blood

Gay men aren't the only ones that get HIV.

^ i didn't say there were

It's perfectly acceptable for a gay person to donate blood, as long as they get tested and their blood's healthy. I know gay men are most likely to get HIV, but denying them the choice to donate blood because of that is stereotypical and a slight bit homophobic in my opinion. If someone wants to donate blood, and everything is all safe, sure, why not?

LOL @jennabug121 Yeah if they have a sexually transmitted disease they cannot donate blood

Only some std's like hiv and hepatitis can be transmitted by blood-to-blood contact. But not most of them like syfilis, chlamydia, gonorrea and cervix cancer.