LGBT: Is it offensive to the LGBT community...?

when the Red Cross refuses to take a blood donation from a gay man? It seems like people forget that homosexuality does not equal disease and promiscuity. Heterosexual sex can also lead to HIV/AIDS infection. Is it offensive or reasonable?

I am a part of the LGBT community (I'm FTM trans), but I also am a laboratory science student, and I currently do an internship in a blood bank. I will have my degree in less than a year. So for all intensive purposes I'm a laboratory scientist who works, but is not getting paid at this point.

So..I know the in's and out's of this a lot more than the donors do. It is NOT the Red Cross who is refusing you. It's the FDA. The FDA regulates the deferrments for donors, due to blood being considered a "therapeutic drug". So don't get mad at the people at the red cross, it's not their fault. Blood banks fall under a lot of federal red tape.

And it's not just gay men. In fact, the donor sheet does not specifically say "gay men". It SAYS: "men who have had sex with another male, even once since 1977". So this can include guys on the "down low". It includes heterosexual women who's had sex with a man that's had sex with another man. It's people who've traveled to Europe or Africa. It's hemophiliacs, it's people with recent tattoos or peircings, it's people who have recently been on antibiotics, ALL KINDS OF REASONS, relating to PUBLIC HEALTH, not DISCRIMINATION.

Since antibody testing is what is primarily used to detect diseases in the blood that's collected, it only has about a 98% sensitivity. And since some viruses, like HIV and hepatitis can have "window" periods, where an antibody test may not pick it up, this is why they are deferred.

Let me ask you a question...an IV drug user makes up about 10% of the cases of Hep B and/or HIV. But if I were to ask you, "should an IV drug user be allowed to donate blood?" you'd probably say NO, right? Ok..so why should we exclude someone that is only a 10% risk, but allow a group of people that makes up over 60% of all HIV confirmation cases (i.e. men who have sex with other men)?

See what I mean? It's a matter of economics, (lab testing for blood donations is expensive) as well as public health statistics.

*edit* blood is NOT tested for all STD's. It is tested for Hep A, B, and C as well as Hep core antigen, Syphilis, West Nile virus, and HIV 1 and 2, and another virus that attacks T cells but not HIV that I can't remember the name of. It's also ABO grouped, and antibody screened. And that's it. It is not tested for EVERYTHING.

See? This is what I'm talking about. Everyone wants to scream it's offensive and discriminatory, but how many of you ACTUALLY know your FACTS on the subject? Probably very few of you.

Don't like it? Take it up with the FDA and CDC.

*edit* Whatever, give me thumbs down. You know I'm right and that I know my sh*t. Don't hate.

Not only is it offensive, there's a really unfair double standard.

If you're a man and have had sex with a man since whatever year (1967, maybe?), you can't donate blood ever.

If you're a woman and have had sex with a man who has had sex with a man since that year, you have to wait 1 year to donate blood.

So if you're gay, you can't donate, but if you're a woman and you're promoting heterosexual activity, you can? Unfair! They test all the blood, and if you can certify that you don't have HIV, you should be able to donate no matter what your sexuality. I've heard some arguments that HIV can be in your blood without being detected for 1 month before it's testable, but you can get HIV through heterosexual sex as well as homosexual sex, and if you're a gay man who has safe and protected sex with a single partner, you're unlikely to have HIV.

What I find offensive are those asking the questions simply "taking people's word for it" that they have never engaged in intravenous drug use, have no diseases and believing whatever the donor may say about their sexual conduct, straight, gay or otherwise.

I cannot donate blood to anyone but myself because of my cancer history. So it's not an issue for me. But I have received many transfusions from donated blood & it's always concerned me a bit due to wondering about the honesty of the donors.

One time, while in hospital, I was lounging about in the nuclear medicine department and I set my bottled water down and walked away from it. A small child spied it and started to drink from it and his mother snatched it out of hands and said "Don't drink that! You might catch cancer!". =(!!

So, comparing that incident to the Red Cross people, it's not the act, necessarily, that offends me, but the ignorance behind it.

But, people get lots of silly ideas in their heads, and some people don't make an effort to reason things through. Some are gullible and some don't even know there's anything to think through in the first place. So I can't really be too overly offended. At least not in an angry way. =)

Omega

It is offensive and meaningless, because all blood is tested for STDs anyway.
And as was mentioned in another answer, many gay men lie and say they are straight in order to donate blood, especially in a situation where they don't want to be 'outed'- like a blood drive at work or school where everyone is being encouraged to participate.

I believe it is offensive until they also deny anyone who might possibly be an intravenous drug user from donating. All blood goes through extensive testing, I understand not wanting to take any chance with HIV, but just because someone is gay doesn't mean they are positive. Any Tom, Dick, or Harry walking down the street could be HIV positive and it's not fair to risk a blood shortage because of someone's sexual orientation.

They take blood from me all the time....LOL, I`m a bisexual women.I think it`s offensive and bigotry.Again more intolerance....There was a heterosexual man recently in the news being charged with 1st degree murder, ( two counts), because he knowingly had sex with 11 women and he did not tell them he was AIDS infected.I`m sorry Einstien...I don`t agree, even with your facts.You`re saying that being gay is dirty, ( comparing it with IV drug users). IV drug users will do anything to get a high, ( including using dirty needles)....AIDS IS NOT A HOMOSEXUAL DISEASE!!

it's based on their interpretation of the statistical probability of infections. if infection and not caught, company is sued to oblivion. they're protecting themselves financially and insofar as reputation. so be it. there are also constraints about having had tattoos during such and so time frame relative to the blood donation. i don't see that as offensive. nor do i see the gay related hesitancy.

I think there was a time when the testing of donated blood didn't have a reliable way to detect HIV. I think that was like more than 25 or 30 years ago when the disease was first out there. Now they can detect it easily so there is no way that we can do any more damage to the blood supply than str8 people. I agree they should change the rules again to allow us to donate blood! You are right Moo, so thanks for saying something about this.

offesive but understandable still unfair though.

they do acept donations from gay men but only if they have not engaged in any sexual act that was male to male. the reason being is that the technology they have when they test the blood, doesnt not detect everything and they say most stuff that doesnt really mean hiv/aids, can be found in the blood of a male that has had male to male sexual contact.

i see why it can be offensive.

however... people are still trying to figure out if homosexuality is in genes or not. many gays think it isn't, but doctors cannot be too sure so they have to be careful.

really, don't take it personally. i am offended, but there is no reason to be because people are trying to figure out if its genes.

(i don't think it is because it really is a decision in life a person makes)

i find it offensive, and i'm not a gay man. my b/f is bi and he's not able to donate because he's had sex with guys, i'm bi as well, and i think that it's pretty stupid to say that just because a man has had sex with another man he's automatically got aids or w/e, i think it's offensive to our community as a whole

Both.

Offensive because it stereotypes that all gay men have HIV/AIDS.
Resonable because gay men have the highest rate of HIV/AIDS [excluding Africa..respectively]. Gay men naturally participate in more high risk sexual activity. They are only trying to be careful.

At my old school they had a blood drive. I thought it was pitiful that they took blood from stoners over clean gay guys. The second time the drive came to the school, most of the gays just lied and said they were straight.

i find it offensive.
i have a gay friend, who just tells them he is straight. because he knows he's safe.
my friend told me that on the paper work it asks "have you ever had sex with a man who has had sex with a man?"
i think that's stupid... they should just do an STD test on all the blood donations they get and not worry about sexuality.

Heya Moo! *hugs*

I'm gonna have to go with both on this one. I think that while I'm mildly offended by the implications it presents, I do think that they have to look at the probability and statistics, and they only have the best interests of their patients in mind.

That being said, i think there's other screenings you could provide, such as bringing in test results to prove cleanliness. *shrugs* I don't know.

Have a good rest of your week!

Hey Senor. I hate it. I tried to donate blood and they asked me if I had ever had sex with a man.. stupid people.. Never did they ask if i did it with a girl.. How stereotypical..! I hate it.. I ended up calling the person who was in a higher position.. They said it was just a standard question.. STANDARD?! wtf! wierdos!

Like everything else, it boils down to economics; that is , the cost (incl. time & accuracy) of testing vs. the demand 4 blood ! - now if they refused to GIVE me blood 4 being Gay; that would be another story ! (they also refuse IV drug users !!)

It was reasonable 25 years ago when the testing for HIV could take up to 6 months.

Now, it's just offensive. And worse - it's stupid. I have type O-, which is rare and totally universal. And I can't give blood. STOOPID.

I find it to be a reasonable safety precaution to keep the blood supplies safe. I donate every 60 days to The American Red Cross and I appreciate the fact that they provide a much needed life saving service.



L

Offensive and illogical. When we had a blood drive at my school I couldn't donate which was just really messed up.But who cares, if there are ignorant people out there who would rather discriminate than save lives then its their fault there is a blood shortage.

a bit, yes.

I mean, I understand the rational like 10 yrs ago, but things are different in medicine these days.

Oh well, when all the breeders start dying off because they need blood - don't come begging to me.

I believe donations are tested. It is offensive and I also believe HIV may lay dormant and undetected for quite some time. Correct me if I'm wrong, please

completely offensive. It is disgusting that they think they have the right to refuse a donation from a perfectly healthy person!

somewhat reasonable because it protects people but offensive to the people who want to give blood but are gay

All I know is they should never b*tch about blood shortages when they are refusing to take blood from so many people.

鈽?/div>

• 4 weeks ago