Should the ban on gays?

giving blood be overturned despite the increased risk of HIV infection


http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Call-t...

Abolishing the rule for gay men would increase the risk of an HIV-infected donation entering the blood supply by about five times, and changing the rule to allow gay men to donate one year after they last had sex with a man would increase the risk by 60 per cent."

My first instinct was to become angry at your question, but the link does point to a very interesting article with worrying statistics.

no

No... it should'nt!

Every blood donation is screened for HIV anyway.

No. nay never, no nay never no more! We do not want 'tainted' blood. It will spread HIV and they should be totally excluded from the programme.

Dee L, what an extremely valid point to make - it's a pity that the self-centred ignoramousses who do not correctly understand the consequences do not also suffer the consequences! Ignorant, self-seeking imbeciles who do not contemplate what their life-style may inflict on innocent people! And quite frankly do not give a damn!

QPR _ i LOVE YOU! - have you seen the number of thumbs down so far - bet i get more than you 'cos i'm a 'rational human being'! God , you@re so funny!


Edit: For you stupid people who are giving me the thumbs down on here - two years ago i lost a friend who had been given a blood transfusion fouteen years ago following the birth of her second son. She contracted AIDS from it and never recovered. She had a life of living hell and the longer she lived, the worse it became as she watched both her boys grow up knowing she would probably never see them as adults. Her last few weeks were an absolute agony to us all and if we could have done it, any one of her friends would have helped her to die with more dignity than she had at the end. The boys will eventually benefit financially from the gross incompetence of her health 'care' but that will not ever bring back her love and care for them and all of us who loed and still miss her. Don't be so quick to thumb down until you know why some of us feel the way we do, sometimes it's too damned hard to talk or put things in print.

should there be a ban on people who eat chicken too?
lol
no
there should not be a ban
that's just silly

yeh sure

no

Every potential donor should be requested a general health checkup including HIV screening of their blood whether gay or not. E.g. people who take antiepileptic can't give blood either, which is why our blood was tested (me and my sister) and we got a no.

I wonder if this ban applies to lesbians. Having said that how could they get HIV. ? A little difficult when you come to think about it.

what a crock of s*hit

how does gay men giving blood increase the risk of HIV five times? not every gay man has HIV and shags everything that walks without a condom

So yes gay men shoudl be allowed to give blood

no, they are still high risk.

In a democratic society, nothing should be banned. But their blood should be labled for patient to decide if they would accept it.

I can't give blood either (take medication for Blood pressure) but I don't find it offensive - I understand that my blood could cause more harm than good and could adversely affect a severely ill person so I accept that it is for the greater good.

YES. I am in someways homophobic but as long as the blood is screened then what's the problem. It's their blood you're getting not their attitudes, sexual preferences etc. If they can help save somebody's life then at last they are doing something decent.

I wouldn't want a gay's blood,even if the blood wasn't infected.My main concern about having gay blood it is that i might turn on the radio one morning, hear 'Its Raining Men' and develop an uncontrollable urge to pick up a hairbrush and start singing along in front of a mirror

To be honest i am not sure,i understand that people are concerned,but everyone who is sexually active and is not using protection is at risk and they could already be blood donors. i personally can't wait until science is advanced enough that you store your own blood.so the only person at fault is yourself if you have bad blood.
we all have a responsability to have protect sex and to teach the younger ones to protect them selves.

Rationalism has no basis on the PC crap we all have to suffer. So this does have a basis on fact - so no it should not be overturned.

.
Do you know what, if me or my kids needed blood I would risk it. Theres screening in place ffs
Gay men are well aware of the risk and statistically dont donate as much as the hetereosexual population..
The Blood donor service have restrictions in place for a reason, who are you or I to question it?

Gee, lets ask some poor slob who is about to get a blood transfusion how they feel about this...........................
Have people no common sense at all anymore???? God help us.

no

the headlines would be terrible if mistakes were to occur...

Now everyone here seems to have there own agenda.
If it makes sense then it has to be done.
Would the same protest be in place if it was a wee village?
Some of the residents were prone to a blood disorder that could infect others.
I don鈥檛 think so.
The word gay gets mentioned then people want to start shouting oh it鈥檚 unfair.
Then you wonder why you have homophobia. Because people get sick of the gay thing getting shoved down there throats. I am a great believer in live and let live
So all the best
Let the doctors decide

The ban should stay. Sorry

Looking at the issue objectively and 'coldbloodedly' do we know the overall % of the population who are HIV+ and of these do we know which % are gay/bi?(former roughly..latter problematic) This would give us an idea of the actual increase of the risk factor. Also, while it may be possible to screen for HIV contamination of blood donations.. how do you screen for a gay/bi lifestyle?

I don't think a person's chosen sexuality should interfere with blood donations. It's only based on health. If the reasons are purely health-based then i don't see anything wrong with it.

I mean if you're low in iron, have just given birth, have just had a tattoo, are over 70 or under 16, are pregnant, have been to a 3rd world country, etc, etc - all these things discount you from donating blood. They are discriminatory is some way, but good blood is hard to come by and they need the best blood from the healthiest people possible.

Also, blood is tested and screen before being given to anyone, so HIV slipping through... well that would be unlikely, and if it were to happen, there would be an enormous law suit against the donations organization.

Er.....I thought they gave you a blood test first before you gave blood, am I missing something? Heterosexuals too can carry HIV infections.

the blood supplies are screened for HIV as well as other factors, so no.