Tweet
AY MEN BANNED: FDA Doesn't Want Their Blood
Posted May 25th 2007 12:20PM by Angela Bronner
Filed under: AIDS: 25 Years and Counting
On Wednesday, the FDA reiterated its policy that gay men (actually, any man who has had even ONE sexual encounter with a man) are banned for life from donating blood, a policy instituted in 1983, when there was a very real threat of contamination of the blood supply.
On their web site, the agency gave a laundry list of reasons why this is the case, including the following: "Men who have had sex with men account for the largest single group of blood donors who are found HIV positive by blood donor testing."
However, other respected blood donation organizations lifted their lifetime ban in March 2006, concentrating on sexual contact within one year.
The Red Cross, the international blood association AABB and America's Blood Centers proposed replacing the lifetime ban with a one-year deferral following male-to-male sexual (MSM) contact.
New and improved tests, which can detect HIV-positive donors within just 10 to 21 days of infection, make the lifetime ban unnecessary, the blood groups told the FDA. (Source)
In a word, critics say the FDA policy is discrimination.
Many recall the ban on all Haitians from donating blood which was also instituted in 1983, but lifted in 1990 in both the U.S. and Canada after Haitian activists raised hell.
Though the FDA agrees that the policy may defer many healthy donors, it still does not see its policy as discriminatory.
The estimated HIV risk from a unit of blood is currently about one per 2 million in the United States, according to the agency.
If people want to take "risk" into consideration, what about the scores of women who have had sex with men who've had sex with men (knowingly or unknowingly)?
As it now stands, gay men, anyone who has ever been paid for sex or anyone who has used intravenous drugs are under the lifetime ban.
Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [3]
Reader Comments
(Page 1)
1. It is an utter bliss of discrimination. Red Cross is always yelling we need blood, we need blood, just because a person is gay..Does not mean that their blood is a sureness for HIV. Welllll FCC is the Government and that's the Government for you
Chaz at 1:08PM on May 25th 2007
2. Is the gay male lifetime ban on blood donation discriminatory? It sure is. But unfortunately these are the precautions that must be taken when dealing with possible infections of others. You may not be infected, but your lifestyle makes you more susceptible. I think they should come up with a ban on promiscuous people too. (just a suggestion)
katj360 at 1:50PM on May 25th 2007
3. The risk involved in transmitting potential diseases (like HIV/AIDS) from homosexual sex is too great to risk. I know that sounds like discrimination but I certainly don't feel that way. Homophobic, I'm not....but, I do understand the need in taking any necessary precautions that might keep the public at large a little safer.
Robbie Rob at 2:27PM on May 25th 2007
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Your name (required):
Your email address (required, will not be shown to the public):
Your site’s URL (optional):
Do you want us to remember your personal information for next time?
Yes No
Add your comments:
Posted May 25th 2007 12:20PM by Angela Bronner
Filed under: AIDS: 25 Years and Counting
On Wednesday, the FDA reiterated its policy that gay men (actually, any man who has had even ONE sexual encounter with a man) are banned for life from donating blood, a policy instituted in 1983, when there was a very real threat of contamination of the blood supply.
On their web site, the agency gave a laundry list of reasons why this is the case, including the following: "Men who have had sex with men account for the largest single group of blood donors who are found HIV positive by blood donor testing."
However, other respected blood donation organizations lifted their lifetime ban in March 2006, concentrating on sexual contact within one year.
The Red Cross, the international blood association AABB and America's Blood Centers proposed replacing the lifetime ban with a one-year deferral following male-to-male sexual (MSM) contact.
New and improved tests, which can detect HIV-positive donors within just 10 to 21 days of infection, make the lifetime ban unnecessary, the blood groups told the FDA. (Source)
In a word, critics say the FDA policy is discrimination.
Many recall the ban on all Haitians from donating blood which was also instituted in 1983, but lifted in 1990 in both the U.S. and Canada after Haitian activists raised hell.
Though the FDA agrees that the policy may defer many healthy donors, it still does not see its policy as discriminatory.
The estimated HIV risk from a unit of blood is currently about one per 2 million in the United States, according to the agency.
If people want to take "risk" into consideration, what about the scores of women who have had sex with men who've had sex with men (knowingly or unknowingly)?
As it now stands, gay men, anyone who has ever been paid for sex or anyone who has used intravenous drugs are under the lifetime ban.
Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [3]
Reader Comments
(Page 1)
1. It is an utter bliss of discrimination. Red Cross is always yelling we need blood, we need blood, just because a person is gay..Does not mean that their blood is a sureness for HIV. Welllll FCC is the Government and that's the Government for you
Chaz at 1:08PM on May 25th 2007
2. Is the gay male lifetime ban on blood donation discriminatory? It sure is. But unfortunately these are the precautions that must be taken when dealing with possible infections of others. You may not be infected, but your lifestyle makes you more susceptible. I think they should come up with a ban on promiscuous people too. (just a suggestion)
katj360 at 1:50PM on May 25th 2007
3. The risk involved in transmitting potential diseases (like HIV/AIDS) from homosexual sex is too great to risk. I know that sounds like discrimination but I certainly don't feel that way. Homophobic, I'm not....but, I do understand the need in taking any necessary precautions that might keep the public at large a little safer.
Robbie Rob at 2:27PM on May 25th 2007
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry: inappropriate or purely promotional comments may be removed. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Your name (required):
Your email address (required, will not be shown to the public):
Your site’s URL (optional):
Do you want us to remember your personal information for next time?
Yes No
Add your comments:
Comment