[QUOTE=kittykaty;32181828]This is the case, but there is also another exclusionary that is debatable homophobic; "Female that has had oral or anal sex with a male that has/may have had anal or oral sex with another man"[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's almost certainly homophobia. But a part of me thinks that the NHS is so utterly desperate for blood donations that they aren't going to exclude based on some antiquated garbage.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32181790]Yes, but this is a blanket ban on any kind of gay sex at all, while if you're a straight guy and fuck a different woman every week you have no waiting period at all.[/QUOTE]
Because they are statistically 60 times less likely to have HIV. Anal sex also carries a higher transmission rate, and condoms are also more likely break than with vaginal intercourse. Yes, heterosexual couples practise anal sex as well, but it's far less prevalent.
Futhermore, this change brings gay sex in line with other HIV high risk groups:
[quote]You should not give blood for 12 months after sex with:
A man who has had sex with another man (if you're a female).
A prostitute.
Anyone who has ever injected themselves with drugs.
Anyone with haemophilia or a related blood clotting disorder who has received clotting factor concentrates.
Anyone of any race who has been sexually active in parts of the world where AIDS/HIV is very common. This includes countries in Africa. [/quote]
So no, I don't think its discriminatory.
I think it's rediculous how they do HIV tests on heterosexual donors, but not the same for homosexuals.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32181944]Because they are statistically 60 times less likely to have HIV. Anal sex also carries a higher transmission rate, and condoms are also more likely break than with vaginal intercourse. Yes, heterosexual couples practise anal sex as well, but it's far less prevalent.
Futhermore, this change brings gay sex in line with other HIV high risk groups:
So no, I don't think its discriminatory.[/QUOTE]Gay men are not not a high risk group, promiscuous people are a high risk group, it's just exasperated by anal sex.
I've just gotten used to the fact that they will never want my potentially life saving STD-free O-...
I'd donate whenever I could if they would allow me to.
[QUOTE=Legend286;32181960]I think it's rediculous how they do HIV tests on heterosexual donors, but not the same for homosexuals.[/QUOTE]
Er, they do tests for HIV along with a few other diseases on [b]all[/b] blood donations. It even gets automatically extracted into test tubes when you donate.
[QUOTE=Patriarch;32181130]So wait, if I need to get a blood transfusion, there's now I chance that after, I'm going to want to suck dick?
Eh, seems good enough.[/QUOTE]
yes, thats exactly how it works. Just last week, there was a man who was schizophrenic and insane, so we replaced his blood with calf blood, and he turned into a much calmer and nice man.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32181989]Gay men are not not a high risk group, promiscuous people are a high risk group, it's just exasperated but anal sex.[/QUOTE]
Like I said, statistically speaking gay men who practice gay sex are 60 times more likely to be HIV positive than a heterosexual person. If you want to infer whatever you want out of that, so be it.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32182041]Like I said, statistically speaking gay men who practice gay sex are 60 times more likely to be HIV positive than a heterosexual person. If you want to infer whatever you want out of that, so be it.[/QUOTE]
Show me your source.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32182041]Like I said, statistically speaking gay men who practice gay sex are 60 times more likely to be HIV positive than a heterosexual person. If you want to infer whatever you want out of that, so be it.[/QUOTE]
What about straight men who practice gay sex?
[QUOTE=Lebowski;32182129]Show me your source.[/QUOTE]
These are some pretty good statistics on the matter:
[url]http://www.avert.org/usa-transmission-gender.htm[/url]
Black people are significantly more likely to have aids than white people but they'd never ban black people from giving blood because direct discrimination based on race isn't as politically acceptable as doing the same based on sexual orientation
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32182041]Like I said, statistically speaking gay men who practice gay sex are 60 times more likely to be HIV positive than a heterosexual person. If you want to infer whatever you want out of that, so be it.[/QUOTE]I'm not infering anything from this, it pretty much completely bans any male gay couple in a long term relationship from donating blood for the duration of it plus roughly a year.
[QUOTE=Chrille;32182179]These are some pretty good statistics on the matter:
[url]http://www.avert.org/usa-transmission-gender.htm[/url][/QUOTE]
I'm fine with someone stating the facts as long as they have a source to back it up.
Thank you.
[I]i also like how they made the male-to-male sexual contact pie chart part pink.[/I]
[QUOTE=Lebowski;32182129]Show me your source.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/bloodbloodproducts/questionsaboutblood/ucm108186.htm[/url]
Was the source I was quoting from, though I'm not particulary keen on it.
The Health Protection Agency has data which says:
[quote]Unlinked anonymous testing shows that of individuals attending sentinel sexual health clinics in 2009, 2.4% (119/4,925) of men who have sex with men (MSM) and 0.25% (180/70,971) of heterosexuals had a previously undiagnosed HIV infection.[/quote]
Which seems to suggest men who have sex with men are 10 times more likely to have undiagnosed HIV than heterosexuals. [url=http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1202115496235](Source)[/url]
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32182379][url]http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/bloodbloodproducts/questionsaboutblood/ucm108186.htm[/url]
Was the source I was quoting from, though I'm not particulary keen on it.
The Health Protection Agency has data which says:
Which seems to suggest men who have sex with men are 10 times more likely to have undiagnosed HIV than heterosexuals. [url=http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1202115496235](Source)[/url][/QUOTE]
No worries mate, never thought you were really talking out of your ass, just wanted the source. :smile:
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32181996]Er, they do tests for HIV along with a few other diseases on [b]all[/b] blood donations. It even gets automatically extracted into test tubes when you donate.[/QUOTE]
Exactly? But they don't say "oh don't have sex for 12 months" to straight people. What I meant was that they have to wait, where as straight people don't.
Estimates of New HIV Infections in the US, By Transmission Category, 2006
[img]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/images/riskgroup.jpg[/img]
Hall HI, Song R, Rhodes P, et al. Estimation of HIV Incidence in the US. JAMA 2008;300: 520–529.
From the CDC at
[url]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/us.htm[/url]
[quote]By Risk Group
Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM): By risk group, gay, bisexual, and other MSM of all races remain the population most severely affected by HIV.
[B]MSM account for more than half (53%) of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year, as well as nearly half (48%) of people living with HIV. [/B]
While CDC estimates that MSM account for just 4% of the US male population aged 13 and older, the rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in the US is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women.
White MSM account for the largest number of annual new HIV infections of any group in the US, followed closely by black MSM.
MSM is the only risk group in the U.S. in which new HIV infections have been increasing since the early 1990s.
Heterosexuals and Injection Drug Users: Heterosexuals and injection drug users also continue to be affected by HIV.
Individuals infected through heterosexual contact account for 31% of annual new HIV infections and 28% of people living with HIV.
As a group, women account for 27% of annual new HIV infections and 25% of those living with HIV.
Injection drug users represent 12% of annual new HIV infections and 19% of those living with HIV.[/quote]
[editline]9th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32182198]Black people are significantly more likely to have aids than white people but they'd never ban black people from giving blood because direct discrimination based on race isn't as politically acceptable as doing the same based on sexual orientation[/QUOTE]
Estimates Rates of New HIV Infections, By Race/Ethnicity, 2006
[img]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/images/raceethnicity.gif[/img]
Hall HI, Song R, Rhodes P, et al. Estimation of HIV Incidence in the US. JAMA 2008;300: 520–529.
[quote]By Race/Ethnicity
African Americans: Among racial/ethnic groups, African Americans face the most severe burden of HIV and AIDS in the nation.
While [B]blacks represent approximately 12% of the U.S. population, they account for almost half (46%)[/B] of people living with HIV in the US, as well as nearly half (45%) of new infections each year. HIV infections among blacks overall have been roughly stable since the early 1990s.
At some point in their life, [B]approximately one in 16 black men will be diagnosed with HIV, as will one in 30 black women. [/B]
[B]The rate of new HIV infections for black men is about six times as high as that of white men, nearly three times that of Hispanic/Latino men, and more than twice that of black women.[/B][/quote]
[QUOTE=Legend286;32182480]Exactly? But they don't say "oh don't have sex for 12 months" to straight people. What I meant was that they have to wait, where as straight people don't.[/QUOTE]
Because men who have sex with men fall into a high risk category for HIV, the same as people who sleep with prostitutes, with drug injectors or with people from areas where HIV is endemic.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;32181997]yes, thats exactly how it works. Just last week, there was a man who was schizophrenic and insane, so we replaced his blood with calf blood, and he turned into a much calmer and nice man.[/QUOTE]
That's not how schizophrenia works (nor insanity).
[QUOTE=Kung Fu Jew;32182589]That's not how schizophrenia works (nor insanity).[/QUOTE]
are you high?
he was joking.
[QUOTE=lulzbocksV2;32181037]Are they banned from giving blood in the US?[/QUOTE]
It's banned pretty much everywhere except for [u]maybe[/u] the Faroe Islands.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country#Europe[/url]
Good to hear :v:
[QUOTE=Lebowski;32182621]are you high?
he was joking.[/QUOTE]
Looks like you missed the point. Not my problem
[QUOTE=Contag;32182497]
post with charts and shit[/QUOTE]
Really good post. Interestingly, it shows that if you wanted to take a purely scientific approach to this it would be just as logical to ban blacks from giving blood as it is to ban MSM.
But like I said before, that'll never happen because these decisions are as political as they are scientific.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32182553]Because men who have sex with men fall into a high risk category for HIV, the same as people who sleep with prostitutes, with drug injectors or with people from areas where HIV is endemic.[/QUOTE]
And? What stops them from being eligible if they are HIV negative? The fact they have to wait 12 months before being able to be tested is a load of shit.
[QUOTE=Legend286;32182856]And? What stops them from being eligible if they are HIV negative? The fact they have to wait 12 months before being able to be tested is a load of shit.[/QUOTE]
As I said earlier in the thread, there is a window period in which blood tests are unable to pick up the HIV virus after infection, hence the twelve month wait. Futhermore, if anyone suspects they might be HIV positive they shouldn't be donating blood to find out - the NHS provides support and testing through hospitals, sexual health clinics and GP surgeries for people who are concerned they might be infected.
[editline]8th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32182815]Really good post. Interestingly, it shows that if you wanted to take a purely scientific approach to this it would be just as logical to ban blacks from giving blood as it is to ban MSM.
But like I said before, that'll never happen because these decisions are as political as they are scientific.[/QUOTE]
I haven't seen similiar data for the UK - although people born in Sub-Saharan Africa are more likely to be diagnosed, as are people from other places outside the UK.
[QUOTE=Aidan_088;32181162]There should just be a mandatory aids test for all potential blood donors; straight people can have aids to.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure there is. I think the blood goes away and has every test known to mankind done on it before its put into another human, which is why banning gays over the risk of AIDS/HIV is dumb as fuck as they are already screening for it.
[QUOTE=Jsm;32183070]Pretty sure there is. I think the blood goes away and has every test known to mankind done on it before its put into another human, which is why banning gays over the risk of AIDS/HIV is dumb as fuck as they are already screening for it.[/QUOTE]
Again, read the article. HIV transmission has a window period during which it is impossible to screen for with our current tests. Hence high-risk groups of people are asked to wait for twelve months after doing anything that has a high chance of transmission, so that people can be clear of the window period and their blood screened safely.
Whenever i hear something about blood I always think of that Seinfeld episodes.
And this ban was stupid in the first place.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
