[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]
Unfortunately much of the time politics comes before logic. This could also be applied to the Republican party.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32183127]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.[/QUOTE]This rule deems a faithful, monogamous gay guy who neither he nor his partner have any blood-borne diseases as "high risk" as someone who fucked a heroin addict or prostitute, that's pretty clearly discriminatory.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32183770]This rule deems a faithful, monogamous gay guy who neither he nor his partner have any blood-borne diseases as "high risk" as someone who fucked a heroin addict or prostitute, that's pretty clearly discriminatory.[/QUOTE]
I never understood why they don't include a sexual promiscuity question.
Surely a man who has had sex with only one other man is at a lower risk than that of a straight man who has had said with 1000 women that year.
[editline]9th September 2011[/editline]
Then again, people would probably overinflate how many times they got laid by different people and then there would be no blood!
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;32180960]Why was there a ban on that in the first place? And how the hell did they identify gay men?[/QUOTE]
The ban was there so that people didn't catch THE GAY (DUN DUN DUUUNNN!)
[QUOTE=Contag;32183812]I never understood why they don't include a sexual promiscuity question.
Surely a man who has had sex with only one other man is at a lower risk than that of a straight man who has had said with 1000 women that year.
[editline]9th September 2011[/editline]
Then again, people would probably overinflate how many times they got laid by different people and then there would be no blood![/QUOTE]
Because anyone who can have sex with almost 3 different women everyday for a year is clearly too alpha for HIV
[QUOTE=RivaGe;32180987]Showed them pics of nude men and looked at their pants.[/QUOTE]
-Showed them pictures of gay men
-Blood stopped flowing from their arm
[quote]
not had sex with another man in the past 12 months
[/quote]
So basically if you have a shitty sex life, go donate blood.
[QUOTE=Kung Fu Jew;32182797]Looks like you missed the point. Not my problem[/QUOTE]
Your problem is that you didn't have a point in the first place.
[QUOTE=FreakyMe;32182176]What about straight men who practice gay sex?[/QUOTE]
Those are called bi-sexual guys, and the ban was on them too
So when are they going to lift the ban here in the US? It's retarded.
And people (or at least, I) wouldn't lie because you can get charged for fraud.
Why does our culture act like gays are like, martians or some shit. I've lived with gay guys before. One, you couldn't even tell was homo, like, at all (until he showed me his... 'toybox' :suicide:) and the other, besides being quite feminine was totally normal.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32183127]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.[/QUOTE]
Isn't the window 6 months (at the most) anyway. That aside, I thought that if the blood was left sitting for 6 months then the screening for HIV would pick it up, in fact I thought that was the whole point of blood having to sit around for months before it could be used.
Maybe I just don't understand the screening process enough.
[QUOTE=Jsm;32186782]Isn't the window 6 months (at the most) anyway. That aside, I thought that if the blood was left sitting for 6 months then the screening for HIV would pick it up, in fact I thought that was the whole point of blood having to sit around for months before it could be used.
Maybe I just don't understand the screening process enough.[/QUOTE]
Blood is mostly separated into it's component parts: red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and Platelets. Red and white blood cells have a shelf-life of 35-42 days, platelets have a shelf-life of five days and plasma can be frozen and stored for up to a year. Because of the short time spans, blood needs to be tested ASAP so it can be used as soon as possible. Blood generally doesn't sit around anywhere.
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32187117]Blood is mostly separated into it's component parts: red blood cells, white blood cells, plasma and Platelets. Red and white blood cells have a shelf-life of 35-42 days, platelets have a shelf-life of five days and plasma can be frozen and stored for up to a year. Because of the short time spans, blood needs to be tested ASAP so it can be used as soon as possible. Blood generally doesn't sit around anywhere.[/QUOTE]
Ah it seems that I have confused blood (as in the actual cells) and plasma, that does explain the waiting period for high risk groups then.
Thanks for explaining that a bit better.
Perhaps the high risk groups are what need to be looked into, as someone said before surely gays are only high risk if they sleep around?
[QUOTE=Camundongo;32181743]Unfortunately, gay men are significantly more likely to be HIV positive than heterosexual men. Taking at quick look at what data I can get (unfortunately from the US):[/QUOTE] The extremely small risk of them having aids without the doctors knowing is less risky then not having the needed blood.
[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;32187305]The extremely small risk of them having aids without the doctors knowing is less risky then not having the needed blood.[/QUOTE]Making sure [i]none[/i] of the blood is contaminated is more about public confidence than risk assessment.
[QUOTE=Nerts;32183770]This rule deems a faithful, monogamous gay guy who neither he nor his partner have any blood-borne diseases as "high risk" as someone who fucked a heroin addict or prostitute, that's pretty clearly discriminatory.[/QUOTE]
Who cares, it's just a blood donation.
I'm straight and I don't even donate.
12 months is about the period it takes for an infection to become noticeable in blood tests.
Personally, as a gay man, I'm not against the ban on gay men donating blood. I actually think it's a very sensible move, and this legislation is not just a piece by piece reduction of the ban, but a smart development of it which allows gay people to donate blood yet still protects blood stocks.
You could take each person on a case by case basis, but that would require everyone being honest, and increase the work load on blood services.
If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
if that's not homophobia then i don't know what is
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
What are you twelve
So you'd rather die if you needed a blood transfusion
I'm not exactly pro or anti-homo but you, you're fucking retarded
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
That actually [B]IS[/B] disrespectful and discriminating.
But on the matter at hand: their logic for this, as I've read, is that since gay men are capable of only anal sex, the chances of disease are escalated BECAUSE the intestinal walls are easily ruptured by a penis from lack of proper lubrication, which makes it easy for any possible diseases to spread.
However, I find this ridiculous considering that gay men aren't mindless sex machines who smex up everything, regardless of what it MAY be infected with...
They're just as conscious about and aware of STDs as anyone else and take precautions against them, which should pretty much eliminate chances of infection.
I reckon what it all boils down to, especially with that bolded statement, is homophobia.
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE] And this is why you would also never want blood from a women?
protip: most chicks have probably taken it in the pooper once
AIDAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS RUN GUYS RUN RUN FROM THE DISEASE CARRIERS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH
[QUOTE=En-Guage V2;32189551]protip: most chicks have probably taken it in the pooper once
AIDAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDSAIDS RUN GUYS RUN RUN FROM THE DISEASE CARRIERS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH[/QUOTE]
My god! Watch out, man! SHE'S SECRETING THE GAY-GENE!
RUN BEFORE IT GETBLARGHBLARGHBLARGHPUKE...hmmmm...I think I'll go for a nice, hard cock today...
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]Nothing disrespectful or discriminating [...] I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
I'm not very upset at you for being a massive closet homophobe.
However, if you use a semicolon wrong like that [I]ever again[/I] I will be forced to hunt you down.
[QUOTE=just-a-boy;32189601]My god! Watch out, man! SHE'S SECRETING THE GAY-GENE!
RUN BEFORE IT GETBLARGHBLARGHBLARGHPUKE...hmmmm...I think I'll go for a nice, hard cock today...[/QUOTE]
That's how they get those
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
You seem like the kind of person who - through years of melding irony, sarcasm and humour - have lost the ability to tell yourself when you are joking and when you are serious. One of the worst types of people, honestly. Same kind of people that are militant in their hate for Justin Bieber to the point where it's retarded and who yell a lot at things they don't need to yell at.
Because you're claiming you couldn't [B]live your life[/B] knowing you have the blood of a homosexual in you, or had it at one point. You need to realize what you're saying - you would be in favour of death, of dying, because of the activities your donor may or may not have engaged in, and you are so remarkably insecure about your sexuality that it actually bothers you to the point where you don't feel comfortable with yourself.
Enjoy ur shitty life then lol
[QUOTE=BlackCrow;32189185]If I ever get a blood transfusion. I am not getting my blood from a homosexual. Nothing disrespectful or discriminating but I couldn't live my life knowing I have some dude's blood; and he fucked another man in the ass. I'd be getting a visual every time I would bleed.[/QUOTE]
I hope you get blood from a pedophile at some point in your life
This isn't even an insult or a wish of ill-will it's just a post take it or leave it
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
