FDA Lifting Ban on Gay Blood Doners - Polidicks

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;46781971]No it really is [url]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/[/url][/QUOTE] True, but why implement the ban in the first place? Blood donations are/should-be [U]done on a case by case basis[/U], and if there are a significant level of antibodies to show that HIV/AIDS is present then that would just drop whoever regardless of orientation. Or is there something I'm missing?

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;46782284]True, but why implement the ban in the first place? Blood donations are/should-be [U]done on a case by case basis[/U], and if there are a significant level of antibodies to show that HIV/AIDS is present then that would just drop whoever regardless of orientation. Or is there something I'm missing?[/QUOTE] Many HIV patients are unaware of their status - and the antibodies can take months to develop - the NHS recommends a six-month wait between an encounter and a HIV screening in order to reduce the chance of a false-negative. Gay men make up less than 10% of the USA's population but over 3/5 of her HIV+ populace. It's the logical thing to do, like banning heroin junkies.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;46782407]It's the logical thing to do, like banning heroin junkies.[/QUOTE] IIRC the UK system bars anyone who has consumed illegal drugs ever.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;46782407]Many HIV patients are unaware of their status - and the antibodies can take months to develop - the NHS recommends a six-month wait between an encounter and a HIV screening in order to reduce the chance of a false-negative. Gay men make up less than 10% of the USA's population but over 3/5 of her HIV+ populace. It's the logical thing to do, like banning heroin junkies.[/QUOTE] I see, but at that point wouldn't it just apply to all who have been apart of unprotected sex? Especially non-vaginal sex regardless of orientation?

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;46782587]I see, but at that point wouldn't it just apply to all who have been apart of unprotected sex? Especially non-vaginal sex regardless of orientation?[/QUOTE]The higher rate of incidence of HIV in homosexuals means that homosexual sex is more likely to result in a new infection than heterosexual sex. I don't know the FDA's rules.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;46782618]The higher rate of incidence of HIV in homosexuals means that homosexual sex is more likely to result in a new infection than heterosexual sex. I don't know the FDA's rules.[/QUOTE] The FDA will disqualify donors for solicited sex (sex for money/drugs). But condom use is not a factor. Nor non-vaginal sex. Its blanket "sexual contact".

[QUOTE=lazyguy;46782618]The higher rate of incidence of HIV in homosexuals means that homosexual sex is more likely to result in a new infection than heterosexual sex. I don't know the FDA's rules.[/QUOTE] Male homosexual sex is not inherently more dangerous. Gay men, obviously, cannot become pregnant, and thus imbeciles who do not think about STDs don't wear condoms because, hey, can't get pregnant. Thus, homosexual sex is not inherently more dangerous than heterosexual sex. Unprotected sex practices are dangerous regardless of orientation. It's just that the benefits of protection for male homosexuals are less obvious.

[QUOTE=PolarEventide;46782750]Male homosexual sex is not inherently more dangerous. Gay men, obviously, cannot become pregnant, and thus imbeciles who do not think about STDs don't wear condoms because, hey, can't get pregnant. Thus, homosexual sex is not inherently more dangerous than heterosexual sex. Unprotected sex practices are dangerous regardless of orientation. It's just that the benefits of protection for male homosexuals are less obvious.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-transmission-risk-during-anal-sex-18-times-higher-than-during-vaginal-sex/page/1446187/[/url] "The risk of HIV transmission during anal intercourse may be around 18 times greater than during vaginal intercourse" p. sure homosexual sex is inherently more dangerous than heterosexual sex

[QUOTE=Limed00d;46781730]lmfao how can you tell if a man has had sex with another man anyways "uh sorry sir our scanners show that you have touched penises with someone else recently, please leave"[/QUOTE] In my country such ban doesn't exist and I don't remember existing however if you tell them about something that they don't allow in donors they register it and always check before using your blood. I imagine if you tell them you're gay, because you're unaware that gays can't donate, they're going to ask you to leave but register that so that the next time even if you lie they won't allow you / use your blood. And trust me, when someone is asking you something like that its hard to lie because they often do private questions out of the blue or in the middle of innocent ones so that you're not prepared to lie, at least here they do it when asking about tattoos and stuff that people can hide and lie about.

[QUOTE=Center for Disease Control and Prevention]At the end of 2011, an estimated 500,022 (57%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were gay and bisexual men[/QUOTE] You just can't deny the facts. While the majority of gays are not infected, around 50% of the people with HIV ARE GAY, by excluding gays you are excluding 50% of the infected. Lifting this ban is pretty stupid and demonstrates a clear disregard for health over retarded non problems such as offending gays. It's a no brainer that gays should not be allowed to donate blood, chances are that an infected person is gay, therefore the gays should be banned from donating blood. Do not risk the health of others over this retarded shit.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;46782816]p. sure homosexual sex is inherently more dangerous than heterosexual sex[/QUOTE] Heterosexual intercourse can be anal as well.

[QUOTE=Magman77;46781800]It takes a while for the body to produce traceable antibodies which can be used to detect HIV in blood. It makes sense for them to put a ban on [I]people[/I] who have been sexually active in the past three months.[/QUOTE] the ban's over 12 months, or 1 year, not 3 months

afaik there's no difference in terms of your likelyhood of getting HIV from anal sex between homosexual or heterosexual couples, so the idea that gays should be treated differently in this respect doesn't make any sense. And to the argument that gays are less likely to use condoms because they know they won't get pregnant, the same could be said of heterosexual couples that are using the backdoor.

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;46783017]afaik there's no difference in terms of your likelyhood of getting HIV from anal sex between homosexual or heterosexual couples, so the idea that gays should be treated differently in this respect doesn't make any sense. And to the argument that gays are less likely to use condoms because they know they won't get pregnant, the same could be said of heterosexual couples that are using the backdoor.[/QUOTE] Do me a favor, look up the differences between HIV infection rates in heterosexuals v.s. homosexuals. I already know the answer, but you need to look at it if you think it doesn't make sense....

IMO, it's such a blanket law. What if 2/3 of all HIV affected individuals would be black? Would they ban black people from donating? Again, all they need is information of the last date of having sex with a newest partner. If it's within 9 weeks (or w/e it takes for the specific antibodies development), run the tests (they do this anyway). If clear, bam! Let the donation be made.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46783029]Do me a favor, look up the differences between HIV infection rates in heterosexuals v.s. homosexuals. I already know the answer, but you need to look at it if you think it doesn't make sense....[/QUOTE] Looking at a couple studies, it looks like anal sex increases likelihood of hiv transmission by about 17x, while partaking in male-on-male sexual activity increases it by about 4x. This would indicate that it's not gay sex that increases HIV transmission, it's anal sex that increases HIV transmission. Of course, anal sex is far more prevalent among homosexual men than heterosexual ones, but the point is that asking whether you've had gay sex is irrelevant, while asking whether you've had anal sex is relevant. Of course this is just a very brief look into it I've taken, if you've got a source that shows otherwise by all means post it here. [QUOTE=gufu;46783197]And anal sex point does not stand, as lesbians are still affected, and chances that they partake in anal sex is even less.[/QUOTE] HIV transmission through lesbian couples is extremely rare so I don't see what your point is? Unless you think I'm suggesting that anal sex is the only way that HIV is transmitted, which I'm not. It's just scientific fact that anal sex massively increases HIV transmission rates.

And anal sex point does not stand, as lesbians are still affected, and chances that they partake in anal sex is even less.

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;46783183]Looking at a couple studies, it looks like anal sex increases likelihood of hiv transmission by about 17x, while partaking in male-on-male sexual activity increases it by about 4x. This would indicate that it's not gay sex that increases HIV transmission, it's anal sex that increases HIV transmission. Of course, anal sex is far more prevalent among homosexual men than heterosexual ones, but the point is that asking whether you've had gay sex is irrelevant, while asking whether you've had anal sex is relevant. Of course this is just a very brief look into it I've taken, if you've got a source that shows otherwise by all means post it here. HIV transmission through lesbian couples is extremely rare so I don't see what your point is? Unless you think I'm suggesting that anal sex is the only way that HIV is transmitted, which I'm not. It's just scientific fact that anal sex massively increases HIV transmission rates.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/web/statistics_basics_HIV-Infections-2010_550x237.jpg[/IMG] [url]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html[/url] That looks like it's broken down a LOT farther than just sexual acts. You can try and close your eyes and pretend the statistics don't say what they say, but the statistics don't lie....

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;46783183] HIV transmission through lesbian couples is extremely rare so I don't see what your point is? Unless you think I'm suggesting that anal sex is the only way that HIV is transmitted, which I'm not. It's just scientific fact that anal sex massively increases HIV transmission rates.[/QUOTE] But then why would lesbians be banned from giving blood, then?

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46783247][IMG]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/web/statistics_basics_HIV-Infections-2010_550x237.jpg[/IMG] [url]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html[/url] That looks like it's broken down a LOT farther than just sexual acts. You can try and close your eyes and pretend the statistics don't say what they say, but the statistics don't lie....[/QUOTE] Like I said, the statistics there say that gay men are about 4x more likely to transmit HIV than straight men, but the disparity between anal and vaginal sex in terms of HIV transmission is much, much larger. I would argue that this indicates that the increase isn't anything inherent in homosexual couples, but instead in the practice, which is naturally much more prevalant in male-male couples than male-female couples. Of course I'm not a statistician, but as far as I can see nothing in that data indicates that the FDA should be restricting people who have had gay sex, but instead those who have had anal sex. [QUOTE=gufu;46783251]But then why would lesbians be banned from giving blood, then?[/QUOTE] They aren't?

[QUOTE=gufu;46783179]IMO, it's such a blanket law. What if 2/3 of all HIV affected individuals would be black? Would they ban black people from donating? Again, all they need is information of the last date of having sex with a newest partner. If it's within 9 weeks (or w/e it takes for the specific antibodies development), run the tests (they do this anyway). If clear, bam! Let the donation be made.[/QUOTE] I don't know where you get your HIV information from (guessing Wikipedia) but HIV antibodies aren't required to be present after 3 months, they just typically are. There are many variables that can go into an HIV infection which can influence when they can be detected. HIV antibodies can be detected from anywhere from weeks to 6 months or greater. So, a blanket "1 year policy" is a pretty safe policy in regards to testing. [editline]24th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=gufu;46783251]But then why would lesbians be banned from giving blood, then?[/QUOTE] I don't know where you're getting this lebian thing from but lesbian's aren't banned from donating blood. Gay men are. Also, I literally just gave blood less than 2 hours ago so I shoud know this. [editline]24th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;46782284]True, but why implement the ban in the first place? Blood donations are/should-be [U]done on a case by case basis[/U], and if there are a significant level of antibodies to show that HIV/AIDS is present then that would just drop whoever regardless of orientation. Or is there something I'm missing?[/QUOTE] Why should blood be donated on a case-by case basis? What happens if there is a mass-casualty event? What if a building collapses and hundreds of people are injured and require immediate blood transfusion? What about service-members that get shot/blown up overseas and require immediate blood transfusion? We have blood banks for a very good reason because you [b]never[/b] know when you are going to need to transfuse blood products.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46783247][IMG]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/images/web/statistics_basics_HIV-Infections-2010_550x237.jpg[/IMG] [url]http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html[/url] That looks like it's broken down a LOT farther than just sexual acts. You can try and close your eyes and pretend the statistics don't say what they say, but the statistics don't lie....[/QUOTE] That still doesn't mean that all homosexuals have HIV, nor does it even imply that most homosexuals have HIV. In fact, the evidence supports Mort's point in that anal is the factor here; anal is just most prevalent among gay males. You realize that they do in fact do test for these diseases? A lifetime blanket ban is unnecessary simply for having had [I]any[/I] sexual contact with another man.

[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;46783352]That still doesn't mean that all homosexuals have HIV, nor does it even imply that most homosexuals have HIV. In fact, the evidence supports Mort's point in that anal is the factor here; anal is just most prevalent among gay males. You realize that they do in fact do test for these diseases? A lifetime blanket ban is unnecessary simply for having had [I]any[/I] sexual contact with another man.[/QUOTE] Just because they test for something doesn't mean they still shouldn't screen. Testing is not always 100% accurate, so extra screening measures are required. Transfusing blood products is super fucking serious, if you accidentaly transfuse infectious blood into somebody you can fuck them up for the rest of their life or kill them. That's why there are so many strict measures/protocols/screenings done when donating and accepting blood. Testing is only supposed to be the LAST line of defense, not the first.

[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;46783352]That still doesn't mean that all homosexuals have HIV, nor does it even imply that most homosexuals have HIV. In fact, the evidence supports Mort's point in that anal is the factor here; anal is just most prevalent among gay males. You realize that they do in fact do test for these diseases? A lifetime blanket ban is unnecessary simply for having had [I]any[/I] sexual contact with another man.[/QUOTE] So you guys going to go show the CDC all of your research, or are you just going to keep it secret? I'm only asking because you guys seem to know a lot that they don't.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46783372]So you guys going to go show the CDC all of your research, or are you just going to keep it secret? I'm only asking because you guys seem to know a lot that they don't.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-transmission-risk-during-anal-sex-18-times-higher-than-during-vaginal-sex/page/1446187/#item1446189"]http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-transmission-risk-during-anal-sex-18-times-higher-than-during-vaginal-sex/page/1446187/#item1446189[/URL] [QUOTE]The risk of HIV transmission during anal intercourse may be around 18 times greater than during vaginal intercourse, according to the results of a meta-analysis published online ahead of print in the International Journal of Epidemiology. ... [B]Two of these studies were conducted with gay men and two with heterosexuals, and the results did not vary by sexuality.[/B][/QUOTE] Yes, there is a correlation between gay male couples and HIV transmission. No, that does not mean there is a causation. If anal sex is causing HIV transmission, then they should restrict blood donations for people who are having anal sex. Inevitably this will include a lot of homosexual persons, but that doesn't mean a blanket ban on persons who have engaged in homosexual activity that does not increase the risk of AIDS transmission makes any sense. And they [I]do[/I] screen for male-on-male oral sex, even though oral sex has a very low transmission rate for HIV. They don't, afaik, ask if you've had heterosexual anal sex.

You can get rid of the ban but you apparently can't get rid of the hate.

[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;46783385][URL="http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-transmission-risk-during-anal-sex-18-times-higher-than-during-vaginal-sex/page/1446187/#item1446189"]http://www.aidsmap.com/HIV-transmission-risk-during-anal-sex-18-times-higher-than-during-vaginal-sex/page/1446187/#item1446189[/URL] Yes, there is a correlation between gay male couples and HIV transmission. No, that does not mean there is a causation. If anal sex is causing HIV transmission, then they should restrict blood donations for people who are having anal sex. Inevitably this will include a lot of homosexual persons, but that doesn't mean a blanket ban on persons who have engaged in homosexual activity that does not increase the risk of AIDS transmission makes any sense. And they [I]do[/I] screen for male-on-male oral sex, even though oral sex has a very low transmission rate for HIV. They don't, afaik, ask if you've had heterosexual anal sex.[/QUOTE] So you're saying that there isn't a higher percentage of homosexual men with HIV than any other subset? The CDC begs to differ.... [QUOTE]Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)a represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, young gay and bisexual men (aged 13-24 years) accounted for 72% of new HIV infections among all persons aged 13 to 24, and 30% of new infections among all gay and bisexual men.[/QUOTE] You're saying that anal sex is the reason for this, but it's not proven that even a majority of these cases were due to anal sex. You're trying to say the cause is anal sex, but that's not proven.

[QUOTE=ASIC;46782937]Heterosexual intercourse can be anal as well.[/QUOTE] statistically you'll find homosexuals having more anal intercourse than heterosexuals not taking a stand here, but i can see where the FDA would be coming from with the ban, as ridiculous as it seems on the surface. [editline]24th December 2014[/editline] Like the point isn't that every gay male has HIV and thus they need a ban on gay males or anything like that. Blood donation is a VERY delicate process and still has a billion flaws. One of these is not being able to catch every STD through testing. It was in their best benefit to screen blood donors based on raw statistics, because this is human lives you're dealing with.

That's just great..now we will all get aids and DIE.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46783455]So you're saying that there isn't a higher percentage of homosexual men with HIV than any other subset? The CDC begs to differ.... [/QUOTE] What? No, I've been saying the opposite the entire time, read my posts. [QUOTE] You're saying that anal sex is the reason for this, but it's not proven that even a majority of these cases were due to anal sex. You're trying to say the cause is anal sex, but that's not proven.[/QUOTE] Well the study I just linked demonstrated that HIV infection rates are identical between homosexual and heterosexual partners engaged in anal sex, so what do you mean? What other possible explanation is there other than much more anal sex occurring among gay couples that would account for identical infection rates when partaking in the same sexual activities?