|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 5,586
Location: Alabama, United States
|
For as long as I've given blood, starting in the late 80's part of the screening process is to ask if I've slept with another man. For fear of Aids/HIV anyone that answers yes to that question is automatically forbidden from donating. Is this discrimination or is this just safety protocol? Is it a necessary from of discrimination? Similarly.... Man rejected as blood donor because he "seemed" gay?
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 193
|
Course they should. Blood should be screened like it is for anyone else. Its not as if hetrosexuality is a vaccine against viruses like HIV etc.
Who ever thought up that rule is a moron.
|
|
 
Rank: Thread Mediator
Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,087
Location: United States
|
wow.
Besides the point about how bigoted that practice is...
Don't they screen blood after they take it? They're not really transfusing blood on the honor system, right? If so, then what's the point of asking these discriminatory questions, or worse, turning people away?
I wonder what part of Mexico might be safe to live in.
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
How odd. I know several gay men that donate and they've never had a problem. There's a screening process in order that they follow after the blood or plasma has been taken.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 5,586
Location: Alabama, United States
|
Jacknife wrote:Course they should. Blood should be screened like it is for anyone else. Its not as if hetrosexuality is a vaccine against viruses like HIV etc.
Who ever thought up that rule is a moron. I knew all my Lush friends would see this as a completely moronic practice. Also, part of the questionaire asks if the donor has had sex with a prositute. I always thought the screeening process would/should eliminate any "tainted" blood. Not to mention, anyone could lie on this questionaire. It's not like they give you truth serum first.
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 193
|
This is a song that somes up my feeling on the matter
|
|
Rank: Alpha Blonde
Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 4,370
Location: In your dirty fantasies
|
I thought people might find this list interesting... As for me, having been on the receiving end of a blood transfusion, I have mixed feelings. Provided the blood is screened properly, I don't care who it comes from. If there are things they can't screen for, then I prefer them to err on the side of caution. I think more focus should be put on screening procedures for the blood rather than turning away willing donors. I wonder what specific criteria they used for "seeming gay"... http://pbcers.org/default_files/page0026.htm wrote:
Blood Donation Guidelines
Some donor eligibility rules are specified by the Food and Drug Administration for every blood bank in the country. Other rules are determined by the particular blood bank and may differ between programs. Donor eligibility rules are intended to protect the health and safety of the donor as well as the patient who will receive the transfusion. List may not be complete.
Age: 17 years of age and in good health. 16 years of age with parental consent form. There is no upper age limit.
Weight: Minimum of 110 lb.
Medications: Must have completed antibiotics 3 days prior to giving blood. OK to donate if taking aspirin (except platelet donors), antihistamines, birth control pills, blood pressure medicine and vitamins.
Eating: We suggest you eat a meal before your blood donation.
Diabetes: OK to donate if controlled by diet or oral medication. If Insulin dependent, must be stable.
Asthma: Acceptable if asymptomatic and on normal medications (including bronchodilators) for management. Symptomatic asthma, or requiring oral steroids for management is not acceptable.
Epilepsy: More than one seizure in the past 6 months, or multiple seizures are not acceptable to donate blood. If controlled with medication, and there has been no more than one seizure in the past 6 months, is acceptable.
Cancer: Cured local skin cancer (simple basal cell or squamous cell), as well as Cervical cancer in situ is acceptable. Most other forms of cancer are acceptable 5 years after being treated and released by your primary physician. Mitral Valve Prolapse: Ok to donate if asymptomatic, no arrhythmias, and no limitations of activities.
Temporary Deferral
Cancer: Cured health and feeling well on the day of donation.
Dental Work: OK to donate 72 hours after minor surgical procedure, 24 hours after a cleaning.
Allergy Shots: OK to donate.
Other Shots: No shots for measles or mumps in the last 2 weeks; rubella in the last 4 weeks.
Small Pox: OK to donate 21 days after vaccination or contact with someone who has, and no complications.
Needle Sticks: None in the past year.
Pregnancy: OK to donate 6 weeks after routine delivery, 6-months after a C-section. It is ok to donate while breastfeeding.
Acupuncture: Procedures performed with sterile disposable needles in a doctor's office are acceptable, with written verification from acupuncturist.
Blood Donation: You may donate whole blood every 56 days.
Tattoo / Skin Branding / Permanent Make-up applied: None in the past year.
Ear and Body Piercing: Ear and non-mucous membrane body piercing that was done with a piercing gun or using disposable/single use equipment is acceptable. 12 month deferral if any other method was used. Skin piercing of any mucous membrane is a 12 month deferral.
Blood Transfusions: None in the past year except your own (autologous).
Malaria: Those who have lived in an endemic area for one year or more must have left the endemic area at least 3 years to qualify as a blood donor.
Travel to a malaria zone is a 12 month deferral from date of departure from the endemic area.
Medications: Acutane, Proscar and Propecia - OK to donate 30 days after last dosage. Avodart - OK to donate 6 months after last dose.
Stroke: OK to donate 1 year after and must be stable.
Permanent Deferral
HIV infection with or without symptoms of AIDS or Hepatitis. Men who have had sex with another man (even once) since 1977.
Any lymphoma, leukemia, melanoma.
Medication: Tegison, heart-regulating medications, anti-coagulants (i.e. Coumadin), long-term steroid therapy, Bovine (beef) insulin.
Travel to or residing in the UK for 3 months or more between 1980 - 1996.
Travel to or residing in Europe for 5 years or more between 1980 and the present.
Kidney & liver diseases.
Autoimmune Disorders (such as): Crohn's disease, Grave's disease, Lupus, MS, Pernicious anemia, Rheumatoid arthritis, Sarcoidosis, Sjogren's syndrome, Ulcerative colitis, Scleroderma, Hashimoto thyroditis.
 The complete 50,000+ word novel, inspired by the original short story, is now available for instant download on Amazon.com *Forum Announcement and More Dirty Details* *** Click here to read my NEW Hardcore rough sex story. Now a Lush Editor's Pick selection! ***
|
|
Rank: Story Verifier
Joined: 4/15/2011
Posts: 3,840
Location: Gainesville, United States
|
At one time blood was not screened so well. Many people did recieve diseases including HIV and Hepatits from their transfusions. Asking screen questions is just one of the ways they attempt to control that. That being said, today homosexuality does not increase the risk for bloodborn pathogen especially.
Who would have guessed that my little tale, the very First one I ever submitted to Lush would be read by so many? It shocks me a little to realize that it has now served over 20,000! Charge NurseThank you so very much to those who have read it!
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
I agree it shouldn't be a problem at all!! I assumed they screened everything regardless!! With tests I mean, not absurd intake forms...  This is discriminating! I just checked our checklist, I can't donate due my thyroid, and there is the question posed as well, though have never heard that gay men were denied to give blood here. I think it is weird that they don't ask if women had (un)protected sex with various partners during the last 12 months... then that could be risky as well! It is 2011!! I really thought and hoped we were passed the time that all gays have the risk of getting aids and hetero's don't have a risk at all...
|
|
Rank: Divine Rapscallion
Joined: 8/14/2010
Posts: 3,048
Location: On the ragged edge of disaster
|
Dancing_Doll wrote:I thought people might find this list interesting... Yes indeed, and thanks for posting that, DD! Apparently my bum thyroid disqualifies me from donating blood. I hadn't even considered the possibility. The scary thing is, I'm pretty sure I had the problem but it hadn't yet been diagnosed when I did donate blood a few times.
Maggie Rascal(Please note, I am no longer active on Lush and will not be responding to messages or friend requests.)
|
|
Rank: Alpha Blonde
Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 4,370
Location: In your dirty fantasies
|
This news story is even more bizarre. Turns out that if you lie when filling out the form, you're also criminally liable for negligence. Blood Donation Lawsuit wrote:A gay Toronto man who concealed his sexual history on a blood donor questionnaire and was sued for negligence by Canadian Blood Services has lost in Ontario Superior Court. In a decision released Thursday, the court sided with CBS in its suit against Kyle Freeman for "negligent misrepresentation." The court said Freeman did not have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms defence against the claim of negligence. The decision essentially upholds the current CBS practice of prohibiting men who have had sex with other men anytime since 1977 from donating blood. Freeman donated blood several times between 1990 and 2002. Each time, he falsely denied that he had had sex with another man since 1977. In June 2002, Freeman donated blood that subsequently tested positive for syphilis. He was permanently ruled out as a donor. Freeman did not know at the time he had syphilis, and did not know how he had contracted it, the judge wrote. Canadian Blood Services chief executive officer Dr. Graham Sher speaks during a news conference in Ottawa on Thursday. CBS took steps to get any blood traceable to Freeman out of its system, at a cost of about $10,000. It later filed suit against him. Freeman was held liable to the blood bank for $10,000 in damages. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/09/09/ontario-court-blood-kyle-freemen-suit-negligent.html
The complete 50,000+ word novel, inspired by the original short story, is now available for instant download on Amazon.com *Forum Announcement and More Dirty Details**** Click here to read my NEW Hardcore rough sex story. Now a Lush Editor's Pick selection! ***
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
Saw the thread title, and my first reaction was: "What the fuck?"
When I was younger I had Hepatitis B, not C like that hoochy Pam Anderson. I tell the blood suckers that every time they are on one of their drives. And then they give me this look like well, that's not a problem or "How old were you when you had it." Don't worry, I know I shouldn't and don't. I guess next time I'll just tell the guy with a Scotty Thompson style lisp and they'll go away.
Damned Vampires.
|
|
Rank: The Linebacker
Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 3,302
Location: Atlanta, United States
|
Just test the damn blood to make sure it is safe and if someone donates infected blood they should be prosecuted if they knew it. It shouldn't matter about whether they are gay, straight or bi. I give blood and platelets. People are in need.
Please check out my newest story: "10 Items Or Less"http://www.lushstories.com/stories/milf/10-items-or-less.aspxOr my previous story: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/in-the-land-of-salvation-and-sin.aspx
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,033
Location: ATL in da house!!!, United States
|
This may be a dumb-assed question, but if it is, it won't be the first one I've ever asked: Are there any serious blood-borne pathogens that can't be detected by normal means? Or, are there any for which the tests are too complicated, to expensive, too inconclusive... I'm asking because they ask that question here. Not being gay, I've never answered "yes". I have to assume that they're weighing the costs of testing versus the risk of letting un-tested-for pathogens get through. I mean, sure, they could test for every known virus, bacteria, and fungus known to man, but this would drive the cost of a pint of blood to... what? Twenty thousand? Thirty thousand? So what they're doing is testing for anything that's common, and for which the tests are relatively cheap. Pre-donation screenings could help lessen that cost because for every ten donors that get rejected, there may be one that would have supplied a tainted donation. If they can save on testing costs, then they can charge less for the pint of blood, the hospital pays less, and the end payer (insurance company or taxpayer) pays less. Other than that, then I'd say let everybody donate that wants to donate, test every single pint for everything they can, and hope nothing really out-of-the-ordinary gets through... Oh, and our Blood Mobiles don't just ask if you've been to any malaria zone - they want to know if you've been out of the country within the last year, and where you've been.
|
|
Rank: Purveyor of Poetry & Porn
Joined: 10/19/2009
Posts: 5,358
Location: Right here on Lush Stories...
|
Jacknife wrote:Course they should. Blood should be screened like it is for anyone else. Its not as if hetrosexuality is a vaccine against viruses like HIV etc.
Who ever thought up that rule is a moron. I think that sort of sums it up...the whole idea of gay men being excluded as a group from something like donating blood is bizarre... But, there are a lot of things I'll never understand in this world...this just gets added to the list...
 You know you want it, you know you need it bad...get it now on Amazon.com...Lush Erotica, an Anthology of Award Winning Sex Stories
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 4/5/2011
Posts: 790
Location: Here
|
"In 2009, the estimated number of diagnoses of HIV infection in the 40 states with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting, by race or ethnicity was as follows":
Race or Ethnicity Estimated Number of Diagnoses of HIV Infection, 2009
American Indian/Alaska Native 189
Asian 470
Black/African American 21,652
Hispanic/Latinoa 7,347
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 34
White 11,803
Multiple Races 516
"Following is the distribution of the estimated number of diagnoses of HIV infection among adults and adolescents in the 40 states with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting, by transmission category. A breakdown by sex is provided where appropriate".
Transmission Category Estimated Number of Diagnoses of HIV Infection, 2009
Male-to-male sexual contact 23,846
Injection drug use 3,932
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 1,131
Heterosexual contact* 12,860
Other** 76
So should they ban African Americans also because on the statistics is more "common"? for me is moronic. Anyway they have to run the taste for HIV on the blood no matter if you are gay, white, black, latino or alien its all the same the person can have aids and not know it yet, so if either way you have to do it why reject some possible good blood that could possibly safe some lifes!
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 2/24/2010
Posts: 2,667
Location: Ohio
|
I think we should send every post here,,to congress.>
|
|
Rank: Active Ink Slinger
Joined: 6/23/2011
Posts: 14
Location: Canada
|
The risk of disease comes from those who practice unsafe sex.
For some reason it seems easier to ask people if they've bunked with another man, as opposed to asking if they use protection when they fuck. I can't imagine why, of course. They both seem to be entirely reasonable questions.
Happiness
My life has no meaning, no direction, no aim. No purpose. But I'm happy. I can't wrap my head around this. What the fuck am I doing right?
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 7/8/2011
Posts: 254
Location: Somewhere out here...send a map I\'m lost again.
|
Just finished reading the article about the straight man being turned down because they "thought he was gay" This is unreal...there is afr too much need for blood and organs to turn anyone away becuase of some obscure guideline that was put in place before testing was mandatory. Yet they will take (and transfuse) blood that carries a variey of other things like the Epstien Barr branch of mono.
I was the kid next door's imaginary friend.
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
eviotis wrote:Saw the thread title, and my first reaction was: "What the fuck?" lmao..me too. exactly.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/7/2009
Posts: 226
Location: at sea
|
I don't believe this has anything to do with discrimination or gay bashing, or anything other than prudent health care practices(look at the above list of other exclusions). Because of the many previous blood transfusion horror incidents, restrictions were implemented. You could argue that this is 2011 and all donor blood is screened but: Can't help but wondering, if you were in need of a transfusion and were given the choice of HIS one or THIS one, would you really say "it doesn't matter" ? or Wasn't it then wasteful for the previous donations of the syphllis man to be withdrawn as they would have been "tested"? What would your response be if you found out that you had knownly been given blood from a person who had contacted syphllis? Thats OK because it's been "tested"?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Wordsmith
Joined: 11/28/2008
Posts: 2,594
Location: Newcastle, United Kingdom
|
I tried to give blood in the UK once, and was turned down. There reasoning was that alothough I have been tested frequently, I was in a high risk group for HIV. Although they screen all blood there is some super small percentage that it can be missed, especially if you have recently contracted that, or other blood bourne illnesses. And I am a straight woman, but: I´ve had sex with men who have had sex with other men (both oral and anal) I had been in Africa within a certain time period (I didn´t have a blood transfusion, but I had had protected sex with someone living in Africa) I´d had acupuncture, and had my ear pierced done within four months of trying to give blood (also can´t give blood if you´ve had a tattoo in that time period) I had been in a country that had malaria within six months of trying to give blood I had been given money for sex (another question was about being given drugs for sex) I had injected drugs a couple years previously (new syringe and had been tested since then) I´d had sex with someone who had injected themselves with drugs Yet, I don´t ever remember being asked if I had had unprotected sex with a heterosexual man. Actually I won´t ever be able to give blood because of certain medication, and because I have had a blood infection in the past. I get that they want to minimise the risk of passing on blood bourne illnesses. I don´t think it´s a bad thing to be overly cautious. So if a gay man has had unprotected sex within a certain time period, then they shouldn´t give blood. But the same should go for a heterosexual man or woman. There´s a risk, and things like HIV aren´t going to show up immediately after you´ve contracted them. So yes, I think gay men should be allowed to donate blood. https://secure.blood.co.uk/c11_cant.asp
|
|
Rank: Constant Gardener
Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 9,516
Location: Cakeland, United States
|
Eh, receiving some gay blood when I most required a transfusion would be the least of my concerns. But I'd want Dr. Russell working at the clinic to ensure I didn't get some of this plasma. It would tend to fck up my whole year. 'Spoiler alert' if you have not seen this 29 year old flick.
 The best thing you can do for your fellow,
next to rousing his conscience, is - not to give him things
to think about, but to wake things up that are in him...
to make him think things for himself - George MacDonald
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 6/29/2011
Posts: 614
Location: South Florida, United States
|
If theiri blood passes the screening tests I do not see why not.
You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan. http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 4/25/2011
Posts: 1,134
Location: São Paulo , Brazil
|
LittleMissBitch wrote:eviotis wrote:Saw the thread title, and my first reaction was: "What the fuck?" lmao..me too. exactly. Perfectly said!
Overwhelming RealityFrom Across the Room
|
|
Rank: Active Ink Slinger
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 39
Location: Caro
|
as long as they can show they are not HIV positive, but then ANY donor should have that checked, which they can do any time you donate. In fact, it's easiest way to get an HIV test. Just donate blood and have them test, if positive, they'll contact you, and your blood will not be used.
Irishmik60
Mike Corkran
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
It's not just HIV that one may give, while giving. But it is the first thing in the minds of those spoken of in the article.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 2/13/2011
Posts: 304
Location: Top Of The South
|
Aren't you tested before you donate? I haven't donated for a while because of taking warfarin
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 327,286
|
Nope. Questionnaire. Like the one assumed gay.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 5/11/2010
Posts: 1,040
Location: at your back! BOO!
|
rxtales wrote: There´s a risk, and things like HIV aren´t going to show up immediately after you´ve contracted them. So yes, I think gay men should be allowed to donate blood. https://secure.blood.co.uk/c11_cant.asp yes that is true.. HIV has a window period of about 6 months. Meaning that if someone gets HIV today and is tested tomorrow, the result would be negative and would still be negative until 6 months has elapsed.
Smile at your enemies.. It makes them crazy...
|
|
|
Guest |