Britain: Gay Men Allowed to Give Blood

[Gerald]

http://fohn.net/history-of-aids/

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Egan

Interesting. I do remember being told that the first ever case was reported to have been way back in 58 or 59, although the diagnosis was only verified in the 80's.

Could very well been. We would have been more in the dark about then.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Growler

I think so, as well - from the way it was described, different elements in the blood settle out at different centrifugal speeds - for instance, my white blood cells would be spun out first, for intravenous delivery to her; three days later, they'd hook me up again and spin out stem cells (after a self-administered treatment program with a drug called Neupogen that targeted the release of stem cells ("granulocytes") into the bloodstream.)

It was a modification of a treatment developed at Hopkins here in Baltimore, and has, apparently, been used to cure the Berlin Patient of both his leukemia and HIV.

I know about the plasma and certrifuge from college. I would sell my plasma to a lab and this is how it was done. I got beer money for it.

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Leftist stupidity at it's finest. Because of course to them the feelings of homosexuals are more important than the safety of the nation's blood supply.

So you really think the 'leftists' are more worried about pc'ness?

Name one disease or blood donation complication that is limited to Homosexual men?





I'm still waiting.....

It doesn't matter the source, diseases can still infect the blood supply.

Pull your head out of your victorian ass and get with the times. And not just you, SD, I mean anybody who thinks this way at all.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Thomen

The ban was probably not because of some people hating gays, but rather based on what was back then considered a given: namely that STD's and AIDS are prevalent among the gay community and may endanger recipients of blood transfusions.

Recent research however suggests otherwise.

I have not seen anything credible that breaks the notion of AIDS, Hepatitis-C, and various other STD's being more prevalent in the homo community. This is a problem that has occured with the advent of "political homosexuality". Since this politicization happened, I trust no such research as credible. I also don't trust that every blood sample is tested and know for a fact that there are breakdowns in every system. Simply put, I believe this policy is unnecessarily putting their nation's blood supply at risk to appease homos and idiotic leftists who wish to appear "tolerant". It's idiotic and dangerous.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Thomen

Yes, the ban was stupid, but so was your comment.

Stupid comment, sarcasm, satire... dare I say it, personal attack
(what, dont tell me you believe I believe in pink blood cells )

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

I have not seen anything credible that breaks the notion of AIDS, Hepatitis-C, and various other STD's being more prevalent in the homo community. This is a problem that has occured with the advent of "political homosexuality". Since this politicization happened, I trust no such research as credible. I also don't trust that every blood sample is tested and know for a fact that there are breakdowns in every system. Simply put, I believe this policy is unnecessarily putting their nation's blood supply at risk to appease homos and idiotic leftists who wish to appear "tolerant". It's idiotic and dangerous.

I'm unclear of your point.....

You stated these diseases are not specific to any demographic, yet you support a ban?

please clarify.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

So you really think the 'leftists' are more worried about pc'ness?

Name one disease or blood donation complication that is limited to Homosexual men?

Yes. Liberals are narcissistic and need to avoid truths to make their politics work for them. That's where political correctness comes from.

On your second question, it's not a limitation, it's a matter of increased risk.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

I'm unclear of your point.....

You stated these diseases are not specific to any demographic, yet you support a ban?

please clarify.

Increased risks. So yes, I support a ban on homosexuals.

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Increased risks. So yes, I support a ban on homosexuals.

But there is little difference in infectious rates these days.

HIV was mainly among the gay communities originally because that is where patient zero is supposedly from, and so it stayed within that community longer. There was also no risk of pregnancy with gay men, so the use of prophylactics was nearly non-existent. Today, the disease has spread so much that the difference between straight and gay carriers is almost nil. There is practically equal risk between demographics, the difference is negligible.

There is a higher risk of infection with IV drug users, but I don't see you supporting a ban on them? What about if I slept with a fairly promiscuous girl once, Why am I not banned? Or how about the gay man who has been in a monogamous relationship for 40 years, he still deserve a ban?

Making a ban that targets a specific demographic just because of some social title applied to them is wrong. Applying a ban based on specific credible scientific data is fine.

With my own arguement, yes I would support a ban on gay men donating blood in the 80's and early 90's. The evidence showed a much higher infection rate then. But that does not apply today.

[Betonov]

A little off topic, went and donated blood on tuesday.
I highly recomend it and not for the moral feeling of doing something right afterwards, but the dizzy feeling right after you donated, the free food and coffee and this nurse that works there <3<3<3 (suprisingly, she's not red-haired)

[Armistead]

I wonder what test they give to determine if someone is gay so they can give blood, just ask? What if the person lies, what if the gay person slept with someone the night before, but said he'd been celibate for over a year? Are they just trusting people to tell the truth...?

I sure hope they test the blood better than they try and uphold stupid laws...

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

But there is little difference in infectious rates these days.

Absolutely not true. There's this:

http://www.science20.com/news_accoun..._behavior_data

In 2005, over half of new HIV infections diagnosed in the US were among gay men, and up to one in five gay men living in cities is thought to be HIV positive. Yet two large population surveys showed that most gay men had similar numbers of unprotected sexual partners per year as straight men and women.

This indicates a terrifying difference in rates of HIV infection in the homo community.

Plus you've obviously never heard of "bug-chasing".

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...to_become.html

This is a mostly homo activity. Those of us who live in California know what this is and it's impact. Your need to appear "tolerant" simply isn't worth the risks to the blood supply if my family needs a transfusion. Homo's specifically need to be banned to cut risks. You're right, we can't eliminate all risks. But here is one risk that can be minimized.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Armistead

I wonder what test they give to determine if someone is gay so they can give blood, just ask? What if the person lies, what if the gay person slept with someone the night before, but said he'd been celibate for over a year? Are they just trusting people to tell the truth...?

Here you just answer a quick form. And it doesn't ask you if you're gay, just if you had sexual intercourse with a same gender person, a prostitute or if you have been a prostitute in the last month (plus other questions on which medication you're taking, are you on drugs...) and then a doctor has a quick talk with you.

I actually had a school friend in high school that's gay and he donated blood. He just told the doctor that he had a steady partner for a long time then.

[Growler]

Please refrain from using the derogatory "homo" when referring to homosexual people. Thanks.