In the UK, currently... -Men who have sex with men (Gays and bisexuals), -Any woman in a long term relationship with a bisexual man... cannot give blood.
Is this law wrong or right?
EDIT: I realised I worded the question weirdly. I am asking whether you think this law is MORALLY wrong or right.
In order to assure the continued safety of the blood supply, we currently ask those in groups shown to have a particularly high risk of carrying blood-borne viruses not to give blood. These include men who have ever had sex with men. The reason for this exclusion rests on specific sexual behaviour (such as anal and oral sex between men), rather than the sexuality of the person wishing to donate. There is, therefore, no exclusion of gay men who have never had sex with a man nor of women who have sex with women. The reasons for the National Blood Service s current policy of permanently excluding men who have ever had sex with men from blood donation are as follows: - Blood safety starts with the selection of donors before they give blood. By excluding groups known to present a particularly high risk of blood-borne viruses, we are already reducing the risk of infected blood entering the blood supply. - We test every blood donation for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis and human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV). However, despite improvements in blood screening tests, a small number of infected donations may be missed because of the window period between getting the infection and the test showing a positive result. - While safer sex, through the use of condoms, does reduce the transmission of infections, it cannot eliminate the risk altogether. Men who have sex with men continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV and account for 63% of HIV diagnoses where the infection was likely to have been acquired in the UK. Epidemiological evidence in the UK also shows that there has been a significant increase in sexually-transmitted infections which can also be blood-borne, such as hepatitis B and syphilis, among men who have sex with men. Between 2002 and 2006, for example, there has been a 117% increase in syphilis infections in men who have sex with men. - Research shows that completely removing the current exclusion on blood donation from men who have sex with men would result in a fivefold increase in the risk of HIV-infected blood entering the blood supply. While changing deferral to one year from the last sexual contact would have a lesser effect, it would still increase this risk by 60%. The current National Blood Service policy on excluding men who have ever had sex with men from giving blood is supported by the Terrence Higgins Trust please see: www.tht.org.uk/blooddonation The policy is subject to regular review by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissue and Organs. It was last reviewed in January 2007 by the Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs, the predecessor to the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissue and Organs.
The reasons for the National Blood Service s current policy of permanently excluding men who have ever had sex with men from blood donation are as follows:
- Blood safety starts with the selection of donors before they give blood. By excluding groups known to present a particularly high risk of blood-borne viruses, we are already reducing the risk of infected blood entering the blood supply.
- We test every blood donation for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis and human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV). However, despite improvements in blood screening tests, a small number of infected donations may be missed because of the window period between getting the infection and the test showing a positive result.
- While safer sex, through the use of condoms, does reduce the transmission of infections, it cannot eliminate the risk altogether. Men who have sex with men continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV and account for 63% of HIV diagnoses where the infection was likely to have been acquired in the UK. Epidemiological evidence in the UK also shows that there has been a significant increase in sexually-transmitted infections which can also be blood-borne, such as hepatitis B and syphilis, among men who have sex with men. Between 2002 and 2006, for example, there has been a 117% increase in syphilis infections in men who have sex with men.
- Research shows that completely removing the current exclusion on blood donation from men who have sex with men would result in a fivefold increase in the risk of HIV-infected blood entering the blood supply. While changing deferral to one year from the last sexual contact would have a lesser effect, it would still increase this risk by 60%.
The current National Blood Service policy on excluding men who have ever had sex with men from giving blood is supported by the Terrence Higgins Trust please see: www.tht.org.uk/blooddonation
The policy is subject to regular review by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissue and Organs. It was last reviewed in January 2007 by the Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs, the predecessor to the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissue and Organs.
http://www.blood.co.uk/pdfdocs/position_statement_exclusion.pdf
Emphasis my own.
They should be able to give blood if they've been tested first.
Yeah there are a lot of unfair laws in the world, people just learn to deal with them.
Quote: from Wakeupcall at 4:54 pm on Nov. 10, 2008 It is a big deal. Let me give blood. Fuckk. JUST LIE. If they ask "Have you had man on man buttsex recently?" Just say "Nope."
It is a big deal. Let me give blood. Fuckk.
JUST LIE.
If they ask "Have you had man on man buttsex recently?" Just say "Nope."
THAT'S NOT THE POINT. This stupid ass law doesn't allow me to give blood, unless I lie, which, unbelievably, I don't want to do. It's blatant discrimination and should be changed.
THERE ARE STILL WAYS YOU CAN.
Dur.
Quote: from Wakeupcall at 4:51 pm on Nov. 10, 2008 They're taking away my right to give blood. My blood could save someone. But they don't want it - I'm gay, and therefore have HIV/AIDs, you see. IT'S A GAY DISEASE. HIV/AIDs is on the decline among the gay community, and on the rise in the heterosexual community. AND YET.... Oh please. It isn't a big deal, simply lie, and prove you don't have HIV. Fuckk.
They're taking away my right to give blood. My blood could save someone. But they don't want it - I'm gay, and therefore have HIV/AIDs, you see. IT'S A GAY DISEASE. HIV/AIDs is on the decline among the gay community, and on the rise in the heterosexual community. AND YET....
HIV/AIDs is on the decline among the gay community, and on the rise in the heterosexual community. AND YET....
Oh please. It isn't a big deal, simply lie, and prove you don't have HIV. Fuckk.
I don't see anything wrong with it. They are trying to take a precaution, and aren't taking away any of your rights. Chill.
They're taking away my right to give blood. My blood could save someone. But they don't want it - I'm gay, and therefore have HIV/AIDs, you see. IT'S A GAY DISEASE.
I think it's stupid to assume the blood isn't good based on those events.
I immaturely laugh when they ask me. :( Every time.
307 users online 
224587 members 266 active today Advertise Here
307 users online 224587 members 266 active today Advertise Here
You have 1 new message.
