So I'm about to take this college course about HIV/AIDS, specifically how San Francisco treated the epidemic. I've been given assigned readings (And the Band Played On, In My Own Country), and reading about HIV (oh it's horrible, and I am totally going to start PrEP as soon as I come out). And...one of the things that really stuck out to me, was that gay men were some of america's top blood donors before we got banned. Which (unfortunately) helped increased the HIV/AIDS epidemic even more because it took a lot of blood to create Factor VIII(for hemophiliacs), and one contaminated allotment of blood could give a hemophiliac, and other people that needed blood donated, the infection as well. Additionally, private blood banks and even federal blood donation services were slow to start screening, which increased the epidemic even more. But...now there's ELISA testing, and PeP, and PreP...so should we be allowed to donate blood again? I'm assuming a lot of yeses (due to the nature of this forum), but are there any no's? Why? Should there be a limit that's less intense (ie. X amount of days post sex, to allow for HIV to show up on the ELISA test or something similar) because gay men in general are such a high risk group?
Yes, I believe gay men should be allowed to give blood. What's particularly noticeable is that gay men are (effectively) prohibited from donating for life, so long as they are sexually active. The Red Cross in Australia, which laughably suggested it was generous to offer a 6-month deferral period as opposed to a 1-year period, doesn't even specify what sort of sexual activity is the prohibiting factor - all sex between men is a prohibiting factor, regardless of the frequency with which one changes partners, what type of sex it is or the monogamy of the donor. Another pertinent thing is that certain tangibly assessable risk factors just don't get screened. For example, the incidence of HIV among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Sydney (around 10.6%) is over double that of Melbourne (around 4.2% of MSM) and triple that of other Australian cities. That isn't considered by the Red Cross, even though any sexual clinic experienced with MSM will consider that quite highly in their assessment of HIV risk. That's an extraordinary level of difference that, were the Red Cross serious about being non-discriminatory, they would take into consideration. But instead, this lazy and marginalising blanket ban exists and only impacts on certain groups who could simply have more rigorous hurdles to jump over and blood screening processes. And it incentivises lying, rather than an accessible process for MSM to go through in order to donate blood safely. It is undeniable that HIV rates among MSM are concerning. But that doesn't mean the blood donation ban is fair, effective or based on good public policy. It is perversely discriminatory and encourages worse disclosure than a fair but cautious approach which recognises that certain gay men have high risk factors, but which doesn't flatly reject many perfectly healthy donors.
Yes, I do believe that gay/bisexual men should be allowed to give blood.. But wait, how can they tell if you are LGBTQ?
Currently the red cross makes you take a survey every time you go to give blood, and one of the questions is if you are male, and have had sex with a man within the past year. It doesn't explicitly ask if you are a queer male, but implies it within the above question. Also applies broadly to the trans community, because I'm fairly certain there's another question involving if you are taking hormones for gender reassignment.
Of course, anyone who isn't sick with HIV or AIDs or other illnesses along those lines should be able to give blood.
Yeah if people who have ever used IV drugs in their lifetime can give blood I don't understand why MSM couldn't. It is hypocritical. To be noted I am pretty sure they ask if you have had sex with a man since the 1980s and if you have ever had any sexual relations MSM you can't give blood. They're basically saying that anal sex is more risky than vaginal sex in passing HIV which is true but they should ask straight people if they have had anal sex too and discriminate against them if they're going to discriminate against MSM..... The facts are that MSM have a higher rate of HIV than some groups of people but there are also other groups of people that have high HIV risk and are allowed to give blood in their lifetime.
One thing that always bothered me about this is straight people have anal sex all the time too, but I don't think anyone takes the risk as seriously then... Then again I don't know about the restrictions on that.
Never bothered me when I had gone to donate plasma. Just tick no on the box that asks and you're good to go. I know with my sexual activity, and the fact that I was tested assure me that I'm clean. I don't think my blood is bi, just me (I know some might not like the fact that I lie on the survey, but it's not as though I'm shooting up with the other 37 guys I've slept with in the past hour, so meh.)
Should we be allowed to? Yes, without question. Should we ignore the ban and give blood anyway? No, I don't think we should. Like many members of the LGBT+ community, I would give blood tomorrow if the ban were lifted (I used to donate regularly when I was in my late teens), but since I'm now ineligible I'm not going to lie to do so. They need to lift the ban, not force me to lie.
Without a doubt, yes. If it's over the fear of HIV, then straight people should be put on the same level as we are--especially those who are sexually active with multiple partners.
I do think that men that have had sexual intercourse with a man should be alowed to give blood. If both parties are clean and still are after having sex then there is no reason that they cannot. It's funny because I looked this up earlier and a heterosexual man is alowed to have unprotected sex with multiple people within say 6 months and they are alowed to give blood, and yet men that have had gay sex within the year (protected or not) aren't alowed to do that- regardless if they were clean or not.
Yes, we should be able to. Right now, I'm able to give blood without lying because I haven't had sex yet, but once I do, I'm not sure what I'll do. My family on my father's side are big blood donors (my father having given over 100 times) and I really want to do the same thing... I'm already happy that being trans is not an issue with the blood donations in Quebec, though. I believe they should modify the questions to exclude people who don't have safe sex instead (as in, unprotected with non-monogamous partners).
