- Joined
- Jul 1, 2010
- Messages
- 3,057
- Reaction score
- 574
- Location
- The Swamplands
- Website
- www.galehaut.com
I searched and searched, and didn't find this discussed here. (If I'm mistaken a mod can delete it, no resentment.) Though it doesn't affect our entire community I'd like to know what everyone thinks about it.
The FDA continues to insist that gay blood donors have a higher risk of spreading HIV despite the Red Cross's referral that the policy is antiquated, lacks scientific backing, and regularly bars perfectly healthy individuals from donating.
Rutger students protest.
Do you think that this policy is really concerned with public health or do you feel that it is being held in place by prejudice?
ETA: The UK has the same policy. Check out the rationale.
ETA2: So does Australia. Rationale.
The FDA continues to insist that gay blood donors have a higher risk of spreading HIV despite the Red Cross's referral that the policy is antiquated, lacks scientific backing, and regularly bars perfectly healthy individuals from donating.
Rutger students protest.
The FDA does not allow men who have sex with other men (MSM) to donate blood because of the high risk of the donor having HIV or AIDS, according to its website.
Since the regulation was put into effect during the 1980s, Clarke said the rule is outdated because we no longer live in a world uncertain about HIV or AIDS.
"We have made so many advances and we know it is not just gay men that can contract HIV/AIDS. It is anyone who partakes in high risk behavior," she said. "So having the ban just on gay men is discriminating against their sexual orientation."
Do you think that this policy is really concerned with public health or do you feel that it is being held in place by prejudice?
ETA: The UK has the same policy. Check out the rationale.
ETA2: So does Australia. Rationale.
Last edited: