PDA

View Full Version : Is it fair that homosexual men cannot give blood?



Nixt
07-10-2009, 12:52 PM
Technically homosexual males can give blood, providing they haven't had any form of sexual contact with another male. Is this fair? Personally, I think it is extremely unfair.

Statement on why homosexual males cannot give blood. (http://www.blood.co.uk/pdfdocs/position_statement_exclusion.pdf)

My argument is that HIV/AIDS is prevalent in the whole of society nowadays, in fact looking at the statistics for 2007 35% of new diagnoses were homosexual or bisexual and 47% were heterosexual. There are about 25,000 undiagnosed individuals though and then the homosexual or bisexual males who contracted HIV while it was rife in the homosexual/bisexual communities is still considerable. The last official figure was that 43% of gay / bisexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV and 52% of heterosexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV. Therefore, the National Blood Service's statement on why homosexual males cannot give blood is now obsolete as, at the time, the basis for their exclusion was that homosexual males accounted for 63% off all those diagnosed.

What are your opinions?

scottish
07-10-2009, 12:55 PM
yes its fair

Technologic
07-10-2009, 12:55 PM
If they can prove they dont have it then they should be able to. I would gladly give blood if i could on my 18th b'day

Nixt
07-10-2009, 12:58 PM
yes its fair

Even when you look at the statistics I posted? Try giving a constructive answer with evidence to back up your opinion next time... :rolleyes:


If they can prove they dont have it then they should be able to. I would gladly give blood if i could on my 18th b'day

Yeah that's what I think. Blood goes through a screening process anyway. Yeah they can make mistakes but the gay community is huge and I don't see why we shouldn't be able to donate blood. You can from 17. I've given blood a couple of times... even though I have had plenty of homo action :P.

scottish
07-10-2009, 01:01 PM
Even when you look at the statistics I posted? Try giving a constructive answer with evidence to back up your opinion next time... :rolleyes:



Yes, even when i look at it.

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 01:02 PM
It's a reasonable precaution considering HIV and AIDS is more common in homosexual males and females and until the number decreases, its a good decision to make considering the time and money that would be required for the blood screening and the disposal of infected blood. Also it isn't that if you are a homosexual you cannot give blood, its if you have ever engaged in homosexual sex (for heterosexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals), if you haven't had homosexual sex, then its fine to give blood because you wont have had the chance to be infected with HIV/AIDS through sexual intercourse.

Nixt
07-10-2009, 01:06 PM
Yes, even when i look at it.

Your skills in debating far exceed comprehension. I bow down to you.

In response to your comment, iSarcastix I am merely going to quote from my original post...

It's a reasonable precaution considering HIV and AIDS is more common in homosexual males and females
The last official figure was that 43% of gay / bisexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV and 52% of heterosexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV.


its a good decision to make considering the time and money that would be required for the blood screening and the disposal of infected blood.

Blood goes through a screening process anyway.


Also it isn't that if you are a homosexual you cannot give blood, its if you have ever engaged in homosexual sex (for heterosexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals), if you haven't had homosexual sex, then its fine to give blood because you wont have had the chance to be infected with HIV/AIDS through sexual intercourse.

As said in my first post: Technically homosexual males can give blood, providing they haven't had any form of sexual contact with another male.

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 01:15 PM
In response to your comment, iSarcastix I am merely going to quote from my original post...

The last official figure was that 43% of gay / bisexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV and 52% of heterosexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV.

It's still fairly a high ratio, but the main concern about it is whether or not homosexuals are actually engaging in safe sex, which it's in common belief that they're not as much as heterosexuals, so it could be assumed that the amount of HIV positive homosexuals could be higher than heterosexuals because its believed that heterosexuals engage in safer sex, and that homosexuals aren't aware of their contamination.


Blood goes through a screening process anyway.

The screening process only suggests the possibility of contamination from which if there is, the blood is further tested, so if the blood does suggest HIV/AIDS, then it must undergo additional testing to verify and to ensure false-positives etc, this is where the money would go to, also considering the amount of blood which would have to be disposed of would also be need to considered, it requires a lot of funding for that as well.


As said in my first post: Technically homosexual males can give blood, providing they haven't had any form of sexual contact with another male.

Lol, just noticed that bit, I just looked from the bold part downwards, sorry :P.

-:Undertaker:-
07-10-2009, 01:25 PM
I think that if the rate of infection is higher with homosexuals than hetrosexuals then the rule should stay in place, i'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to end up HIV because of some government equality scheme. The NHS is over-funded and still lacking money as it is and the country itself is saddled with debt, the worst debt crisis we have ever faced and according to the Conservatives, the worst in the western world taking up 14% of GDP.

I would say wait, until everything is sorted and more important issues are sorted, we still have people dying because the NHS does not have the proper treatment/moeny to fund treatment as it is, we don't need to burden it any further.

Technologic
07-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Your skills in debating far exceed comprehension. I bow down to you.

In response to your comment, iSarcastix I am merely going to quote from my original post...

The last official figure was that 43% of gay / bisexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV and 52% of heterosexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV.



Blood goes through a screening process anyway.


As said in my first post: Technically homosexual males can give blood, providing they haven't had any form of sexual contact with another male.

52% of men have HIV?

Pardon... Dont you mean 52% of men with HIV are heterosexual and 43% homosexual?

Nixt
07-10-2009, 01:35 PM
52% of men have HIV?

Pardon... Dont you mean 52% of men with HIV are heterosexual and 43% homosexual?

Yeah you get what I mean.

Glitter
07-10-2009, 01:35 PM
personally i think its unfair, anyone can have AIDs!

-:Undertaker:-
07-10-2009, 01:36 PM
If it is that case as Technologic stated, that more hetrosexual men as a percentage have HIV/Aids than homosexual men, then I think it should be uplifted then as it would make little difference.

kk.
07-10-2009, 01:55 PM
i thought it was providing you had no sexual contact for 6 months?

I think its still fair. Homosexuals contract it far easier than people who are hetero. I know what youre saying about the statistics, but thats new cases. Not current.

In any case, you sue statistics for 2007, but the NHS page im on also uses stats and its the 63% youre on about. So you cant use stats that were used in 2007, and then disregard others made in that time.

GommeInc
07-10-2009, 02:39 PM
To be fair, you could just lie, but why should they? As mentioned in the statistics, and common sense, you'd learn that not all homosexuals are aids/HIV ridden. What should be done is tests on EVERYONE giving blood, to make sure the blood is safe. Infact, the blood is tested anyway post-test in machines which shake the blood around and keep it oxygenated. So arguably, anyone should be allowed to donate if they so choose, and if the machine fails the blood and the blood fails the tests, it shouldn't be used.

FlyingJesus
07-10-2009, 04:12 PM
What happened to the other 5% of men with HIV? Are they entirely asexual?

Inseriousity.
07-10-2009, 04:15 PM
What happened to the other 5% of men with HIV? Are they entirely asexual?

Hermaphrodite? :P

As far as I'm aware and I'm not entirely an expert on blood donation but aren't donors decreasing (or is that just organ donors?) so surely to disallow the homosexuals just cos they might have HIV sounds ridiculous to me.

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 04:42 PM
What happened to the other 5% of men with HIV? Are they entirely asexual?

They could have recieved it through other methods, e.g. sharing needles etc.

kk.
07-10-2009, 04:45 PM
Hermaphrodite? :P

As far as I'm aware and I'm not entirely an expert on blood donation but aren't donors decreasing (or is that just organ donors?) so surely to disallow the homosexuals just cos they might have HIV sounds ridiculous to me.

Actually I do believe it's increasing.

BeanEgg
07-10-2009, 04:50 PM
To put simple, would you like blood from someone who's giving other males blow-jobs or even having **** sex? No!

So I think its fair.

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 04:50 PM
It isn't that blood donors are decreasing, but that the demand is increasing. The amount of organ donations etc. is decreasing as dead bodies aren't being offered to medical science and donation as much now for whatever reason.

Xoim
07-10-2009, 05:12 PM
If the blood was tested throughly then yeah I can't see why not.
AIDS and HIV will have an impact on this
But Straight Men And Women also carry HIV.

kk.
07-10-2009, 05:19 PM
The difference is, they say there can be mistakes, and so the HIV might not be picked up. If someone then goes on to receive this blood, they will also contract it. Its hard to say whether its wrong or not, but as i said before, they are more likely to get it than heteros.

However, if it is a rare blood group, it should be allowed. Especially O+/- blood group

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 05:24 PM
To put simple, would you like blood from someone who's giving other males blow-jobs or even having **** sex? No!

So I think its fair.

Well considering you don't have to know who gave you the blood, also I don't think the persons sexual orientation or what sexual acts they have engaged in really matters as long as they have had safe sex and have not contracted an virus from it.

Its like asking if you would like blood from a woman who's given oral sex, nothing's different other than whose given oral sex.

Inseriousity.
07-10-2009, 05:33 PM
It isn't that blood donors are decreasing, but that the demand is increasing. The amount of organ donations etc. is decreasing as dead bodies aren't being offered to medical science and donation as much now for whatever reason.

If that's the case then my statement still applies. Said I didn't have a clue :P

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 05:35 PM
If that's the case then my statement still applies. Said I didn't have a clue :P

And I told you ;), everytime I give blood I always somehow forget to take my ipod and have to resort to reading leaflets to pass the time xD!.

Japan
07-10-2009, 05:44 PM
To put simple, would you like blood from someone who's giving other males blow-jobs or even having **** sex? No!

So I think its fair.

Please don't be so homophobic. If you were dying and the only option left was to accept a blood transfusion from a homosexual man, I think you would be singing a very different tune.
TBH I think this is all rubbish. Not all homosexual men carry HIV and allowing them to donate blood = More lives saved.

-Heart
07-10-2009, 06:01 PM
No, ofcourse it's not.

-:Undertaker:-
07-10-2009, 06:02 PM
Please don't be so homophobic. If you were dying and the only option left was to accept a blood transfusion from a homosexual man, I think you would be singing a very different tune.
TBH I think this is all rubbish. Not all homosexual men carry HIV and allowing them to donate blood = More lives saved.

He is just stating his opinion, while i'm gay myself (pretty sure anyway :P) I accept people are not comfortable with homosexuality, bisexuality and a range of different things. We live in a democracy and people should be allowed to say what they want, aslong as its not on the edges of all out hatred.

Caution
07-10-2009, 06:19 PM
To put simple, would you like blood from someone who's giving other males blow-jobs or even having **** sex? No!

So I think its fair.What a lovely outlook on life.

Kardan
07-10-2009, 06:53 PM
Technically homosexual males can give blood, providing they haven't had any form of sexual contact with another male. Is this fair? Personally, I think it is extremely unfair.

Statement on why homosexual males cannot give blood. (http://www.blood.co.uk/pdfdocs/position_statement_exclusion.pdf)

My argument is that HIV/AIDS is prevalent in the whole of society nowadays, in fact looking at the statistics for 2007 35% of new diagnoses were homosexual or bisexual and 47% were heterosexual. There are about 25,000 undiagnosed individuals though and then the homosexual or bisexual males who contracted HIV while it was rife in the homosexual/bisexual communities is still considerable. The last official figure was that 43% of gay / bisexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV and 52% of heterosexual men are currently living in the UK with HIV. Therefore, the National Blood Service's statement on why homosexual males cannot give blood is now obsolete as, at the time, the basis for their exclusion was that homosexual males accounted for 63% off all those diagnosed.

What are your opinions?

Sorry, what? 52% of straight men have HIV? That can't be true, that's way higher than I expected. Seriously, I'm pretty sure it's not 1 in 2 straight men have HIV.

As for the discussion, yes, homosexual men should be able to donate blood. Tests are carried out on the blood anyway to make sure it's safe for use, right? Why can't that be done for blood donated by gay men? :S

kk.
07-10-2009, 06:59 PM
Sorry, what? 52% of straight men have HIV? That can't be true, that's way higher than I expected. Seriously, I'm pretty sure it's not 1 in 2 straight men have HIV.

As for the discussion, yes, homosexual men should be able to donate blood. Tests are carried out on the blood anyway to make sure it's safe for use, right? Why can't that be done for blood donated by gay men? :S

Nah, he means people with HIV. not all straight men,

and as i have said, its not always 100%, and as there are more gay men than straight with HIV, it would be mroe likely that a gay HIV man wouldnt get found.. if that makes sense lol

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 07:05 PM
Tests are carried out on the blood anyway to make sure it's safe for use, right? Why can't that be done for blood donated by gay men? :S

I've already posted on this, but just to reiterate :P. The blood tests are only used to discover the possibility of contamination, so if any blood is suggested to contain a virus etc. it then goes through a series of tests which then prove if its actually contaminated, so gay men who give blood who don't know they have HIV will cause a lot of problems when it comes to testing as more tests will be used and additional funding will be needed for that and the safe disposal of the contaminated blood, also with the funding for more medication for those who will have found out they're HIV positive from giving blood. I know that it would be best to incorporate better testing (saving lives etc.), but at this time its just easier to deny the donation to be honast :S.

Japan
07-10-2009, 07:14 PM
He is just stating his opinion, while i'm gay myself (pretty sure anyway :P) I accept people are not comfortable with homosexuality, bisexuality and a range of different things. We live in a democracy and people should be allowed to say what they want, aslong as its not on the edges of all out hatred.

Well that isn't fair. He's talking about homosexuality like it's a disease or something disgusting.

And @beanegg- what is the difference between straight sex and gay sex? When it's all boiled down it's pretty much the same thing- just in different places.

Xoim
07-10-2009, 07:20 PM
Tbh.. it's the 21st century.
And everyone now-a-days are coming out which I think is cool.

Problem is I dislike homophobes.
Although ... I do realise I have to get used to it tbh.

A can't really add much more to what Undertaker said.

And the fact that all blood given has the same risk off being hiv positive. and Blood is given anonymously so tbh you wouldn't know if the guy was gay or straight.

And @Bean Straight guys can Have **** with a girl... Does It make it acceptable for a girl to take it up there but not a man.

Japan
07-10-2009, 07:32 PM
I really don't understand why some people have a problem with homosexuals.
We are not in the dark ages, please get with the times.

RandomManJay
07-10-2009, 07:41 PM
I really don't understand why some people have a problem with homosexuals.
We are not in the dark ages, please get with the times.

Homosexuality was only legalised about 40 years ago, and it does take time for something to be accepted which was repressed to such a degree that it was illegal as well as being considered a mental illness and the work of the devil. Also the last generation was involved in the outbreak of HIV/AIDS and the media controversy over AIDS being the 'Gay Plague', instilling fear and hatred for homosexuality. So if these values are passed down, they may be less influencial in the modern age, but they are still there and until they loose all influence, those values will stick around.

GommeInc
07-10-2009, 08:49 PM
To put simple, would you like blood from someone who's giving other males blow-jobs or even having **** sex? No!

So I think its fair.
Men can give women **** and oral sex.... Infact, I can use this against you. Would you want your blood coming from a woman who has given a man a blow job? It's the same thing ;)

Jay.
09-10-2009, 03:30 PM
To be honest, I think it's unfair. It's a little stereotypical if you ask me. If I was to give you a figure, lets say, "67% of women make mistakes in the nursing department" (Random figure) would the NHS then ban women from applying to that job? Of course not. I think this is the same issue, just because a lot of homosexual people have a specific virus, does not mean they should be treated unfairly. If they're asking the world to donate blood, let more people eligible.

(And I'm not even homosexual, so it's not a biased view.

DJ-Ains.T
09-10-2009, 03:40 PM
I'm never giving blood nor organs. They are mine, and no one elses. If they don't have enough, it's tough. Africans die daily, many of them, it's unfair to them, us saving someone else when they could be saved, many of them.

Also, I think males should be able to give blood, if they are gay, bi, straight, as long as they are clean. Just like sperm.

Lost
09-10-2009, 03:42 PM
I think they should be tested incase they do have HIV or any other blood disease (which is why they're not allowed to give blood because homosexuals are the most likely to have blood diseases; yet again, so are heterosexual people lol..) I think it's unfair to just say that any guy who is a homosexual is rejected to save a life, and fair enough, he could be ending one if he DOES have some blood disease, but that's why I think they should test the blood... only seems fair, right?

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!