Donating Blood / Organs

[jasey]

I need to start giving blood, think i'll sign up this year - do something good, i'm not concerned about needles anyway.



Well its a true health concern, and if it really is a fifth that are infected - thats frankly scary.

Yes, it is a true health concern. I don't doubt the severity of the HIV / AIDS epidemic in the gay male population. That being said, most new HIV cases in this decade are shown among straight couples. Roughly 40% of HIV / AIDS patients in the United Kingdom (where you live - open your eyes) are of African descent. No one denies people the right to donate blood because they are black or African, right?

Regardless, the ban against men who have sex with men donating blood is archaic and being repealed and fought in areas across the globe as the civil rights movement for gay equality spreads. The comment that I had the problem with and what spurred me to write my post was the fact that they referred to HIV / AIDS patients as 'contaminated' as if they are pieces of rotten food. There are other words that could have been used.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes, it is a true health concern. I don't doubt the severity of the HIV / AIDS epidemic in the gay male population. That being said, most new HIV cases in this decade are shown among straight couples. Roughly 40% of HIV / AIDS patients in the United Kingdom (where you live - open your eyes) are of African descent. No one denies people the right to donate blood because they are black or African, right?

Regardless, the ban against men who have sex with men donating blood is archaic and being repealed and fought in areas across the globe as the civil rights movement for gay equality spreads. The comment that I had the problem with and what spurred me to write my post was the fact that they referred to HIV / AIDS patients as 'contaminated' as if they are pieces of rotten food. There are other words that could have been used.

I accept the African point, there may be logic in it - in the case with homosexuals, its little to do with rights I find and more to do with supposed risk and perhaps cost in checking the blood. If it is indeed 1/5 of male homosexuals who have HIV or AIDS (a shocking and scary figure), then the cost-benefit side of allowing homosexuals to donate may not be in their favour and that is entirely rational for the health service to refuse.

But I would say from what I recall that its not against homosexuals - its against homosexuals who have had anal sex.

[beth]

used to give blood, they don't want it anymore though haha they think i'm too sickly.

[jasey]

I accept the African point, there may be logic in it - in the case with homosexuals, its little to do with rights I find and more to do with supposed risk and perhaps cost in checking the blood. If it is indeed 1/5 of male homosexuals who have HIV or AIDS (a shocking and scary figure), then the cost-benefit side of allowing homosexuals to donate may not be in their favour and that is entirely rational for the health service to refuse.

But I would say from what I recall that its not against homosexuals - its against homosexuals who have had anal sex.

Of course there is logic in the point. It's as clear as the sun. I am not going to be too harsh as you clearly don't understand how HIV is transmitted as identified in your << homosexuals who have had anal sex >> comment. You can get HIV from vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse and oral intercourse. I guess that kind of ignorance is rampant among those who don't get the proper education on the subject from school or from their environment. I won't blame you for that - I will blame society.

Let me share something directly from the British NAT website. There are about 40,000 men who have sex with men living with HIV in the UK. Remember that number. There are about 30,000 black Africans living with HIV in the UK. Bear in mind that these are not separate groups as you can be black African and be a man that has sex with men at the same time. That's shocking and scary in itself that race plays such an important part in this argument. Of the huge group of black Africans that have HIV, about 95% of them contracted the virus through heterosexual sex. What does that tell you? Give it a thought.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Of course there is logic in the point. It's as clear as the sun. I am not going to be too harsh as you clearly don't understand how HIV is transmitted as identified in your << homosexuals who have had anal sex >> comment. You can get HIV from vaginal intercourse, anal intercourse and oral intercourse. I guess that kind of ignorance is rampant among those who don't get the proper education on the subject from school or from their environment. I won't blame you for that - I will blame society.

Let me share something directly from the British NAT website. There are about 40,000 men who have sex with men living with HIV in the UK. Remember that number. There are about 30,000 black Africans living with HIV in the UK. Bear in mind that these are not separate groups as you can be black African and be a man that has sex with men at the same time. That's shocking and scary in itself that race plays such an important part in this argument. Of the huge group of black Africans that have HIV, about 95% of them contracted the virus through heterosexual sex. What does that tell you? Give it a thought.

I don't think you quite understand, and to make me out as not understanding simply because i'm not dogmatically pushing for homosexuals under the banner of 'rights' is ridiculous. The fact is that HIV is more common in proportion if you compare homosexuals to hetrosexuals (as you said, its one in five - this is not the case amongst hetrosexuals). The reason for this being tearing in the anus making it easier for the disease/s to spread along with a culture that exists where men pick other men up freely from clubs (now I know this occurs amongst hetrosexuals, but its a deep cultural thing amongst homosexuals). The point you make about those with an African background also requires analysis if you ask me, as it would be wrong if it turns out that its the case that homosexuals were being barred whilst those of African background were not despite both groups carrying an enormous risk.

[jasey]

I don't think you quite understand, and to make me out as not understanding simply because i'm not dogmatically pushing for homosexuals under the banner of 'rights' is ridiculous. HIV is more common in proportion if you compare homosexuals to hetrosexuals (as you said, its one in five - this is not the case amongst hetrosexuals). The reason for this being tearing in the anus making it easier for the disease/s to spread along with a culture that exists where men pick other men up freely from clubs (now I know this occurs amongst hetrosexuals, but its a deep cultural thing amongst homosexuals).

I suspect the decision is not only to do with safety, but also on a cost-benefit basis.

Oh, I understand very well. You said something very ignorant - you implied that HIV was spread only through anal sex which is so radically untrue. As I previously pointed out and as you can find with a simple search, the HIV rate in men who have sex with men is not the dominant factor for new HIV cases and hasn't been for a long time. As a gay population, we have been slandered, labeled and slapped with the ideology that HIV is a 'gay disease' for ages. Because of this, we are the most aware and likely most careful about contracting the virus. It is heterosexual couples who have followed this ideology and become blissfully in disbelief that straight couples can get HIV who are leading the pack as far as new cases go. Other demographic groups like the sexually active older generation are also plagued with the spread of the virus because they also haven't been given the go around about how prolific the affliction really is.

I was going to say more about how you are ignoring the fact that the black African demographic poses more of a violent risk to the spread of HIV but I see you've since edited your post to acknowledge that. Thank you!

You have a wonderful evening.

[buttons]

eat the kitkat omg lol
i've decided that i won't be donating organs, i decided quite a long while ago. it's my choice and i have my reasons
i tried to donate blood but was a stone underweight.. & i don't trust doctors or needles anymore so i probably won't do so in the future.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Oh, I understand very well. You said something very ignorant - you implied that HIV was spread only through anal sex which is so radically untrue.

No I never, I said that that was one of the reaons why HIV and AIDS are more common amongst homosexuals.

As I previously pointed out and as you can find with a simple search, the HIV rate in men who have sex with men is not the dominant factor for new HIV cases and hasn't been for a long time. As a gay population, we have been slandered, labeled and slapped with the ideology that HIV is a 'gay disease' for ages. Because of this, we are the most aware and likely most careful about contracting the virus.

Because the fact is that its more common amongst homosexuals, wriggle all you want - thats the fact.

Indeed, I myself was shocked at the one in five statistic (20% of homosexuals have HIV/AIDS) as I didn't know it was that high.

It is heterosexual couples who have followed this ideology and become blissfully in disbelief that straight couples can get HIV who are leading the pack as far as new cases go. Other demographic groups like the sexually active older generation are also plagued with the spread of the virus because they also haven't been given the go around about how prolific the affliction really is.

Oh yes, its certainly spreading amongst hetrosexuals also due to the fall in standards and changes in behaviour amongst women and men sleeping around. But as I state above, that is nothing like the one in five (20%) figure that you gave yourself, therefore it-is-not slandering to state this statistical fact that HIV and AIDS is a hell of a lot more prevalent amongst homosexuals.

I was going to say more about how you are ignoring the fact that the black African demographic poses more of a violent risk to the spread of HIV but I see you've since edited your post to acknowledge that. Thank you!

You have a wonderful evening.

Well I said this from the start that there's reason to look at that also if the figures you showed me were true ...but don't let that stop you feeling oppressed.

[Jazz]

i won't let anyone touch me with a needle, i just won't allow it. but i will probably end up giving blood at some point :-)

[Eric]

Never donated my blood but i'd like to, when i'm older. I had blood tests which i think it's pretty much the same thing.

No, nothing strange happened but i just felt kinda cold somehow.

oh i didn't know gay men can't donate their blood :S