Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)a represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, young gay and bisexual men (aged 13-24 years) accounted for 72% of new HIV infections among all persons aged 13 to 24, and 30% of new infections among all gay and bisexual men. At the end of 2010, an estimated 489,121 (56%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were gay and bisexual men, or gay and bisexual men who also inject drugs.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/
This is the age range this young man was in. And the infection rate within the gay male population is still significant - and has started growing again as HIV/AIDS comes to be viewed as a chronic illness - particularly by young gay men who - like most kids that age - view themselves as immortal.
As explained above, there is a risk/benefit analysis done with organs used. Gay men who do not test positive on the most accurate tests we have are allowed to donate many life sustaining organs - as this young man was. But when an organ is not life sustaining, the risk/benefit analysis is different. Sexually active gay men do - statistically - run a greater risk of being HIV+ without having sero converted yet. As for others with unknown histories - I don't know enough about the screening process for eyes. For livers - sexual orientation is not a factor in the screening. When they have to rely on social history, rather than tests, unknown sexual history of any type is an issue.
I do think they should cut the timeline down considerably (5 years is far longer than needed to be safe), but I do favor using statistically based models to make appropriate risk/benefit balancing decisions. Unfortunately, that will mean that some organs which the families of gay men would like to be used cannot be.
= new reply since forum marked as read