Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Blood bank in Florida still turning away gay donors after terrorist attack [View all]
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11912020/oneblood-blood-donation-orlandoIt's more difficult to donate blood as a gay man in Florida than to buy an assault rifle with no questions asked. Following an attack on on a gay nightclub in Orlando that killed 50 people and wounded scores of others last night, Mic and others reported that blood bank OneBlood would be "accepting all donors" crucially, including gay men. That's a big deal, since the official recommendation of the federal Food and Drug Administration is to turn away gay men from blood donations if they've had sex in the past year. However, the blood bank later said those reports were false, and that "all FDA guidelines remain in effect."
The FDA only lifted the total recommended ban on donations from gay men last December, after the policy has been in place since 1983, when the AIDS epidemic was becoming a national panic. "We have taken great care to ensure this policy revision is backed by sound science and continues to protect our blood supply," the FDA's acting commissioner said at the time. Still, the new guidance is discriminatory and immensely hurtful to survivors who are unable to help their own community after being attacked.
The 12-month limit on donations from gay men is an international standard, but it will still prevent lots of men from donating blood. However, the FDA's policy is guidance that local and private bodies aren't required to follow. As The Washington Post reported, the blood bank's guidelines haven't even caught up to the FDA's most recent standard, meaning it's still turning away all gay men from donating.
The FDA only lifted the total recommended ban on donations from gay men last December, after the policy has been in place since 1983, when the AIDS epidemic was becoming a national panic. "We have taken great care to ensure this policy revision is backed by sound science and continues to protect our blood supply," the FDA's acting commissioner said at the time. Still, the new guidance is discriminatory and immensely hurtful to survivors who are unable to help their own community after being attacked.
The 12-month limit on donations from gay men is an international standard, but it will still prevent lots of men from donating blood. However, the FDA's policy is guidance that local and private bodies aren't required to follow. As The Washington Post reported, the blood bank's guidelines haven't even caught up to the FDA's most recent standard, meaning it's still turning away all gay men from donating.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
86 replies, 4520 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (9)
ReplyReply to this post
86 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Blood bank in Florida still turning away gay donors after terrorist attack [View all]
KamaAina
Jun 2016
OP
I can't donate because I lived in Europe (US Army) for more than three months.
underpants
Jun 2016
#1
And yet people in the UK are not dropping like flies when they get blood transfusions
whatthehey
Jun 2016
#52
I used to work for the Red Cross in their blood bank. Let me see if I can explain their stand.
CaliforniaPeggy
Jun 2016
#2
Why is a person more apt to have a blood borne disease because they are gay?
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#11
Wrong. You say no gay man should be allowed to donate blood, where heteros can, because some
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#15
ONLY if they engage is risky actions. A heterosexual woman who has unprotected intercourse is much
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#29
Largely because of history - but the number of new HIV infections are sharply higher among men.
Yo_Mama
Jun 2016
#78
Then ban men. For real though, ban anyone, any gender, any orientation, who has participated in
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#79
How does banning someone who doesn't engage in risky behavior make any sense?
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#82
"no individual can ever be sure about the actual risks of their sexual behavior"? Exactly.
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#84
I don't see empirically being gay increases the chances of someone getting tainted blood...
uponit7771
Jun 2016
#7
Why would a gay person be any more likely to have a blood borne disease? How does screening by
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#12
I am old enough to have worked as a nurse before HIV, and to understand statistics.
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#27
The op says local blood banks requirements have not caught up with FDA ones. At minimum, they should
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#43
Some poeple are gold medalist gymnasts when it comes to protecting bigotry.
Behind the Aegis
Jun 2016
#44
I don't know, is it even safe to reply to you? I might catch them gay cooties at 40X
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#46
I found an article on women and anal sex, for someone else on another thread on same topic
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#86
And it is being done by folks in this thread who have been told repeatedly for over a decade
JackBeck
Jun 2016
#63
Do you understand that not all sex between men involves anal? That's not making things up.
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#40
Here you go. They don't have mutual masturbation, since that's negligible risk
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#45
Do you think there is a difference because of sexual orientation for any action?
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#50
They are at higher risk based on certain activities, not because of who we are.
Behind the Aegis
Jun 2016
#37
Anyone who participates in risky behavior is in a high risk group regardless of gender or orientatio
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#62
"limit on donations from gay men is an international standard" Really? Troubling if true (nt)
TacoD
Jun 2016
#22
Why should someone who engages in no risky behavior be banned only because of their orientation?
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#68
For the question of "male/male sex" being so risky, like m/f sex, it depends on what is done
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#71
We've already addressed this upthread. Do you know the difference between HIV and AIDS? between
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#75